I think with ablative, 'aa' means 'till', not 'out of'. It basically reverses the meaning of ablative. egAtri wrote: 3.(as a separable preposition with abl.) it shows either the limit inceptive, from, ever since, away from, out of, off, from among;
...
5.(as a separable adverb) aa chiefly occurs in the vedas and means near, near to, or towards, there to, further.
Yashaa is victory, glory, success (feminine of Yasha). Ayashaa is opposite of Yashaa. Please check my reply over meaning of this verse in Saamkhya context few posts above.Then it becomes a statement of fact as it should be. Can anyone point out where the compulsion to make She inglorious in the translation. Is the compulsion explicit or is it intended as a statement of fact as most of the Upanishads is.
Depends upon context IMO.. Aamukta does not mean "till freedom". It means "away from freedom" or Bondage. OTOH, the phrase Aasindhu sindhu paryantaa is "from Sindhu till Sindhu (ocean)". This is further different from Aananda (nanda from all sides)..ManishH wrote:I think with ablative, 'aa' means 'till', not 'out of'. It basically reverses the meaning of ablative. egAtri wrote: 3.(as a separable preposition with abl.) it shows either the limit inceptive, from, ever since, away from, out of, off, from among;
...
5.(as a separable adverb) aa chiefly occurs in the vedas and means near, near to, or towards, there to, further.
"śuciryatī giribhya ā samudrāt" for Saraswati.
Not just strangers, but with servants, Father with daughter, grand father with grand daughter, grandmother with grandson, brother with sister and their offsprings, son with mother, atithi with one's wife, a man with stranger's wife.. It includes bestiality, necrophilia, necrophilic bestiality and sentences about genitals and intercourse in each of the above case which today would be considered extremely obscene. All this being done by characters which regard highly today. They were knowledgeable and Yugapurushas then. But if we apply today's system and standards on them, one will end up like self-hating Harmeet Singh.ramana wrote:Bji, I read that one sage was upset at his mother going with another person and his father not objecting. He came up with the marriage ritual and started the foundation of society.
If you read the Khalistani versions of the same story, that will state that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu prostrated before Guru Nanak and converted to Khalistani monotheism. This subtle way of satiating our ego by making our Acharyas submitting to each other is worst kind of "paap" karma.sanjeevpunj wrote:
How Sikhism incorporated elements of Vaishnavism is worth a study. It has been recorded in the history of Jagannath Temple in Orissa, that Guru Nanak visited Jagannath Temple, and he met Chaitanya Mahaprabhu there.As he was entering the temple,Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was coming out. Guru Nanak stopped and they met and exchanged respects.Chaitanya Mahaprabhu asked Guru Nanak why he stopped on seeing him. Guru Nanak said "I have met the Lord, where is the need to go to the temple now? Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu smiled and they later spent time at a Kirtan organised by the devotees.With such a humble beginning, their relationship certainly grew leaps and bounds, connecting and reconnecting Hinduism and Sikhism at the core level.The holy names of Hari,Ram, and Vishvambhar (The Supreme Lord) are recommended in the Granth Sahib. The same names are sung by the followers of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
One can read more here - http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/features/1 ... es1565.htm
Manmatha Nath Dutt's translation is there in Google books and others books by him are at archive.orgMorally disoriented, like Bhishma was
Author: Shashi Shekhar
Today’s politicians share the failing of Bhishma in Mahabharata. They lack moral courage, so did he
George Lucas and the Star Wars franchise exemplify more than any other phenomenon myth-making in the age of the motion picture, the iPad and YouTube. At one end of the spectrum is the popular perception of the Star Wars trilogy made and remade for every generation. At the other end of the spectrum is the extreme fan following with its dictionaries, encyclopaedias and the ensemble of immersive games and animation series. Looking at my five and seven-year old rattle out the names of every character from the extended motion picture series and watching them build out the various crafts and personalities using their Lego building blocks made me wonder what it would take to popularise the Mahabharata in the 21st century.
Thus started a limited experiment with the kids by recycling BR Chopra’s television series, thanks to full episodes on YouTube accompanied by an English language narrative thanks to Manmathanatha Datta’s mammoth translation available digitally via Google Books, all delivered through a Samsung Android Tablet. The characters in BR Chopra’s series may be speaking high-brow Hindi and Manmathanatha Datta’s prose a little too abstract for them, but it was a start. A few episodes into the story they wanted me to fast forward to the war. So we go from episode six all the way to episode 69. A couple of episodes into the war, my five- year old stumps me with this question to which my seven-year old came up with a profound answer.
If Bhishma was good and he knew that the Kauravas were bad, why then did he fight the war on their behalf ?
As I pondered the different possible ways to answer the question, my seven-year old exclaimed he had it all figured out. It was that Bhishma was not really fighting for the Kauravas; he was fighting to protect Hastinapur, he was fighting for his kingdom. I guess BR Chopra’s Hindi and Manmathanatha Datta’s prose were not all that abstract after all, and my 21st century experiment was making some progress. It was, however, intriguing to observe how Bhishma’s character had fascinated them.
But it was not the first time that Bhishma’s moral compass and judgment was called to question. The moral dilemma of Bhishma during the game of dice is worth revisiting for the many lessons it holds for the present times.
Manmathanatha Datta’s translation paints a graphically vivid picture of Draupadi’s plight as she is dragged and humiliated in the sabha. It is only after Draupadi’s laments on the failure of the Kuru elders to speak out were met with mocking cries from the Kauravas and Karna that Bhishma speaks up. His words as translated by Manmathanatha Datta are worth reproducing below.
“O blessed lady knowing that one has no wealth of his own cannot stake wealth belonging to others and knowing also that wives are always at command and disposals of their husbands I am unable to decide properly. The ways of it is subtle. Yudhisthira can abandon the whole world full of wealth but he will never sacrifice morality The Pandava Yudhishtra himself has said I am won Therefore I am unable to decide this matter.”
Bhishma’s inability to make a moral judgment on Kauravas’ conduct with Draupadi makes a second appearance further down in the same episode after a riveting intervention by the wise but powerless Vidura in which he narrates a story of Prahlada to drive home two lessons to Bhishma and the other elders. The first was that an understanding of dharma was not the exclusive preserve of the Devas as Prahlada an Asura went on to rule against his own son. The second and more profound lesson was on the importance of testifying to the truth.
In that exchange between Prahlada, Kashyapa and the dispute between Prahlada’s son and a rishi’s son, one sees fundamental questions of justice, the centrality of truth and the moral obligations of a witness, judge and jury being debated that is worthy of a popular retelling to this generation.
Vidura’s poignant poser to Bhishma and the other elders on their moral obligation to speak the truth and answer Draupadi’s question elicits little response but for more humiliation being heaped on Draupadi and further laments from her that end with the same question to Bhishma, who speaks for the second time in that episode, to once again shy away from taking a moral stance with these words:
“O blessed lady I have said the way of dharma is subtle Even the wise men cannot understand it in the world. What a powerful man says in the world is regarded as such by others however otherwise it may really be. What a weak man says however it may be is not regarded as such. From the importance of the issue from its intricacy and subtlety am unable to answer with certainty the question you have asked….My opinion is that Yudhishtra himself is an authority in this question He should say whether you are won or not won.”
So, Bhishma, the colossus that he was, passed the buck on the most important moral question of his life to fail a crucial character test. There are many lessons for the present times in this story from the ancient past, not the least of which was the inability to summon moral clarity at a crucial moment by Bhishma, the philosopher who could have been king.
I agree with Sushupti ji here.Sushupti wrote:This subtle way of satiating our ego by making our Acharyas submitting to each other is worst kind of "paap" karma.
Sounds very interesting. Can you please forward me a link for online shop for address of a vedor where i can buy the print version of this set? Thanks.ramana wrote:Here is the ten volume Indian Culture course for kids.
Its simple language and very clear.
http://www.hindubooks.org/culture_cours ... /index.htm
I had bought the print version for my kids and they benefited from it.
I don't know about the above story. But I came across the following story in KM Ganguli's english translation of Mahabharata:ramana wrote:Bji, I read that one sage was upset at his mother going with another person and his father not objecting. He came up with the marriage ritual and started the foundation of society.
It seems it is owing to the injunction of Dirghatamas Muni that widow remarriage is prohibited. It also seems that extra-marital affairs of married women were declared unlawful(or Adharmic)."Vaisampayana said, 'The unfortunate Satyavati then became plunged in grief on account of her son. And after performing with her daughters-in-law the funeral rites of the deceased, consoled, as best she could, her weeping daughters-in-law and Bhishma, that foremost of all wielders of weapons. And turning her eyes to religion, and to the paternal and maternal lines (of the Kurus), she addressed Bhishma and said 'The funeral cake, the achievements, and the perpetuation of the line of the virtuous and celebrated Santanu of Kuru's race, all now depend on thee. As the attainment of heaven is inseparable from good deeds, as long life is inseparable from truth and faith, so is virtue inseparable from thee. O virtuous one, thou art well-acquainted, in detail and in the abstract, with the dictates of virtue, with various Srutis, and with all the branches of the Vedas; know very well that thou art equal unto Sukra and Angiras as regards firmness in virtue, knowledge of the particular customs of families, and readiness of inventions under difficulties. Therefore, O foremost of virtuous men, relying on thee greatly, I shall appoint thee in a certain matter. Hearing me, it behoveth thee to do my bidding. O bull among men, my son and thy brother, endued with energy and dear unto thee, hath gone childless to heaven while still a boy. These wives of thy brother, the amiable daughters of the ruler of Kasi, possessing beauty and youth, have become desirous of children. Therefore, O thou of mighty arms, at my command, raise offspring on them for the perpetuation of our line. It behoveth thee to guard virtue against loss. Install thyself on the throne and rule the kingdom of the Bharatas. Wed thou duly a wife. Plunge not thy ancestors into hell.'
"Vaisampayana continued, 'Thus addressed by his mother and friends and relatives, that oppressor of foes, the virtuous Bhishma, gave this reply conformable to the dictates of virtue, 'O mother, what thou sayest is certainly sanctioned by virtue. But thou knowest what my vow is in the matter of begetting children. Thou knowest also all that transpired in connection with thy dower. O Satyavati, I repeat the pledge I once gave, viz., I would renounce three worlds, the empire of heaven, anything that may be greater than that, but truth I would never renounce. The earth may renounce its scent, water may renounce its moisture, light may renounce its attribute of exhibiting forms, air may renounce its attribute of touch, the sun may renounce his glory, fire, its heat, the moon, his cooling rays, space, its capacity of generating sound, the slayer of Vritra, his prowess, the god of justice, his impartiality; but I cannot renounce truth.' Thus addressed by her son endued with wealth of energy, Satyavati said unto Bhishma, 'O thou whose prowess is truth, I know of thy firmness in truth. Thou canst, if so minded, create, by the help of thy energy, three worlds other than those that exist. I know what thy vow was on my account.
But considering this emergency, bear thou the burden of the duty that one oweth to his ancestors. O punisher of foes, act in such a way that the lineal link may not be broken and our friends and relatives may not grieve.' Thus urged by the miserable and weeping Satyavati speaking such words inconsistent with virtue from grief at the loss of her son, Bhishma addressed her again and said, 'O Queen, turn not thy eyes away from virtue. O, destroy us not. Breach of truth by a Kshatriya is never applauded in our treatises on religion. I shall soon tell thee, O Queen, what the established Kshatriya usage is to which recourse may be had to prevent Santanu's line becoming extinct on earth. Hearing me, reflect on what should be done in consultation with learned priests and those that are acquainted with practices allowable in times of emergency and distress, forgetting not at the same time what the ordinary course of social conduct is.'"
"Bhishma continued, 'In olden days, Rama, the son of Jamadagni, in anger at the death of his father, slew with his battle axe the king of the Haihayas. And Rama, by cutting off the thousand arms of Arjuna (the Haihaya king), achieved a most difficult feat in the world. Not content with this, he set out on his chariot for the conquest of the world, and taking up his bow he cast around his mighty weapons to exterminate the Kshatriyas. And the illustrious scion of Bhrigu's race, by means of his swift arrows annihilated the Kshatriya tribe one and twenty times.
"And when the earth was thus deprived of Kshatriyas by the great Rishi, the Kshatriya ladies all over the land had offspring raised by Brahmanas skilled in the Vedas. It has been said in the Vedas that the sons so raised belongeth to him that had married the mother. And the Kshatriya ladies went in unto the Brahamanas not lustfully but from motives of virtue. Indeed, it was thus that the Kshatriya race was revived.
"In this connection there is another old history that I will recite to you. There was in olden days a wise Rishi of the name of Utathya. He had a wife of the name Mamata whom he dearly loved. One day Utathya's younger brother Vrihaspati, the priest of the celestials, endued with great energy, approached Mamata. The latter, however, told her husband's younger brother--that foremost of eloquent men--that she had conceived from her connection with his elder brother and that, therefore, he should not then seek for the consummation of his wishes. She continued, 'O illustrious Vrihaspati, the child that I have conceived hath studied in his mother's womb the Vedas with the six Angas, Thy seed cannot be lost in vain. How can then this womb of mine afford room for two children at a time? Therefore, it behoveth thee not to seek for the consummation of thy desire at such a time. Thus addressed by her, Vrihaspati, though possessed of great wisdom, succeeded not in suppressing his desire. Moreover, when he attempted to meet her, the child in the womb then addressed him and said, 'O father, cease from thy attempt. There is no space here for two. O illustrious one, the room is small. I have occupied it first.
Your seed can not be lost. It behoveth thee not to afflict me.' But Vrihaspati without listening to what that child in the womb said, sought the embraces of Mamata possessing the most beautiful pair of eyes.
At point in time, when he was about to let go of his seed into her, the child in the womb blocked it with his foot. So, seed came out and fell to the ground. And the illustrious Vrihaspati, beholding this, became indignant, and reproached Utathya's child and cursed him, saying, 'Because thou hast spoken to me in the way thou hast at a time of pleasure that is sought after by all creatures, perpetual darkness shall overtake thee.' And from this curse of the illustrious Vrishaspati, Utathya's child who was equal unto Vrihaspati in energy, was born blind and came to be called Dirghatamas (enveloped in perpetual darkness). And the wise Dirghatamas, possessed of a knowledge of the Vedas, though born blind, succeeded yet by virtue of his learning, in obtaining for a wife a young and handsome Brahmana maiden of the name of Pradweshi. And having married her, the illustrious Dirghatamas, for the expansion of Utathya's race, begat upon her several children with Gautama as their eldest. These children, however, were all given to covetousness and folly. The virtuous and illustrious Dirghatamas possessing complete mastery over the Vedas, soon after learnt from Surabhi's son the practices of their order and fearlessly betook himself to those practices, regarding them with reverence. (For shame is the creature of sin and can never be where there is purity of intention). Then those best of Munis that dwelt in the same asylum, beholding him transgress the limits of propriety became indignant, seeing sin where sin was not. And they said, 'O, this man, transgresseth the limit of propriety. No longer doth he deserve a place amongst us. Therefore, shall we all cast this sinful wretch off.' And they said many other things regarding the Muni Dirghatamas. And his wife, too, having obtained children, became indignant with
him.
"The husband then addressing his wife Pradweshi, said, 'Why is it that thou also hast been dissatisfied with me?' His wife answered, 'The husband is called the Bhartri because he supporteth the wife. He is called Pati because he protecteth her. But thou art neither, to me! O thou of great ascetic merit, on the other hand, thou hast been blind from birth, it is I who have supported thee and thy children. I shall not do so in future.'
"Hearing these words of his wife, the Rishi became indignant and said unto her and her children, 'Take me unto the Kshatriyas and thou shalt then be rich.' His wife replied (by saying), 'I desire not wealth that may be procured by thee, for that can never bring me happiness. O best of Brahmanas, do as thou likest.
I shall not be able to maintain thee as before.' At these words of his wife, Dirghatamas said, 'I lay down from this day as a rule that every woman shall have to adhere to one husband for her life. Be the husband dead or alive, it shall not be lawful for a woman to have connection with another. And she who may have such connection shall certainly be regarded as fallen. A woman without husband shall always be liable to be sinful. And even if she be wealthy she shall not be able to enjoy that wealth truly. Calumny and evil report shall ever dog her.' Hearing these words of her husband Pradweshi became very angry, and commanded her sons, saying, 'Throw him into the waters of Ganga!' And at the command of their mother, the wicked Gautama and his brothers, those slaves of covetousness and folly, exclaiming, 'Indeed, why should we support this old man?--'tied the Muni to a raft and committing him to the mercy of the stream returned home without compunction. The blind old man drifting along the stream on that raft, passed through the territories of many kings. One day a king named Vali conversant with every duty went to the Ganges to perform his ablutions. And as the monarch was thus engaged, the raft to which the Rishi was tied, approached him. And as it came, the king took the old man. The virtuous Vali, ever devoted to truth, then learning who the man was that was thus saved by him, chose him for raising up offspring. And Vali said, 'O illustrious one, it behoveth thee to raise upon my wife a few sons that shall be virtuous and wise.' Thus addressed, the Rishi endued with great energy, expressed his willingness. Thereupon king Vali sent his wife Sudeshna unto him. But the queen knowing that the latter was blind and old went not unto him, she sent unto him her nurse. And upon that Sudra woman the virtuous Rishi of passions under full control begat eleven children of whom Kakshivat was the eldest. And beholding those eleven sons with Kakshivat as the eldest, who had studied all the Vedas and who like Rishis were utterers of Brahma and were possessed of great power, king Vali one day asked the Rishi saying, 'Are these children mine?' The Rishi replied, 'No, they are mine. Kakshivat and others have been begotten by me upon a Sudra woman. Thy unfortunate queen Sudeshna, seeing me blind and old, insulted me by not coming herself but sending unto me, instead, her nurse.' The king then pacified that best of Rishis and sent unto him his queen Sudeshna. The Rishi by merely touching her person said to her, 'Thou shalt have five children named Anga, Vanga, Kalinga, Pundra and Suhma, who shall be like unto Surya (Sun) himself in glory. And after their names as many countries shall be known on earth. It is after their names that their dominions have come to be called Anga, Vanga, Kalinga, Pundra and Suhma.'
"It was thus that the line of Vali was perpetuated, in days of old, by a great Rishi. And it was thus also that many mighty bowmen and great car-warriors wedded to virtue, sprung in the Kshatriya race from the seed of Brahmanas. Hearing this, O mother, do as thou likest, as regards the matter in hand.'"
I think the currency could have been gold, silver, diamonds and other such precious materials. Apart from that, the exchange of goods may also have been in vogue.johneeG wrote:Guys,
I had a doubt for sometime now: What is economic structure followed during Ramayana times?
I think the taxation was 1/6th of income/produce. But apart from that what are the other details. For example, what was the currency used. What are the occupations that are available and how much is their contribution in GDP? What would constitute public sector and what would constitute private sector?
Ramayana talks about general populace being quite rich. The state(king) is also portrayed in Ramayana as very rich. What kind of economic policy can lead to it?
In short, I would be glad if someone can give a brief account of economic policy followed during Ramayana times(or by Lord Sri Rama).
+ 1000!!!brihaspati wrote:As far as I know - most who have to study the texts one way or the other - know about this. But we have to consider that the Upanishadic texts are actually dealing with three things simultaneously :harbans wrote:I am very uncomfortable with Chapter 6. Till number 5, the whole thing is classic. Mind boggling stuff. It may take years and more to digest the content. Then Chapter 6! I rever the Upanishads and the BG..i read them over the for years..trying to extract some juice. Some i did not delve too deeply, because i thought i was not pure enough..that i have to evolve t oread them. What Harmeet does is poke a spoke in the eye. It does not comfort me.
5 Chapters of the deepest thought that mankind has known..and the 6th..so crass specially in verse 6/7? I have not encountered any similar sentiment. This is absolutely out of context. This Upanishad is amongst the most beautiful i consider..Shankaracharya had a reason to dismiss it(chapter 6) outright. Lets not privilege it here but let the Truth speak for itself. Fact is no 'HIndu'' is aware of this..apart from Harmeet Singh pointing this out. What a shame..even Max Mueller did not translate it because it's source as uncertain. Neither did Adi Shankara nor Swami Krishnanda.
Big jump really from Transcendence to forced Sex..specially if one is meditating in the Forest.
(1) it is acknowledging that women can roam freely and mate with any man they want
(2) it is acknowledging that both men and women can demand sexxual satisfaction from the opposite gender
(3) it discusses means of regularizing a social contract towards monogamy.
All three points are discussed and faced up to. As far as I am aware of, if Upanishadic times are in the range of immediate post-Vedic [perhaps with even elements of pre-Vedic] around say 5000, or even 3000 - there are no contemporaneous theological tract that devises humans themselves arriving at the solution. All others take recourse to order from higher up.
I think there is nothing to be ashamed of about section 6. We should applaud the courage and absolute honesty with which these people faced it, and dealt with it - without taking recourse to supernatural authority - and arrived at contractual monogamy all on their own humanity.
There is a very old theory [backed up by some observations] that in olden times - the right of both genders of a clan on the opposite gender was acknowledged. So that it has been observed that with the advent of monogamous practices - there was always a ritual basis that paid honour to this claim of the whole body of the opposite gender. This has been at the root of the ancient customs that generated stag and hen parties, and in many European feudal cases - the Droit du seigneur - or prima nocta. The theory goes that as male hierarchical power began to domnate - the most powerful male appropriated this right of the males of the tribe - and on behalf of them, on the first night of sex with a bride who was henceforth to be locked into a monogamous relation. The opposite right for women was naturally dismissed because of the balance of power.
But 6th chapter could simply be stating this older social norm. The enforced sex appears to us to be enforced and outrageous because we are unaware of this ancient possible human aspect of collective sexuality.
In fact a data point in this is that Vatsayana mentions this prima-nocta practice for the king/chiefs of Madra-desa onlee in his time - but explicitly denies it as being practised by any other region of India that he describes in his list of sexual practices by region and community. However- the Europeans were practising this in some cases even until the 13th century.
Bharatyias were always pragmatic about human sexuality and inter-relations, and they always thought of things far in advance of the rest of the world. What Bharatyias thought yesterday, the rest of the world only fearfully ponders today, and adopts only tomorrow.
Harbans ji,harbans wrote:Eurasia review comments: Those that supported the Dharmic stance..my respect. Rajesh A, Carl and Atri ji. Some of the points that you made are sinking in. I come from a very mixed bag family now. Hindu-Sikh-Kerala-Tamil, my own gf Naga and yes..i have recently a BIL (1st cousin) a Hyderabadi Muslim too! A direct link between violence and doctrine is always to be introspected. When there is no link or there is controversiality on translation/ purport as in the Upanishad, it's reference comes in only with a motivated opinion like Harmeets. I don't understand how Harmeet was allowed to write for Eurasia review. It's like getting Osama to write for a NYT editorial..would Americans accept it? Dharma is our foundation..amongst all Indic faiths. Lets find and encourage the common heritage. Veda's is our heritage. Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist. We may or may not agree to some tenets, but we agree it is our heritage..a Harmeet cannot break our bond with that.
Atri wrote:The sanskrit term for brother "Bhraataa" and for husband "Bhartru" come from same word root "BhR" which means "to fulfill".
From three major reasons ... One, the 20-m uplift of the stream terrace in the Yamuna valley, related to reactivation of a major fault and tearing apart of the Śiwālik Hills which occurred 3663 ±215 years ago was responsible for the abrupt southward deflection of the eastern Tamasā branch of the Sarasvati resulting in stupendous decline of the river discharge and consequent great exodus of the Harappans from the middle reaches of the Sarasvati around 3750 yr B.P. Two, the archaeologists conclude that the Painted Greyware Culture - which represents a settled agrarian economy, iron technology and growing specialization in craft - coincides with the timespan described in the Mahābhārata. Three, the flourishing culture that the Purāṇas and epics describe, and the existence of a large number of teerths on the banks fo rivers full of water, implies that the climate conditions were favourable and that the rainfall was sufficient to make the rivers flowing full and the land green.
...
Taking the geochronological date of the tectonic event, the climate conditions during the Purāṇa times, the archaeological deductions and testimony of the constellation of stars, it seems very probable that the Mahābhārata War occurred around 1478 BC (3490 yr BP). ... The epic Mahābhārata was written sometime later than 3500 yr BP.
The flood is mentioned I think and how the descendants of manu are the only survivorsramana wrote:Was there a reference in the epic to a pralaya or a cataclysmic event earlier than the Mahabharata war? Or the Puranas?
Currently, 50 years of Brahma have elapsed and we are in the first Day of the 51st year. This Brahma's day, Kalpa, is named as ShvetaVaraha Kalpa. Within this Day, six Manvantaras have already elapsed and we are in the seventh Manavatara, named as - Vaivasvatha Manvantara (or Sraddhadeva Manavatara). Within the Vaivasvatha Manavantara, 27 Mahayugas (4 Yugas together is a Mahayuga), and the Krita, Treta and Dwapara Yugas of the 28th Mahayuga have elapsed. We are in the Kaliyuga of the 28th Mahayuga. This Kaliyuga began in the year 3102 BC.ramana wrote:Was there a reference in the epic to a pralaya or a cataclysmic event earlier than the Mahabharata war? Or the Puranas?
You're right; I was mistaken. -tra is irrelevant here. t>d only happens when preceded by an aspirated sound.brihaspati wrote:But here we are not using -tra, arent we, we are looking at -dra.
A lot of people make this connection; but this is almost zero likelihood. Syncopation of kṣ>ś is unprecedented in Sanskrit dialects. Even in Prakrit, they tend to turn to -kk or -kh.Carl wrote:So shUdra has no relation with kShUdra (narrow, small)?
That's possible. According to Turkic etymology:ManishH wrote:Perhaps the root lies in a non-sanskrit language. The words 'mleccha' or 'yavana' also occur heavily in sanskrit literature, yet don't have any satisfactory etymologies in purely sanskrit roots.
IMHO, no, it should not be removed, because not only is it a mere 4th addition to the traditional 3 Indo-european varNas, but it is essential to understanding how they are yoked together in a daivI-varNAshrama paradigm, as opposed to an Asuri-varNAshrama paradigm. In the Shrimad Bhagavatam, it says that in one phase of time, the Asuras had a more perfect division of varNashrama than the Devas, but Vishnu remained partial to the Devas. This is because of the subtle difference of essence: The daivI-varNashrama system is a service-oriented platform. Selfless devotional service is considered its own reward - phala-svarUpatvAt. Greater and greater service is the goal and essence. Service is not considered a survival route to something else in this paradigm. Rather, all 4 pursharthas are merely seen as phases of mentality that can be subsumed and dovetailed in devotional service. Devotion (bhakti) is the substance of the knowledge (jnAna) and works (karma) of such varNashrama. In parts of the RigVeda, heroes like King Sudas and his father Divodasa have "dAsa" in their names, indicating that they sacrificed their lives to be used up in the service of the divinities and Vedic civilization.Atri wrote:How can a word with no reference and no meaning be so strong as to dictate our narrative in history and present? Is this word itself a deracination which is crept in Vedas? If so, should it be removed from there?
I was always troubled by what seems like Madhva's adherence to caste division. At the same time, from a psychological point of view, I think that is a good derivation. I understand Ambedkar's irritation, but due to the perversion of the caste system, I believe a proper discussion of this derivation was overlooked.ManishH wrote:Madhwa's commentary on chāndogya upaniṣad story of jānaśruti derives 'śūdra' from śucaṃ abhidudrāva (who rushes into grief). Again this is a philosophical explanation, and I haven't seen these kind of NATO style acronyms in vedic. B.R. Ambedkar, in a rush of ideological anger, uses this particular derivation to trash the general seeking of etymologies and linguistic research as typical 'Brahminical' (sic) pursuits.
What about the carry over from previous life?. If only Physical body gets destroyed at the time of death while subtle and casual bodies remain intact deciding the surroundings for the next physical body above can't be true. And this is the main argument of missionaries i.e. as long as you believe in the reincarnation how can you do away with caste system?. Therefore, if one believes in what Gita says about the birth less eternal "Aatma" taking many bodies then caste system is inevitable from Christian/Abrahamic point of view.So in an abstract sense, shUdra can be seen as the base class of a psycho-physical component of varNa division:
जन्मना जायते शूद्रः
संस्काराद् भवेद् द्विजः
वेद-पाठाद् भवेद् विप्रो
ब्रह्म-जानाति इति ब्राह्मणः
"By birth one is Shudra,
By sacramental processes one becomes twice-born.
By study of knowingness one becomes Vipra,
And one who knows Brahman is Braahmana."
It is psycho-physical, so the sookshma-sharIra is included in that "janmanA" of the first line. However, that does not inextricably tie varNa to janma at all. The "Abrahamic point of view" is trying to oversimplify the issue, and that's probably what misguided Indics historically did, too. The second line of that verse is about "samskAra", about psycho-spiritual processes. In the absence of these processes, there will probably be a hardening of the link between janma and the manifestation of "acquired guNa" and vocation, and this can be seen in any society (not just Indic). Problem was that in India people encased this natural tendency in perverted shastric armour. But with the application of proper educational processes of self-knowledge, the game changes completely.Sushupti wrote:What about the carry over from previous life?. If only Physical body gets destroyed at the time of death while subtle and casual bodies remain intact deciding the surroundings for the next physical body above can't be true. And this is the main argument of missionaries i.e. as long as you believe in the reincarnation how can you do away with caste system?. Therefore, if one believes in what Gita says about the birth less eternal "Aatma" taking many bodies then caste system is inevitable from Christian/Abrahamic point of view.
may be true but it can't be fit into reductionist objective frame work and hence hard to explain to an average mini Macaulay of today's India. Key lies in what you say " proper educational processes of self-knowledge" but then it is self knowledge, can't be imparted from outside or by some state owned agency in the absence of self initiative and vicious cycle continues .Carl wrote:It is psycho-physical, so the sookshma-sharIra is included in that "janmanA" of the first line. However, that does not inextricably tie varNa to janma at all. The "Abrahamic point of view" is trying to oversimplify the issue, and that's probably what misguided Indics historically did, too. The second line of that verse is about "samskAra", about psycho-spiritual processes. In the absence of these processes, there will probably be a hardening of the link between janma and the manifestation of "acquired guNa" and vocation, and this can be seen in any society (not just Indic). Problem was that in India people encased this natural tendency in perverted shastric armour. But with the application of proper educational processes of self-knowledge, the game changes completely.Sushupti wrote:What about the carry over from previous life?. If only Physical body gets destroyed at the time of death while subtle and casual bodies remain intact deciding the surroundings for the next physical body above can't be true. And this is the main argument of missionaries i.e. as long as you believe in the reincarnation how can you do away with caste system?. Therefore, if one believes in what Gita says about the birth less eternal "Aatma" taking many bodies then caste system is inevitable from Christian/Abrahamic point of view.
Even such a thing as universal material education is a process that has changed things drastically in many societies, including modern India. The full spectrum of holistic education processes would go a lot deeper in its cause and effects.
