Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Chandragupta · Post by **Chandragupta** » 29 Jan 2013 15:22

Probably a noob question but I have been reading about the earth trembling armies of the nanda dynasty and the later the maurya dynasty, infantry running into half a million men, couple ten thousand horsemen, chariots, elephants and what not. No other empire at their time had this strength. Then why did they not annex and keep hold of atleast half of asia? And how did our kingdoms fall so easily to muslim barbarians despite having a martial tradition and a tradition of having mammoth armies? Was this due to buddhism or had the Hindu kings tired each other out enough to let the mussalmans have an easy time rampaging their way in?

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 29 Jan 2013 15:25

Why Should they hold? Why is an Ashwamedha raid not enough? Is big always better?

Chandragupta · Post by **Chandragupta** » 29 Jan 2013 15:33

Atri wrote:Why Should they hold? Why is an Ashwamedha raid not enough? Is big always better?

Saar couldn't get anything on Ashwamedha raids by indian empire in foreign lands. Please elaborate.

Anyway, still with armies so large the Muslims would have never had had the chance to even smell indian territory, so what changed?

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 29 Jan 2013 15:47

Chandragupta wrote:
Atri wrote:Why Should they hold? Why is an Ashwamedha raid not enough? Is big always better?
Saar couldn't get anything on Ashwamedha raids by indian empire in foreign lands. Please elaborate.

Anyway, still with armies so large the Muslims would have never had had the chance to even smell indian territory, so what changed?

Northwestern Conquests of Raghu (Chandragupta-2 Vikramaditya) as described by Kalidaasa

this is an example of one such raid.. Ashwamedha was one reason.. Rajasuya is another. Few other kings raided CAR without a "Yaagnik" reason as well (for example Lalitaditya of Kashmir, Devapala of Bengal).. Why create an empire when you can make the rulers tow to your policies without having to hold the land, thus creating a common market.

These Yagnas provided a context, social respectability and excuse to do so. With decline in Yagna system, these excuses, contexts and social acceptability declined too. Thus raids became far and wide and later diminished.

It is my dream to see Ashwamedha being conducted at Takshshila university campuses and Indian army routinely venturing out, periodically sanitizing the region adjoining Indian subcontinent.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 29 Jan 2013 15:57

Ashwamedha raids are more like moral, politico-cultural ingress. Which is what is being alluded to. No holding of lands no loot no rape and no pillage. A military and political tussle designed to undermine the leadership of people who dare to challenge.

I mean residents of Pakistan deserve their land but the system can still be challenged.

This way you avoid the unnecessary part of a war and focus your energies on the most immediate/direct part of the eternal war.

Atri ji has written something on the political genius of Raja Ram. @kalichiron.blogspot. Yet to read it but seems like I will end up agreeing with it.

Added later:
Think about it between gathering lands and gathering people what is more important. Unfortunately the 'Salvation of souls' is being conducted by others with our people loosing in absentia.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 29 Jan 2013 16:03

ravi_g wrote:Ashwamedha raids are more like moral, politico-cultural ingress. Which is what is being alluded to. No holding of lands no loot no rape and no pillage. A military and political tussle designed to undermine the leadership of people who dare to challenge.

This way you avoid the unnecessary part of a war and focus your energies on the most immediate/direct part of the eternal war.

Atri ji has written something on the political genius of Raja Ram. @kalichiron.blogspot. Yet to read it but seems like I will end up agreeing with it.

Political Genius of Sri Rama - Part 1

Agreed, except the part about residents of pakistan. There is no Pakistan. Residents of Punjab deserve to live in Punjab with all legal, religious, personal and economic freedoms in Dharmik manner like Sajjana people, following whichever Moksha-marga as they wish to follow in their private lives. Same goes for Sindh, Bengal, Gaandhaar.

For dharmiks, today, gathering people to secure India is more important. Once the bastion of dharma (geography of India) is secured, one can then move on to "making world aarya"..

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 29 Jan 2013 16:15

Saadhu bachan Atri ji.

What the winning side was looking for is often aggrandized by it in its respective itihaas. We are lucky we are the only ones left with a itihaas now. And Yagyan and Yog are an integral part of our itihaas. The fact that our itihaas instead of making grandiose statements about numbers killed or numbers added talked about how a strong willed should deal with the weak willed while working towards establishing balance.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 30 Jan 2013 02:37

Atri wrote: Political Genius of Sri Rama - Part 1

Atriji

Went thru your Rajakiya Ramayana

. Kudos.

Do you think your Raama was doing this comprehensive uprising?

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1025770

vilayat wrote:6. The drawback of Indian part was the uprising was only spearheaded by "Brahmin" aspect of samaaj-Purusha and the Kshatriya (who was mostly used as mercenary) aspect was not much pursued. The Vaishya and Shudra aspect were totally neglected. An uprising, when of brahmin character, is intellectual, principled, often dreamy and away from ground realities. A predominantly Kshatriya uprising (1857) is gory, violent creates lots of fuss but may not be effective. The Vaishya uprising (as we are witnessing today with MMS's 10% growth hogwash), gives rise to mentality where everything is for sale and promotes and encourages "mediocrity" in society. On positive aspects, it increases the wealth pool of civilization. In Shudra uprising (in essence), there is plenty of emphasis on technological aspects but lack the understanding on how to fund that "technology", against whom to be used and "why". Shudra uprising also represent "mass-movement" when even the last man of society contributes.

7. For the establishment of Dharma, there requires the "concerted coordination of these four forces" in a way that the best of all four is seen in that uprising. This explains "what went wrong" in many aspects of India's answer to Abrahmics (Vijaynagar-Maratha-Freedom struggle).

Just an

kumarn · Post by **kumarn** » 31 Jan 2013 12:20

I have a question for the gurus. Why did Bhisma have to side with the Kauravas? As far as I know his vow was to 1) not stake claim to the kingdom and 2) not to marry.

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 31 Jan 2013 12:36

IIRC Bhishma vowed to protect the throne of Hastinapura; and solely by default, the once dismissed (due to blindness) chief claimant happened to be the Lord of Hastinapura.

Interesting fact is that it was Duryodhana, the heir, in effect declared war. That "land large enough to poke a needle into" dialog and all. Duryodhana, NOT the King of the Kurus. I am guessing this was the same as real royal order which can't be overturned. But then again, after Draupadi's disrobing Dhrithrashtra gave immediate manumission to the Pandavas and returned their holdings effectively overriding Duryodhana's rights, no? Maybe the blind old man actually wanted his son on the throne and was prepared to fight it out.

I mean, if you look at the actual Order of Succession and all that, Duryodhana had a stronger claim, no? That is, if one overlooks the fact that the last true Kuru royal was a ummmmmmmmmm.... 80 year old virgin.

kumarn · Post by **kumarn** » 31 Jan 2013 14:23

My confusion is when did he vow to protect hastinapur throne? As far as I know that was not in the vows he took in front of satyawatis father...

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 31 Jan 2013 20:07

If Bhishma were to fight against Hastina, that would amount to him wanting Hastina throne thus undoing his original owe. It is like him leaving Hastina and becoming king of another kingdom. And that would automatically mean He/his descendants (there are 10 types of sons) can usurp Hastina.

Added Later: Same logic applies even if he stayed neutral. Imagine him allowing the off-spring of Satyavati die a natural death thus ending that dynasty. Bhishma's oath itself is interesting. After that oath he should have left the kingdom and become a sanyasi. No, he stayed stuck to the throne, as a protector. That is the karma he couldn't escape until the end.

kumarn · Post by **kumarn** » 31 Jan 2013 23:46

^^^ ramaY ji, ok, but he could have stayed neutral? after all he was an old man already!

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 01 Feb 2013 00:14

kumarn wrote:^^^ ramaY ji, ok, but he could have stayed neutral? after all he was an old man already!

Even old he was the greatest warrior at kurukshetra. As long as he was in kourava command, Pandavas were taking huge losses. It was when the losses by Bhisma became unsustainable, Krishna and co started planning for Shikandi.

He and Drona were the only ones whose elimination logic was predicated on the fact that as long as they were leading the kouravas, there was no chance for the Pandavas. Karna's, Duryodhana's, Dusshashanas elimination logic was because of their adharma or in short they deserved it.

Bhisma and Drona werent directly accused of adharma, they were accused of standing in the way of dharma to kill adharma - i.e. they were the shields or masks of adharma but not adharma itself.

PS: His vow included to serve whoever were on the throne of Hastinapur. After taking this particular vow, Bhishma couldnt avoid sitting out. He was oath bound to fight for Hastinapur. Note, his vow was towards who was occupying Hastinapur, not Hastinapur itself. It did two things, as long as there was a king, he shouldnt be part of any coups and he should work towards the coups. However he had no "owner" after the king is dethroned for any reason and the new king is being installed, i.e. he could partake in the politics of the successor, but never allow a possible successor to prematurely overthrow. This loophole allowed him to say that he will not kill Pandavas, as technically Pandavas werent trying to overthrow Dhritarashtra but Duryodhana.

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 01 Feb 2013 09:43

The oath was to protect the throne of Hastinapur.... not the Kuru line exactly. If the oath and fealty was to his father alone, why take the brunt for the sires of a half-Brahmin-half-fisherman without a drop of Kuru blood in them?

It's interesting that Satyavati brought in her firstborn from Parashara, to do the Niyoga and sire the next Emperor and not somebody else. BTW, Vichitravirya and Chitrangada were Vyasa's half-brothers right..... so that makes Ambika and Ambalika equal to his sisters. Eeeekkkkkkkk!

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 01 Feb 2013 10:42

^ that is why it is called "Niyoga".

In Niyoga, the consummation happens when the man puts ghee all over the body and meets the woman just for the sake of impregnating her. The consummation doesn't happen all the days, but only the days when ovulation happens.

The Niyogi doesn't meet the woman after this and they do not have any sexual relationship.

It is in a way artificial insemination of those days.

Vyasa was selected for the Niyoga for only two reasons. He was a brahmajnani (eligibility criteria) and being son of Satyavathi he was trusted. All Pandavas too were born from this Niyoga method only, in some way.

That shows the maturity of the Sanatana Dharma. In Apaddharma situations too the process weighs towards overall divine quotient and not some sensual pleasures.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 02 Feb 2013 07:33

Anand K wrote:It's interesting that Satyavati brought in her firstborn from Parashara, to do the Niyoga and sire the next Emperor and not somebody else. BTW, Vichitravirya and Chitrangada were Vyasa's half-brothers right..... so that makes Ambika and Ambalika equal to his sisters. Eeeekkkkkkkk!

Is this just a defective logic, or somehow I missed it alltogether.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 02 Feb 2013 07:37

Virupaksha ji,

Your explanation reg. Bhishma's position was refreshing. Thanks.

In any case, when looking at history, while it is always interesting to ask the question... why?, most of the time we will end up with many opinions. And for this to be true, we don't have to go that far back as Mahabharata. Why Gandhi did what he did or why Dr. Ambedkar said what he said.. can be debated for ever. As far as history goes, all one can hope to answer (and that with uncertainty) is What and When. (For those curious... 'Poverty of Historicism' by Karl Popper would be good read).

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Feb 2013 09:37

Nilesh Oak wrote:
Anand K wrote:It's interesting that Satyavati brought in her firstborn from Parashara, to do the Niyoga and sire the next Emperor and not somebody else. BTW, Vichitravirya and Chitrangada were Vyasa's half-brothers right..... so that makes Ambika and Ambalika equal to his sisters. Eeeekkkkkkkk!
Is this just a defective logic, or somehow I missed it alltogether.

It is the individual's paraphilia that make them see things they do. It is a personal choice and behavior.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 04 Feb 2013 22:37

X-posting:
Chanakya Niti, chapter 1, shloka 1:

प्रणम्य शिरसा विष्णुं त्रैलोक्याधिपतिं प्रभुम् ।
नानाशास्त्रोद्धृतं वक्ष्ये राजानीतिसमुच्चयम् ॥
Pranamya shirasa vishnum trailokyadhipatim prabhum |
Nana-shastraodhrutam vakshye rajanitisamuchchayam ||

word-to-word meanings:
प्रणम्य (Pranamya) =having bowed, शिरसा (shirasa) =the head(to), विष्णुं (vishnum) =Lord Vishnu (and) omni-present, त्रैलोक्य (trailokya) =of the three Lokas(worlds), अधिपतिं (adhipatim) =supreme ruler, प्रभुम् (prabhum) =king (or) splendid (or) powerful, नाना (Nana)=various, शास्त्रोद् (shashtrot) =Vedic scriptures(all the scriptures that are based on Vedas), धृतं (dhrutam) =existing, वक्ष्ये (vakshye)= (I) say, राजानीति (rajaniti) =politics, समुच्चयम् (samuchchayam) =collection.

Translations:
१. सर्वशक्तिमान भगवान विष्णु को नमन करते हुए, जो तीनो लोको के स्वामी है, मै एक राज्य के लिए नीति शास्त्र के सिद्धांतों को कहता हूँ । अनेक शास्त्रों का आधार ले कर मै यह सूत्र कह रहा हूँ ।

1. Humbly bowing down before the almighty Lord Sri Vishnu(the all-pervasive), the Lord of the three worlds, I recite maxims of the science of political ethics (niti) selected from the various shatras (scriptures).

Additional Commentary:
The word ‘विष्णु (Vishnu)’ has deep meaning. Of course, it refers to Lord Vishnu. But, why is Lord Vishnu called ‘विष्णु (Vishnu)’? What does that word mean? The literal meaning of the word ‘विष्णु (Vishnu)’ is:
व्याप्नोति इति विष्णुः
‘vyapnoti iti vishnuh’
(that which pervades is called ‘Vishnu’).

विष्णु (Vishnu) is the one who is all-pervasive.
This echoes the (shloka)verse of Ishavasya Upanishad:
ईशावास्यम् इदम् सर्वम् यत् किम् च जगत्याम् जगत् ।
तेन त्यक्तेन भुञ्जिथा मा गृधः कस्या स्विद् धनम् ॥
‘Ishavasyam idam sarvam yat kim ca jagatyam jagat ।
tena tyaktena bhunjithama gridhah kasyasvid dhanam ॥’
(All this is pervaded by the Lord, whatever is moving and not moving in this world.
Therefore, enjoy/protect by renunciation, do not covet the wealth of anyone.)

Infact, that Upanishad obtained its name from this celebrated verse.

Chanakya may have chosen the word ‘विष्णु (Vishnu)’ to represent both its meanings: Lord Vishnu, the all-pervasive.

---
EDIT:
This is a very important concept in Hinduism. Perhaps, the most distinctive feature of Hinduism when compared with Abrahamic creeds. Abrahamic creeds follow Zorastrian conception of God. According to zorastrianism(to the best of my knowledge), god is omnipotent and omniscient, but not omnipresent. Abrahamic creeds follow the same conception of god. Judaism, atleast in later stages, seems to follow this conception.

It is for this reason that followers of abrahamic creeds are unable to understand Hinduism. This is the most distinguishing feature of Hinduism(and other indic religions which have their origin in Hinduism). In Hinduism, God/Goddess is not only omnipotent and omniscient, but also omnipresent. There is nothing devoid of God/Goddess in this world. The God/Goddess is present at all times, at all places, in all circumstances and in all objects. Nothing in the world is independent of God/Goddess. God/Goddess is all-pervasive.

Katha Upanishad explains how the God/Goddess(which is same as one's self) is all pervasive:
अणोर् अणियान् महतो महियान् अत्मस्य जन्तोर् निहितो गुहयाम् ।
तम् अक्रतुः पश्यति वितशोको धातुः प्रसादत् महिमानम् आत्मनः ॥॥
Anur aniyan mahato mahiyan atmasya jantor nihito guyayaam ।
tam akratuh pashyati vitshoko dhatuh prasadat mahimaanam atmanah॥
(Self which smaller/subtler than the smallest/subtlest and greater than the greatest, is seated in the cavity of hearts of creatures. The one who is free from activity(of mind and body) beholds the majesty of self and is freed from sorrow)

Lord Sri Krishna explains in Bhagavad Gita(Chapter 7, shloka 7):
मत्तः परतरं न अन्यत् किञ्चित् अस्ति धनंजय ।
मयि सर्वम् इदम् प्रोतं सूत्रे मणिगणा इव ॥
mattah parataram na anyat kinchit asti dhanamjaya ।
mayi sarvam idam protam sutre manigana iva ॥
(O Dhananjaya(Arjuna), there exists nothing other than me. Everything is connected in me like all the pearls of a necklace are connected to its inner thread.)

Abrahamic creeds limit god to a particular location/space. On the contrary, in Hinduism, God/Goddess is unlimited by time/space/items. God/Goddess is called 'sat'(eternal), chit(the consciousness), ananda(bliss). The word sat means eternal(in terms of time and space). Because, God/Goddess is all-pervasive, Hindus can conceive of the divinity in any thing and in any number of things. Since, nothing in the world is independent of God/Goddess, any worthwhile thing in the world shines forth due to the splendour of God/Goddess.

Lord Sri Krishna explains this in Bhagavad Gita in Chapter 10, from shloka 20 onwards:

The Blessed Lord said: Yes, I will tell you of My splendorous manifestations, but only of those which are prominent, O Arjuna, for My opulence is limitless.

Chapter 10, Verse 20.
I am the Self, O Gudakesa, seated in the hearts of all creatures. I am the beginning, the middle and the end of all beings.

Chapter 10, Verse 21.
Of the Adityas I am Visnu, of lights I am the radiant sun, I am Marici of the Maruts, and among the stars I am the moon.

Chapter 10, Verse 22.
Of the Vedas I am the Sama-veda; of the demigods I am Indra; of the senses I am the mind, and in living beings I am the living force [knowledge].

Chapter 10, Verse 23.
Of all the Rudras I am Lord Siva; of the Yaksas and Raksasas I am the Lord of wealth [Kuvera]; of the Vasus I am fire [Agni], and of mountains I am Meru.

Chapter 10, Verse 24.
Of priests, O Arjuna, know Me to be the chief, Brhaspati, the lord of devotion. Of generals I am Skanda, the lord of war; and of bodies of water I am the ocean.

Chapter 10, Verse 25.
Of the great sages I am Bhrgu; of vibrations I am the transcendental om. Of sacrifices I am the chanting of the holy names [japa], and of immovable things I am the Himalayas.

Chapter 10, Verse 26.
Of all trees I am the holy fig tree, and among sages and gods I am Narada. Of the singers of the gods [Gandharvas] I am Citraratha, and among perfected beings I am the sage Kapila.

Chapter 10, Verse 27.
Of horses know Me to be Uccaihsrava, who rose out of the ocean, born of the elixir of immortality; of lordly elephants I am Airavata, and among men I am the monarch.

Chapter 10, Verse 28.
Of weapons I am the thunderbolt; among cows I am the surabhi, givers of abundant milk. Of procreators I am Kandarpa, the god of love, and of serpents I am Vasuki, the chief.

Chapter 10, Verse 29.
Of the celestial Naga snakes I am Ananta; of the aquatic deities I am Varuna. Of departed ancestors I am Aryama, and among the dispensers of law I am Yama, lord of death.

Chapter 10, Verse 30.
Among the Daitya demons I am the devoted Prahlada; among subduers I am time; among the beasts I am the lion, and among birds I am Garuda, the feathered carrier of Visnu.

Chapter 10, Verse 31.
Of purifiers I am the wind; of the wielders of weapons I am Rama; of fishes I am the shark, and of flowing rivers I am the Ganges.

Chapter 10, Verse 32.
Of all creations I am the beginning and the end and also the middle, O Arjuna. Of all sciences I am the spiritual science of the self, and among logicians I am the conclusive truth.

Chapter 10, Verse 33.
Of letters I am the letter A, and among compounds I am the dual word. I am also inexhaustible time, and of creators I am Brahma, whose manifold faces turn everywhere.

Chapter 10, Verse 34.
I am all-devouring death, and I am the generator of all things yet to be. Among women I am fame, fortune, speech, memory, intelligence, faithfulness and patience.

Chapter 10, Verse 35.
Of hymns I am the Brhat-sama sung to the Lord Indra, and of poetry I am the Gayatri verse, sung daily by Brahmanas. Of months I am November and December, and of seasons I am flower-bearing spring.

Chapter 10, Verse 36.
I am also the gambling of cheats, and of the splendid I am the splendor. I am victory, I am adventure, and I am the strength of the strong.

Chapter 10, Verse 37.
Of the descendants of Vrsni I am Vasudeva, and of the Pandavas I am Arjuna. Of the sages I am Vyasa, and among great thinkers I am Usana.

Chapter 10, Verse 38.
Among punishments I am the rod of chastisement, and of those who seek victory, I am morality. Of secret things I am silence, and of the wise I am wisdom.

Chapter 10, Verse 39.
Furthermore, O Arjuna, I am the generating seed of all existences. There is no being--moving or unmoving--that can exist without Me.

Chapter 10, Verse 40.
O mighty conqueror of enemies, there is no end to My divine manifestations. What I have spoken to you is but a mere indication of My infinite opulences.

Chapter 10, Verse 41.
Know that all beautiful, glorious, and mighty creations spring from but a spark of My splendor.

Chapter 10, Verse 42.
But what need is there, Arjuna, for all this detailed knowledge? With a single fragment of Myself I pervade and support this entire universe.

So, the best among the various items is seen as worth worshiping. While, everything is pervaded by God/Goddess, a normal being cannot perceive of this all-pervasive God/Goddess. So, certain places/items have been designated where even an ordinary person can experience the divinity.

These items are:
Sun, Moon, Fire, pious priest, and Vigraha(idol)...etc.

The sanskrit word for idol is vigraha. The 'vi' in vigraha represents 'vishesha'. The word vi-shesha means(without any remainder). Graha means grasping/receiving. So, vigraha means that which is received/grasped without any remainder. Vigraha allows the conception of God/Goddess to be received/grasped by one and all. Any technology is considered to have become advanced and developed when it is accessible and affordable to one and all. 'Idolatory'(or Vigraha Aradhana) is a sort of spiritual tech that allows everyone access to spirituality instead of limiting it to few privileged ones.

In fact, there is no ideology that can completely shun this mechanism. All ideologies (religious or otherwise) do tend to depend on icons, symbols, idols, marks, ...etc. Even the so-called ideologies that claim to reject idolatory have their own symbols, marks and idols which they worship.

---

The next word in Chanakya's shloka is ‘त्रैलोक्याधिपतिं (trailokya-adhipatim)’. It means the supreme-master(husband/lord) of three worlds. What are the three worlds? According to Hinduism, there are 14 worlds(Lokas).
They are:
Upper regions/worlds : Satya-loka(or Brahma Loka, residence of Lord Brahma), Tapo-loka, Jano-loka, Mahar-loka, Svar-loka (Svarga/Heaven of Indra), Bhuvar-loka.
Bhu-loka (earth)
Nether regions/worlds: Atala, Vitala, Sutala, Talatala, Mahatala, Rasatala, Patala.

These 14 regions/worlds are broadly divided into 3 categories:
upper regions(upper than earth), earth and nether-regions(relative to earth).

These 14 regions/worlds are, therefore, referred as 3 regions/worlds. When Chanakya says, “त्रैलोक्याधिपतिं (Trailokya-adhipatim)”, it means the supreme master(lord/husband) of all the (14 worlds or 3 worlds).

The Chinese usage of middle kingdom may have its origin in the concept of triloka(3 worlds). Middle-kingdom may refer to earth(which is the middle of the three worlds in Triloka).

The word ‘प्रभुम् (prabhum)’ means king. It is also used as a synonym of the word ‘ईशा ( isha, the Lord)’. The word is also related to the word ‘प्रभा (prabha) = splendour’. All these meanings of the word ‘प्रभुम् (prabhum)’ are relevant in this verse because Chanakya is describing the God/Goddess.

Chanakya makes it clear in the very beginning that he is composing this collection of (proper) political conduct by gleaning them from the various ‘shashtra’. He is not making it up on his own. Instead, he is simply re-collecting the most pertinent verses at one place. The word ‘समुच्चयम् (samuchchayam)’ means collection.

‘शास्त्र (Shastra)’ means any scripture which has Vedas as its basis. Chanakya’s present work collects the maxims from celebrated works of previous seers/sages, who themselves have claimed to have gleaned these maxims from holy Vedas. Some of those works are: Brihaspati smriti, Shukra niti, Manu smriti, Parashara smriti, and Vyasa’s MB(and other Puranas).

These works lay out dictums for proper conduct of individual and society, so that there is harmony and happiness for all. These works and their authors do not claim to teach anything new, instead they refer to the Vedas as their basis. That means these authors claim to explain(for general audience) what has already been said in Vedas. In line with the same tradition, Chanakya does not claim to teach anything new. He is only collecting at one place the ancient knowledge(from various sources) for the benefit of his contemporaries.
Later, Panchatantra uses all these works(including the work of Chanakya).

---

Chandragupta wrote:Probably a noob question but I have been reading about the earth trembling armies of the nanda dynasty and the later the maurya dynasty, infantry running into half a million men, couple ten thousand horsemen, chariots, elephants and what not. No other empire at their time had this strength. Then why did they not annex and keep hold of atleast half of asia? And how did our kingdoms fall so easily to muslim barbarians despite having a martial tradition and a tradition of having mammoth armies? Was this due to buddhism or had the Hindu kings tired each other out enough to let the mussalmans have an easy time rampaging their way in?

Saar ji,
I think there are several issues here:
a) One does not really know about Indian Historical timeline. All we have is a dubious timeline created by the indologists which is contradicted by the puranas.
b) The role of Buddhism is a mystery. It was a great prostelyzing religion(perhaps, the first of its kind). And it surely sent missionaries far and wide under the royal patronage. But, why was it not accompanied by conquests is a mystery. The mystery would be cleared if one knows the general geo-political situation of those times.
c) The rise of muslims as a military power is a bigger mystery. Leave alone India, how did the muslims defeat the mighty empires of persia and byzantine? And that too in a very short span of time. What were the factors behind this? All we are told is that muslims had nothing but their religion. One is told that Mohammad united all the arabs and immediately these arabs fell on other nations and conquered them! Triumph of faith!!! Nice story. But, is faith enough to defeat mighty empires? Then, why did the muslims decline? Even today they have faith, perhaps, more faith than in the past, then why are they not able to re-establish the 'islamic golden age'? I think even muslims are unable to understand this mystery.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Feb 2013 22:42

Please continue discussing Chanakya niti. Its very timely now.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 07 Feb 2013 09:25

Deleted by Self

Started a New Thread on Chanakyas Work - Sutras, Niti and Arth-e-shaster

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 07 Feb 2013 09:32

Deleted by Self

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 07 Feb 2013 09:48

Nilesh Oak wrote:As far as history goes, all one can hope to answer (and that with uncertainty) is What and When. (For those curious... 'Poverty of Historicism' by Karl Popper would be good read).

Errr..... the whole AIT and OIT thing is Historicism heavy right? Also the moral dimension of historicism is a major issue in ALL discussions in BRF. harking back to mythological pasts, finding out parallels, the symbology, dovetailing etc with ithihasa purana etc etc. Hermeneutics and a bit of heuristics?

Coming back to the Vyasa's Niyoga thing (and dismissing that cheap paraphilia snide from the resident uber dharmic), what does it boil down to. ..... taking away that theological interpretations? When the royal-blooded sons from her (second) marriage fail to produce heirs, a Mother invites her firstborn from a previous "alliance" to sire the next ruler(s) with the widows of the Niyogi's half-brothers. All the brahmajnani stuff is the theological layer interpreted by or simply laid on by later commentators, no? Isn't that also a sort of historicism?

Anyway, I have onlee the greatest respect for Ved Vyasa. He is a Chiranjeevi and could be walking around, if you go by the texts right?

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 07 Feb 2013 10:26

c) The rise of muslims as a military power is a bigger mystery. Leave alone India, how did the muslims defeat the mighty empires of persia and byzantine? And that too in a very short span of time. What were the factors behind this? All we are told is that muslims had nothing but their religion. One is told that Mohammad united all the arabs and immediately these arabs fell on other nations and conquered them! Triumph of faith!!! Nice story. But, is faith enough to defeat mighty empires? Then, why did the muslims decline? Even today they have faith, perhaps, more faith than in the past, then why are they not able to re-establish the 'islamic golden age'? I think even muslims are unable to understand this mystery.

The plague of Justinian and the final round of Sassanid-Byzantine wars a few decades before the conquests commenced were major factors. Having military geniuses like Khalid ibn Walid and Amr bin A'nas also helped. I remember references about Rashidun armies occupying almost de-populated cities like Damascus and Aleppo. (In fact a fresh bout of the plague claimed the life of Abu Ubaidah who wold have almost surely succeeded Omar as the Caliph). And the Sassanids did fight tenaciously for 10 years..... even as late as Nahavand they fielded ginoromous armies to fight the Muslims.
The fresh nature of the faith also led many Arabs making it a goal of their lives to "spread" Islam. Living legends or descendants of the Sahaba also walked among them..... was a major morale booster and reminder of the "mission". IIRC Qutayba ibn Muslim had one such young super scion who was martyr in one of their campaigns. I feel this sort of thing fizzled out down the generations. By 750-800 AD the Arab surges ended.

Other important factors too. Synchronicity I guess......

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 07 Feb 2013 10:41

b) The role of Buddhism is a mystery. It was a great prostelyzing religion (perhaps, the first of its kind). And it surely sent missionaries far and wide under the royal patronage. But, why was it not accompanied by conquests is a mystery. The mystery would be cleared if one knows the general geo-political situation of those times.

The nature of Buddhist proselytization was different from Muslim or Christian proselytization right? I mean, there is no "charter of fundamental directives" on which your Soul rests. The eternal hellfire vs heaven (a heaven of eternal pleasure) is a major motivator to the less rigorous thinkers. Even Buddha realized that Buddhism is at most a software patch or add-on toolbar to existing Hindu faith and that the high theology is not for everybody. The lay masses marched to a slightly different beat while the Inner Party had the ummm.... "higher answers"..... The inner party was a priesthood but with lesser orthopraxy fundae.

Muscular Political Buddhism with a militant arm of the kind we see in SL today is unique as it was forged in Bhoomiputra versus British lackeys (Christians and Tamil Hindus) forge. A type of this briefly flowered in a forgotten corner of Mongolia with the Bloody Baron (Roman von Ungern-Sternberg) and the not-so-illustrious predecessor of the curren Dalai Lama. I mean, this kind of thing did not even develop in the reign of the apostate Langdarma of the Tibetan Empire (or his predecessors).

JMTC

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 07 Feb 2013 10:46

Ashoka sent out his son and daughter on missions abroad after he had throw down the sword and taken to a life of peace and reflection. Mucho difference compared to following those missions with an army or the missions themselves acting as conduits for information backflow to India about weakpoints and potential exploitability of target societies. Big difference me thinks.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 08 Feb 2013 03:43

peter wrote:
Carl wrote:Well peter ji, war "had to happen" doesn't make gambling away one's wife and watching her being disrobed an enlightened "chankian" move. It was delusion. Sometimes even the enlightened can be overcome by delusion, like clouds cover the sun.

That there may be a higher orchestration is a different matter.
But if God had to show the "debasedness" of Kaliyuga what better way to do it then create repulsion at the action committed by supposedly good human beings?

Came across this in the Panchatantra -- an explanation of the (self-)destructive actions of different kinds of people. Two possibilities are given -- personal ignorance, and fate.

जिह्वालौल्यप्रसक्तानां जलमध्यनिवासिनां
अचिन्तितो वधोsज्ञानां मीनानामिव जायते [3]

"The destruction of the ignorant occurs unpredictably
similar to that of the fish living in the waters chasing the object of taste."

But...

पौलस्त्यः कथमन्यदारहरणे दोषं न विज्ञातवान्
रामेणापि कथं न हेमहरिणस्यासम्भवो लक्षितः
अक्षैश्चापि युधिष्टिरेण सहसा प्राप्तो ह्यनर्थः कथं
प्रत्यासन्नविपत्तिमूढमनसां प्रायो मतिः क्षीयते [4]

"How is it that Raavana, the son of Pulastya
did not know that kidnapping another’s wife is wrong?
(He was greatly learned and wise)
How is it that Rama did not doubt the reality of a golden deer?
(He was a realized Sage and wise beyond his years)
How is it that Yudhishtira lost everything in an instant through gambling?
(He as the name itself suggests was adept in the science of Dharma
and knew the right or wrong of things)
When calamities are ready to hit,
most probably the minds become inert and the intellect becomes inefficient!"

And also-
कृतान्तपाशबद्धानां दैवोपतचेतसां
बुद्धयः कुब्जगामिन्यो भवन्ति महतामपि [5]

"Bound by the deadly rope of the Death-God, minds controlled by fate;
the intellects of even great persons make wrong decisions."

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 10 Feb 2013 09:05

I am reading Sri Chellapilla Venkata Krishna Sastry (one of the Tirupati Venkata Kavulu) Kasi Yatra book.

There I found the answer to why Draupadi was not questioned in Virata kingdom when she said she had 5 husbands.

She said she was a "Sairandhri". In Sanskrit Sairandhri means "swairam dhriyati iti" meaning "a woman who lives as per her wish", hence perhaps they didn't doubt her having many husbands. And calling Gandharvas (perhaps meaning free men?) helped her cause.

My earlier thoughts that polyandry could be common might be wrong and I go for further research...

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 10 Feb 2013 14:19

I have always imagined Gandharvas as Hippies... free sex, free thinking, music, hallucinations, aesthetic sense.. it kind of fits..

but then, who knows..

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 10 Feb 2013 20:32

From wiki:

Rishabha (R̥ṣabha (Sanskrit: ऋषभ "Bull") or Ādinātha (आदिनाथ "Original Lord")) (7190 BC)[2] is an important figure in Jainism. He is referred to as the founder of Jainism.[3] He was the first of the 24 Tīrthaṅkara and is called Ādinātha. According to Jain beliefs, R̥ṣabha founded the Ikshvaku dynasty.

Birth: Ayodhya
Nirvana: Mount Kailash

Never knew Jains are also linked with Mount Kailash alongwith the Hindus, Buddhists and the Bon.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 10 Feb 2013 21:58

Ravi_g garu,

In their efforts to write their own Puranas both Buddhists and Jains rewrote the Hindu Purana using their world-view. Storyline, people and places are same but the concept of self and god-realization are different.

At one point the confusion was so great that Hinduism had to rewrite the MB and Ramayana in 700-1000AD after removing these Buddhist and Jaina Prakshiptas (sleeper cells). Sri Kappagantula Lakshmana Sastry in his verbatim translation of MB says, Kalidasa's RaghuVamsamu is one such effort.

Even now we see that confusion.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 10 Feb 2013 23:47

Kappagantula Lakshmana Sastry

Thanks for the pointer ...
Adi and sabhA (they misspell it as saba) parva at Maha Bharatamu by KLS in several formats and downloaded the kindle one. Not sure how Telugu is going to appear on the screen though.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 11 Feb 2013 00:55

^ Try to get the PDF files and read them. Look out for few things in Aadi Parva (IMHO, this should be a text book for class 7-10). It removes lot of deracination.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 11 Feb 2013 01:16

Since there is no Theertha thread so I am putting this in Kathas (full article for record purpose only) and Nukkad (small link only).

However I would request the views/comments/responses be put in Nukkad thread only.

If this whole thing is bunkum, would request mods to remove it all. I am not aware of the authenticity of claims.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... ?prtpage=1

10 FEB, 2013, 04.49AM IST, VIKRAM DOCTOR,ET BUREAU
Kumbh mela dates back to mid-19th century, shows research

Looking at the pictures of past Kumbh melas from the Times Archives it can seem like little has changed. The uniforms of the policemen are a little different, the cars are old models and the sadhus today often pose with their cellphones.

But the faces of the pilgrims are the same, from every part of India, old and young, each reflecting anticipation, despite the crush of crowds, and exhilaration — accentuated by the shock of cold water — when they finally manage to have their dip.

Images like these, and those of the sadhus who always seem to have been walking photo opportunities, reinforce the idea of the Kumbh mela as an expression of Eternal India. It is certainly marketed that way, with every report telling the churning of the ocean story and the drops of amrit that fell from the pot, and usually reinforced by a reference to Xuanzang (Hsuan-tsang), the Chinese monk who is said to have witnessed a Kumbh in Prayag (today's Allahabad) in the 7th century CE.

Collectively, the Kumbhs, in their four locations in northern and western India are implicit signs of the interconnectedness of India. The crowds that attend them are an answer to the charge that India is not one country, but a collection of them. They have always been a magnet for foreigners who want to experience India, from the intrepid British writer Fanny Parkes, who saw it in 1833, to the Russian grand dukes Alexis and Sergius who, the Times of India reported, had come to see the "Kumbh fair" in 1891 (in Haridwar that year), to all the TV crews from around the world that descend for "The Greatest Show on Earth".

Mela and Myth

Yet the story may be a bit more nuanced than it seems. According to the research of Kama Maclean, a scholar of Indian history who is based at the University of New South Wales, the association of the Kumbh myth with the mela in Allahabad may date back to the mid-19th century. There is no doubt, of course, that an annual mela took place in Prayag since ancient times — as it still does, every year, calling itself the Magh mela, except on Kumbh years when it takes on the larger name and significance. It is just this once-every-12-years association that, Maclean argues, is more recent than we think.

Maclean's thesis, which was first presented in an article in The Journal of Asian Studies builds upon the curious lack of references to a 12-year fair in the administrative reports of the East India Company, which took over control of the city from the nawab of Awadh in 1801. For the profit-focused company, such a fair would be an opportunity for trade and taxation. Yet in all the reports, "never is it noted that every twelve years a mela occurs of such significance that crowds are enlarged, and along with them, revenues and the scale of arrangements".

Not So Ancient

An annual fair certainly took place. Parkes reported that "very good diamonds, pearls, coral, shawls, cloth, woollens, China, furs, etc, are to be purchased" (she bought a pink coral necklace that she wore until a Maratha lady friend of hers told her that Indians only used coral as a talisman for their horses). She also noted the one-rupee tax that pilgrims had to pay the company before being allowed to bathe — which would surely show as increased revenue if the fair was larger every 12 years. Similarly, Maclean argues that all early reports of a fair in Prayag refer to the annual Magh mela, or something similar. The Xuanzang reference seems to be to a fair that happened every five years and may even have been more a Buddhist celebration than a Hindu one.

The first use of the word Kumbh with reference to Allahabad in British records appears to date from an 1868 report on the increased pilgrimage and sanitation controls that would be needed since "in January, 1870, or 25 months hence, there will be the Coomb fair at this station". (If a 12-yearly cycle really was that fixed then this would have happened earlier, in 1869, but Kumbh dates are known to vary quite a bit due to astrological calculations.) By contrast, Parkes says, there are many 19th-century references to a 12-yearly mela in Haridwar and this, along with the fact that Haridwar's Kumbh is always held strictly according to the astrological sign of Aquarius (Kumbha) supports the contention that this is the original Kumbh.

Company Gives Way to Crown

So how did Allahabad get the 12-yearly Kumbh? Maclean links it to that one-rupee tax imposed by the British. This tax — which Parkes, the rare British observer sympathetic to Indians, noted was a severe cost, since one rupee could support a man for a month — cut directly into the revenue of the Prayagwals, the Brahmin priests who catered to pilgrims in Prayag. But Maclean also points out that the resentment wasn't just economic, but devotional, since it was felt that this British control of a sacred space undermined its sanctity. This was exacerbated by the activities of Christian missionaries, who aggressively tried proselytising to pilgrims, even attacking the sadhus at one point.

The resentments built up to a point that when the 1857 mutiny took place, the Prayagwals eagerly supported it, spreading the message along their pilgrimage networks "that British power is to close this year", wrote the besieged magistrate of Allahabad at that time. Retribution fell heavily on them when the British regained control; many Prayagwals were hanged and others exiled. Yet those who remained managed to fight back, not directly this time, but by using the British's own tools against them.

In his very readable history of India's geography, Land of the Seven Rivers, Sanjeev Sanyal notes that the British Proclamation of 1858, in which Queen Victoria formally took possession of India from the company, was delivered not in Calcutta, the seat of government, but in Allahabad which, with its wealth of history and symbolism, the British had finally understood was "no ordinary place, but the heart of Indian civilisation". With the knowledge of the religious causes behind the mutiny (like pig and cow fat-greased bullets), the British knew they would have to do things differently now.

In the proclamation, the British famously disclaimed "the right and desire to impose our convictions on any of our subjects". Religious freedoms now had to be guaranteed and this, Maclean suggests, is what some of the savvier Prayagwals seized on as a way to regain control of the mela. They formed a sabha in 1860 and started building up the annual Magh mela again, which had almost stopped after the rising. But to take it further, something more was needed, and this is where the sadhus came in.

Magh Mela Morphs

The sadhus had come to the Magh mela, but Maclean argues that they had clearly seen Haridwar as the more important festival. British, and earlier Mughal, control was lighter in that city, and akharas had more opportunity to make money from pilgrims. Some sadhus were also traders and Haridwar's markets were more lucrative, since they included livestock, as well as the ornaments and other regular stuff in Allahabad.

Not surprisingly then there were many reports of clashes between the akharas for dominance in Haridwar, but almost none in Allahabad — Maclean notes the continuous concern of the British there not to let the sadhus at the Magh mela behave as they did in Haridwar.

But after the proclamation, this sort of control was trickier. The sadhus, and the Prayagwals acting through them, could claim this was an example of the British "imposing their convictions" on Indian rituals. And the more ancient and time-honoured these could be claimed to be, then the better the Indian position was.

At some point it is possible the idea of linking the Magh mela to the ancient story of the Kumbh may have emerged, with the akharas acting as the troops to take control — a role they must have happily fallen into, since now stories of their elephant-led processions and lack of control emerge in Allahabad as well.

Maclean's contention is that this ruse to regain control of Allahabad's mela worked spectacularly well: "Prayagwals were adapting their tirtha to suit the changing political and economic climate which otherwise may well have left them behind."

A festival of importance mainly to Haridwar, got extended to Allahabad and then, perhaps, to similar melas in Nashik and Ujjain as well. (There is no shortage of river-linked melas to choose from — another example of a 12-year festival involving ritual bathing is the Mahamaham at Kumbakonam, where all of India's sacred rivers are said to meet in the temple tank.)

On the British side, they must have been taken aback at having to run a vastly increased mela every 12 years, and they regularly complained about hygiene and crowd risks. Yet more far-seeing officials would have realised it was a good opportunity to showcase British organisational skills, deployed to support an Indian tradition, to visitors from across the country.

A Times report from Haridwar's Kumbh in 1915 reports with satisfaction that "the pilgrims will carry away with them an unspoilt gratitude to the Sirkar for all that it has done for them.... In a walk through the fair their protestations of gratitude were at times quite embarrassing to the writer".

Far from downgrading Indian traditions, stories like these show the dynamic attitude we have always taken to them, respecting their authority and persuasive power, while adapting them to more immediate needs. If Maclean is right, the most outstanding example of this basic spirit of Indian resourcefulness and ability to deal with adversity may be the Kumbh mela now taking place in Allahabad.

(With inputs from Times Archives)

The resentments built up to a point that when the 1857 mutiny took place, the Prayagwals eagerly supported it, spreading the message along their pilgrimage networks "that British power is to close this year", wrote the besieged magistrate of Allahabad at that time. Retribution fell heavily on them when the British regained control; many Prayagwals were hanged and others exiled. Yet those who remained managed to fight back, not directly this time, but by using the British's own tools against them.

In his very readable history of India's geography, Land of the Seven Rivers, Sanjeev Sanyal notes that the British Proclamation of 1858, in which Queen Victoria formally took possession of India from the company, was delivered not in Calcutta, the seat of government, but in Allahabad which, with its wealth of history and symbolism, the British had finally understood was "no ordinary place, but the heart of Indian civilisation". With the knowledge of the religious causes behind the mutiny (like pig and cow fat-greased bullets), the British knew they would have to do things differently now.

In the proclamation, the British famously disclaimed "the right and desire to impose our convictions on any of our subjects". Religious freedoms now had to be guaranteed and this, Maclean suggests, is what some of the savvier Prayagwals seized on as a way to regain control of the mela. They formed a sabha in 1860 and started building up the annual Magh mela again, which had almost stopped after the rising. But to take it further, something more was needed, and this is where the sadhus came in.

Magh Mela Morphs

The sadhus had come to the Magh mela, but Maclean argues that they had clearly seen Haridwar as the more important festival. British, and earlier Mughal, control was lighter in that city, and akharas had more opportunity to make money from pilgrims. Some sadhus were also traders and Haridwar's markets were more lucrative, since they included livestock, as well as the ornaments and other regular stuff in Allahabad.

Not surprisingly then there were many reports of clashes between the akharas for dominance in Haridwar, but almost none in Allahabad — Maclean notes the continuous concern of the British there not to let the sadhus at the Magh mela behave as they did in Haridwar.

But after the proclamation, this sort of control was trickier. The sadhus, and the Prayagwals acting through them, could claim this was an example of the British "imposing their convictions" on Indian rituals. And the more ancient and time-honoured these could be claimed to be, then the better the Indian position was.

At some point it is possible the idea of linking the Magh mela to the ancient story of the Kumbh may have emerged, with the akharas acting as the troops to take control — a role they must have happily fallen into, since now stories of their elephant-led processions and lack of control emerge in Allahabad as well.

Maclean's contention is that this ruse to regain control of Allahabad's mela worked spectacularly well: "Prayagwals were adapting their tirtha to suit the changing political and economic climate which otherwise may well have left them behind."

A festival of importance mainly to Haridwar, got extended to Allahabad and then, perhaps, to similar melas in Nashik and Ujjain as well. (There is no shortage of river-linked melas to choose from — another example of a 12-year festival involving ritual bathing is the Mahamaham at Kumbakonam, where all of India's sacred rivers are said to meet in the temple tank.)

On the British side, they must have been taken aback at having to run a vastly increased mela every 12 years, and they regularly complained about hygiene and crowd risks. Yet more far-seeing officials would have realised it was a good opportunity to showcase British organisational skills, deployed to support an Indian tradition, to visitors from across the country.

A Times report from Haridwar's Kumbh in 1915 reports with satisfaction that "the pilgrims will carry away with them an unspoilt gratitude to the Sirkar for all that it has done for them.... In a walk through the fair their protestations of gratitude were at times quite embarrassing to the writer".

Far from downgrading Indian traditions, stories like these show the dynamic attitude we have always taken to them, respecting their authority and persuasive power, while adapting them to more immediate needs. If Maclean is right, the most outstanding example of this basic spirit of Indian resourcefulness and ability to deal with adversity may be the Kumbh mela now taking place in Allahabad.

(With inputs from Times Archives)

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 11 Feb 2013 02:49

RamaY wrote:^ Try to get the PDF files and read them. Look out for few things in Aadi Parva (IMHO, this should be a text book for class 7-10). It removes lot of deracination.

I dldd the PDF just in case kindle (mobi) doesn't show well on my kindle. Do you know whether they published rest of the volumes (but they are not scanned to archive) or have they stopped for whatever reason after the two which are here?

I have a source in Vijayawada from whom I can get any printed material. The service charge is 10% on the cover price plus shipping by the bulk. He also does the best packing to minimize shipping costs. Got the entire Vishwanatha Satyanarayana (barring Ramayana Kalpa Vriksham which is not published as of two years back) works published by his son. The deal is either whole set or nothing - but the whole set is not expensive.

If people are interested, I will give out the address here. You can communicate with him on-line, but payments in INR.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 11 Feb 2013 02:55

matrimc wrote:
RamaY wrote:^ Try to get the PDF files and read them. Look out for few things in Aadi Parva (IMHO, this should be a text book for class 7-10). It removes lot of deracination.
I dldd the PDF just in case kindle (mobi) doesn't show well on my kindle. Do you know whether they published rest of the volumes (but they are not scanned to archive) or have they stopped for whatever reason after the two which are here?

I have a source in Vijayawada from whom I can get any printed material. The service charge is 10% on the cover price plus shipping by the bulk. He also does the best packing to minimize shipping costs. Got the entire Vishwanatha Satyanarayana (barring Ramayana Kalpa Vriksham which is not published as of two years back) works published by his son. The deal is either whole set or nothing - but the whole set is not expensive.

If people are interested, I will give out the address here. You can communicate with him on-line, but payments in INR.

Please! I read (in the foreword) that all Parvas are published and I am trying to get them. Only few parvas are there (Adi, Sabha, Virata, Karna. Bhisma is there but not in correct form - Pages are jumbled).

I would like to order the entire set.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 11 Feb 2013 03:30

Try the following -

http://www.telupu.com/

where you can fill out order forms etc. I was then contacted by Madan Mohan garu and subsequently Navodaya Rama Mohan Rao garu. I was in contact with the second gentlemen who said he can get whatever books I want - not just Telugu books. If he can find a source, he will do so and give you a quote (which includes surcharge and shipping). I had asked him to get me Barrister Parvateesham. Intially he was unable to find one in print but he located a source and got me the book at the last minute and included in the shipment.
I sent him an email asking whether you should go through telupu website first or you can directly contact him. If he says yes, I will post his email address here.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 11 Feb 2013 03:35

OK Thank you very much. I am long searching for another book...Its name is something like "Raja Yoga Saraamrutamu". The specialty of this book is that this is a kind of dairy of a Raja Yogi and how different levels are experienced, practiced and so on in good detail. I saw this book in a friends hand more than 20 yrs ago and he didnt want to give it to me.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 11 Feb 2013 05:27

Wise person, your friend. knew about mark twain's quip about lending books...