Question on Nirukta of Yaaska

[N.R.Joshi]

Jan 26, 2017

 

Respected Scholars, Namaskar!

 

Is there mention of Sphotavaada or VarNavaada in the Nirukta of Yaaska? 

 

(Time of Yaaska around 700 BC and that of PaaNini around 500 BC.)

 

Or this debate on Sphotavaada and VarNavaada is post Yaaska (even post PaaNini) development in semantics of Sanskrit words?  Thanks in advance, NRJOSHI

____________________________________________________________
Diabetes Breakthrough That Drug Companies Hate (Watch)
Life Advice Daily
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/588a755f178eb755e3234st02vuc

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Two questions: 

1. We know from your older posts that you have your  varNavAda . Are you asking, "when did the ideas in my varNavAda find their first articulation? " If yes, for the members who did not follow your older mails on the topic, can you please provide a one sentence brief of the same so that they can help you to know when those ideas found their first articulation?

2. Or , Do you know a varNavAda already mentioned in some text and you are asking, "When did this varNavAda that I found in this text find its first mention , description or articulation? " If yes, can you please mention /remind (from your older posts) the source where you found the varNavAda you are focusing here in the present post?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[Hnbhat B.R.]

Or this debate on Sphotavaada and VarNavaada is post Yaaska (even post PaaNini) development in semantics of Sanskrit words?  Thanks in advance, NRJOSHI

____________________________________________________________
Diabetes Breakthrough That Drug Companies Hate (Watch)
Life Advice Daily
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/588a755f178eb755e3234st02vuc

Another question. Why do sponored links appear in your mails? I recently noticed  this in two of your mails like this?

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dr Joshi was alerted about this and was told that it had to do with his email client. 

He may again be reminded of this and be asked to do what is required to remove such sponsored links. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Sivasenani Nori]

Joshi ji

Namaste.

There is no mention of Sphotavaada or Varnavada directly in Niruktam. There is one sentence on nityatva of Sabdas ( इन्द्रियनित्यमौदुम्बरायणः) on which Yaska's views could be interpreted in two ways. The commentator Durgacharya shows that in either case (whether Sabda be nitya or not), there is no baadha to Nirukta's subject matter.

This shows that the debate about whether Sabdas are nitya or not is older than Yaska. Varnavaada and Sphotavaada are closely related to the question of Sabdanityataa.

Regards

N. Siva Senani

--

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Sphotevaada is a later development. Till Patanjali, or even Kasika, the science of grammar was secular. It seems that Bhartrhari introduced some idealistic concepts, but fullfledged idealistic interpretation was an even later affair

[K S Kannan]

"rakṣārtham vedānām", and 

"mahatā devena sāmyam" - are, too, secular?

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

When the question involves divine language it cannot be secular. But Panini had the current language as his object. He took also the language of the Chhandas as object, but he does not call that divine.  Daivi Vaak, Devabhasha etc are later concepts. I admit, of course, that there are glimpses of the shape of thngs to come in future in 1.164.

DB

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Prof. Dipak Bhattacharya,

 The terms used by you, namely, 'idealistic' and 'secular' are both problematic. 

1. I do not know in which sense you used the word 'idealistic'. Since this is a context of philosophy, I would assume that you used it in a philosophical parlance only where it is used in contrast with the word 'materialist'. The matter-idea dichotomy in the views of reality and materialism and idealism as classification of worldviews are all products of 19th century German philosophical discourse which may not fit every context that you come across and turn out to be completely a misfit for understanding ancient Indian knowledge systems. 

2. 'Secular' is another misfit. In a society where the demarcation between the worldly and other worldly itself is blurring, to be more precise, not an insider's approach,  to look for and identify 'secular' works itself is a vain attempt. 

3.  Contradicting Bhartrihari's own view (or even if the verses in vAkyapadIyam to this effect are considered to be those of his disciples, contradicting the views of those so close in time and perspective to him)  that the thought in the book was a preservation of ideas in Sangraha and Mahabhashya described as Sangrahapratikanchuka, to consider the ideas in vAkyapadIyam as completely innovations of Bhartrihari is typically western and unjustifiable. 

  

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:59 PM, K S Kannan <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Thanks Professor Paturi! It appeared to me that elements of divine being came into the early medieval concept of speech. That was the reason behind my stand.  Bhartrhari calls sabdatattva anaadinidhanam brahma and akshara.  That cannot be the secular speech that we use.

DB

[Sivasenani Nori]

Sirs

On 27 January 2017 at 15:22, Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Prof. Dipak Bhattacharya,

 The terms used by you, namely, 'idealistic' and 'secular' are both problematic. 

1. I do not know in which sense you used the word 'idealistic'. Since this is a context of philosophy, I would assume that you used it in a philosophical parlance only where it is used in contrast with the word 'materialist'. The matter-idea dichotomy in the views of reality and materialism and idealism as classification of worldviews are all products of 19th century German philosophical discourse which may not fit every context that you come across and turn out to be completely a misfit for understanding ancient Indian knowledge systems. 

​To the extent that artha is primarily bauddhArtha in vyAkaraNa, "idealistic" is appropriate.

 

2. 'Secular' is another misfit. In a society where the demarcation between the worldly and other worldly itself is blurring, to be more precise, not an insider's approach,  to look for and identify 'secular' works itself is a vain attempt. 

3.  Contradicting Bhartrihari's own view (or even if the verses in vAkyapadIyam to this effect are considered to be those of his disciples, contradicting the views of those so close in time and perspective to him)  that the thought in the book was a preservation of ideas in Sangraha and Mahabhashya described as Sangrahapratikanchuka, to consider the ideas in vAkyapadIyam as completely innovations of Bhartrihari is typically western and unjustifiable. 

​The above point that Bhartrihari only expanded the traditional position of Vyakarana can be established with respect to the "idealism" of ​ Grammarians through the following kaarikas of saadhanasamuddeSa (in padakANDa of vAkyapadIyam)

 

sādhanavyavahāraśca buddyavasthānibandhanaḥ |

sannasanvā’rtharūpeṣu bhedo buddhyā prakalpyate || 3 ||

Sādhana, here, means the instrumentality through which grammar operates, that is division of things into subject, object, instrument etc. so that an appropriate case (vibhakti) can be assigned to each sādhana, that is each thing divided into subject, object etc. Such a system of treating things like agent, object etc. (or division into subject and predicate) is called sādhanavyavahāra. This sādhanavyavahāra is tied to the things situated in the mind; whether they be actually present or not in the real world, their analysis into subject, object etc. is mentally fashioned. (The next kārikā, No. 4 not reproduced here, gives an example of the usage “the people of Pāñcāla are more beautiful than the Kurus” in which construct, first the two peoples are imagined to be together, and are then divided on the basis of beauty by using the ablative case [than]).

 

śabdopahitarūpāṃśca buddherviśayatāṃ gatān |

pratyakṣamiva kaṃsādīn sādhanatvena manyate || 5 ||

The Bhāśyakāra [Patanjali] considers Kamsa and others, who are actually mental constructs given form by words, as if they were directly perceived, as sādhana. [This has reference to the Pāṇinian aphorism hetumati ca 3-1-26 which describes the application of causative affix ṇic. There, Kātyāyana, the vārttikakāra, adds the instance of story telling, such as the one about Krishna killing Kamsa, as a situation where ṇic is to be applied as Kamsa and others are not present as sādhana for ṇic affix to be applied. The bhāṣyakāra Patanjali differs with Kātyāyana, and Bhartṛhari gives the justification: for Patanjali, Kamsa and others, though mental constructs, are to be treated as if they were directly perceived.] The larger idea here is that language operates with reference to mental constructs, not actual things.

 

buddhipravṛttirūpañca samāropyābhidhātṛbhiḥ |

artheṣu śaktibhedānāṃ kriyate parikalpanā || 6 ||

Further, the mental construct is imposed upon external objects by the speakers, and the conceptual differentiation of potentials (to be subject, object etc.) is being done.

Regards

Senani

[Nagaraj Paturi]

In this thread, there was a discussion on Sanskrit as a deva bhasha. 

In this thread, there was a discussion on Daivi Vak. 

 देवीं वाचमजनयन्त देवाः -- ऋग्वेदः 8-100-11 ; तै ब्रा  2-4-6-10 ; निरु 11-29

was quoted by Prof. Korada during these threads.

Vidwan Venkata Sriram mentioned 

"Before commencement of shrauta yAgAs, the yajamAni takes the oath "दैवीं वाचं इच्छामि"."

These quotes and many other similar ones go to prove that Daivee view of vAk (speech) is not a new development during medieval times. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> It appeared to me that elements of divine being came into the early medieval concept of speech. That was the reason behind my stand.

-----  देवीं वाचमजनयन्त देवाः -- ऋग्वेदः 8-100-11 ; तै ब्रा  2-4-6-10 ; निरु 11-29

"दैवीं वाचं इच्छामि"." etc. prove that Daivee view of vAk (speech) is not a new development during medieval times.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> Bhartrhari calls sabdatattva anaadinidhanam brahma and akshara.  That cannot be the secular speech that we use.

----- Here the relevant categorization is not secular-religious. 

It is the manifest-unmanifest aspects of speech that come under discussion here. 

I wrote during one of my older posts as follows:

3. Coming to the concepts such as s'abdabrahma, one needs to first understand the concept of brahman, and then needs to know that there are various views of brahman such as' brahman as nAda (music)-nAdabrahman' 'brahman as s'abda (speech/language)-s'abdabrahman' etc. To take the help of modern understandings in comprehending these ideas one notion that comes to help is the notion of holism and holistic view of things. For example, if one views the whole universe as an ecosystem, it is the ecological holistic view of the universe. Similarly if one views the whole universe as a bio-chemical process , it is the biochemical holistic perspective. There are many such holisms in existence in modern studies. Similarly, if universe is taken as a kind of music, it is the musical holistic view of the universe; if the whole universe is taken as a kind of speech, it is the linguistic holistic view of the universe. nAdabrahman and s'abdabrahman are concepts close to these two concepts of musical holistic view of the universe and linguistic holistic view of the universe respectively.  Why only 'close to' but not 'the same as' ? Because the concept of brahman is close to the concept of universe but not the same as the concept of universe. 

 

4. Let me rephrase the definition of the Brahman in an open ended way , but at the same time in a way aviruddha to the approach of the Upanishads, which is followed by vAkyapadIyam. If there is an absolutely and ultimately imperishable (akshara)  unique (advitIyam)  entity out of which everything around (sarvam khalu idam brahma), is made/evolved/manifest , that entity is called the Brahman. If one agrees that such an entity exists, he is a BrahmavAdi. If one believes that there is no entity which is ultimately and absolutely imperishable, he is not a BrahmavAdi. If one believes that everything around is not made/evolved/manifest from the same entity he is not a BrahmavAdi. If a BrahmavAdi takes the linguistic view of the Brahman he is a s'abdabrahmavAdi.Where are these ideas hanging in sky or somewhere heavenly?

 

[Madhav Deshpande]

I have come across दैवीं वाचं यच्छामि, but not दैवीं वाचमिच्छामि.  I would appreciate a textual reference to the latter, if known.  The phrase दैवीं वाचं यच्छामि is found in:

तै.ब्रा.१.२.१.१३. *आरोहतं दशतं शक्वरीर्मम। ऋतेनाग्न आयुषा वर्चसा सह। ज्योग्जीवन्त उत्तरामुत्तराँ समाम्। दर्शमहं पूर्णमासं यज्ञं यथा यजै (इति हस्ताभ्यां प्रतिगृह्य)। - - - - अनृतात्सत्यमुपैमि। मानुषाद्दैव्यमुपैमि। दैवीं वाचं यच्छामि।

The late Professor G.T. Deshpande wrote an article on Daivī Vāk, and it is included in the volume of his collected articles.

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Thanks Prof. Deshpande, for adding one more reference that confirms the point that viewing speech as daivī is not a new development of medieval times. 

दैवीं वाचमिच्छामि was a quote by Aayushmaan Venkata Sriram, not from a Vedic text, but from his oral information /participating observation of s'routa prayoga. There could be a mistake in his hearing or observation. But the point that vāk was viewed as daivī doesn't alter with the change in that part of the sentence. 

[K S Kannan]

Taittirīya Āraṇyaka 4.34.1

daivīm vācam vadasi

Atharva Veda 8.1.3

daivyā vācā bharāmasi

[K S Kannan]

Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa 2.5.1.3

vāg devī  juṣatām idam haviḥ

Vājasaneyi Samhitā 8.37
vāg devī  juṣāṇā somasya tṛpyatu    

Atharva Veda 19.9.3

vāg devī brahmasamśitā

These treat vāc as devī.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Thanks Prof. Kannan, for providing substantiation for the highlighted portion of my statement :These quotes and many other similar ones go to prove that Daivee view of vAk (speech) is not a new development during medieval times. 

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Nagaraj Ji,

     Your conclusion is appropriate.  The Daivī view of Vāk is indeed not a medieval development.  It is already there as far back as the Ṛgveda:

देवीं वाचमजनयन्त देवास्तां विश्वरूपा: पशवो वदन्ति। सा नो मन्द्रेषमूर्जं दुहाना धेनुर्वागस्मानुप सुष्टुतैतु ॥ - ऋ.८.१००.११

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> Bhartrhari calls sabdatattva anaadinidhanam brahma and akshara.

------ śabdatattvam is not the subject उद्देश्य part of the sentence here. It is in the predicate विधेय part of the sentence. In other words, śabdatattva is not what is being described here. It is brahman that is being described here. 'Brahman which is anādinidhanam and akṣaram is of the nature of śabda'.  is what is being stated here. 

Brahman being described , rather being defined  as anādinidhanam and akṣaram is not new. It is already there in Upanishads.

What Bhartrihari is specifically declaring for the purpose of his book is that that Brahman which is already described as anādinidhanam and akṣaram is in fact, śabdatattvam, i.e.  of the nature of śabda. 

Upanishads have several views of Brahman. They have आनंदो ब्रह्मेति व्यजानात् at one place and ॐ इत्येकाक्षरम् ब्रह्म at another. 

Bhartrihari's statement comes close to ॐ इत्येकाक्षरम् ब्रह्म. Again, in such statements of Upanishads too, we should not say, ॐ is being described here and it is being called Brahman. Brahman is being described here and it is being said that it is in the form of a single syllable ॐ.  

Thus we can see that even Bhartrihari's proclamation that  'Brahman which is anādinidhanam and akṣaram is of the nature of śabda' already has its roots in the Upanishads and is not a new innovation or invention by him.  

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Thanks Dr Nori, for providing examples for the continuity of ideas between Mahabhashya and Vakyapadiyamby citing the Kamsa etc. being seen as mental constructs by both. 

But can this be taken as idealism? 

Unless it is proved that Bhartrihari considers that there is no reality independent of its mental construct, Bhartrihari can not be called an idealist. 

For Bhartrihari, there is no reality apart from śabda. There is no reality apart from bauddhārtha or sampratyayārtha is not his view. Hence his view is not idealist. 

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Sivasenani Nori <sivas...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[K S Kannan]

Clarity of thought and lucidity in  expression mark Prof. Paturi's presentations here.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Thanks Prof. Kannan.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Matter from idea (Hegel) and Idea from Matter (Marx) debate in the 19th century German philosophy can roughly be translated as 

chit from jaḍa and jaḍa from chit debate 

or puruṣa from prakr̥ti and prakr̥ti from puruṣa debate

or kṣara puruṣa from akṣara puruṣa and akṣara puruṣa from kṣara puruṣa debate. 

Do we have any such debate in the entire Indian philosophical thought?

That is why I said materialism -idealism categorization does not suit while talking about Indian philosophical thought.   

[N.R.Joshi]

Jan 28, 2017

 

Thanks to many scholars who contributed to my understanding. My original question was simply--Is there mention of Sphotavada or Varnavada in Nirukta of Yaaska. When I use the word VarNavada, it is the one originally proposed by Upavars'acharya.  I received my answer. Thanks to all.

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "N.R.Joshi" <gira...@juno.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Question on Nirukta of Yaaska
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 22:16:51 GMT

Jan 26, 2017

 

Respected Scholars, Namaskar!

 

Is there mention of Sphotavaada or VarNavaada in the Nirukta of Yaaska? 

 

(Time of Yaaska around 700 BC and that of PaaNini around 500 BC.)

 

Or this debate on Sphotavaada and VarNavaada is post Yaaska (even post PaaNini) development in semantics of Sanskrit words?  Thanks in advance, NRJOSHI

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________
Warning: Don't Use Probiotics Before You See This
Gundry MD
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/588d15e64a18c15e67da2st01vuc

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Moderator's note:

Would you please do whatever you need to, to stop sponsored links from being displayed in your posts, at least while posting to this group?

Jan 28, 2017

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jsr Prasad]

As long as he uses the current mail id, these links seem inevitable.  Or he may try to change his mail client as other members suggested. Juno.com looks like a commercial domain. Instead, he can simply open a gmail account and add to the list.

Sent from my Motorola phone

[Sivasenani Nori]

Sir

I am not yet a Doctor of Philosophy. I hope your sambodhana portends good tidings.

Regarding the usage of labels, I submit that idealism has more than one flavour. Further, while it is true that there cannot be 100% mapping between a relatively modern school like Idealism and a classical one like Sphotavaada, within the limits within which such characterisations are done, it seems that it is reasonable to describe Bhartrihari as an idealist.

For support I would like to quote from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/idealism/):

"Although the existence of something independent of the mind is conceded, everything we can know about this mind-independent "reality" is held to be so permeated by the creative, formative or constructive activities of the mind (of some kind or the other) that all claims to knowledge must be considered, in some sense, to be a form of self-knowledge."

While epistemological idealism (described above) usually leads to ontological idealism (described by Prof. Paturi - that there is no reality beyond mental constructs) in western philosophy, the situation in India is different: Bhartrihari etc. believe in Veda and Veda says there is an entity called Brahman. So for the Astikas epistemological idealism is independent of ontological idealism.

Regards

Senani

[Nagaraj Paturi]

That exactly is the point,  Dr(soon to be) Noriji. 

Bhartrihari etc. believe in Veda and Veda says there is an entity called Brahman.

That is the point. 

As quoted by you from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 

Epistemological idealism 'concedes' a mind-independent entity. This suits Brahman. Brahman is obviously a mind-independent entity as per the Vedic texts. 

But the problem comes with the next part:

" everything we can know about this mind-independent "reality" is held to be so permeated by the creative, formative or constructive activities of the mind (of some kind or the other) that all claims to knowledge must be considered, in some sense, to be a form of self-knowledge"

Brahman for the aastika, the Vedic person, as per the Vedic texts is avāṅmānasagōcara. 

Self-knowledge in the western literature is not the same as  ātmajñāna of Vedanta.

Self-knowledge in the quoted paragraph is described there as 'the creative, formative or constructive activities of the mind (of some kind or the other)'. 

 ātmajñāna of Vedanta is not an activity of mind. 

 Whether  ātmajñāna is the same as brahmajñāna or not depends on the school of Vedanta to which one subscribes. 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Sivasenani Nori]

Sir

I agree that there is a huge gap between the aatmajnaana of Vedanta and self-knowledge of Idealism This - insight of epistemological idealism about what can be known - blossomed later, when western philosophy took a linguistic turn, into the position that knowledge is limited by language, but if one is still left wondering about the noumenon.

For me, these weak formulations only reinforce the fact reasoning cannot positively establish the entity which is the subject-matter of Saastra.

Regarding the idea of labelling Bhartrihari or Sankaracharya as an Idealist, going forward I will be more careful and will try to use the proper avacchedaka as a qualifier.

Regards

N Siva Senani

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Even Radhakrishna S. and many big names who have written text books on Indian philosophical systems often compare Shankaracharyas philosophy with Idealism and given an impression that Shankaras Advaita is close to Idealism or is idealism. Many texts of Advaita Vedanta use western philosophical terms rather loosely for Indian philosophical technical terms. Many Indian Technical terms used in philosophy are untranslatable so are many western philosophical terms untranslatable to Sanskrit. One can compare and get similar currents of thoughts but not exact thoughts which the texts say for there are always minute differences which becomes major as they both stem up from different traditions and purposes.

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Most of these turn out to be problems of 1.learning 2. translation 3. comparison. 

1. Learning: Learner tries to learn the unknown in terms of known. Western learners of Indian word-concept worlds tried to understand the Indian stuff in terms of the word-concept worlds known to them. The vice-versa too happened. The result is these application of misfit word-concepts to describe the Indian things. 

2. Translation: Indian scholars had a need to explain Indian stuff in European languages, mostly English. They worked hard to learn the European word-concept worlds to be successful in their endeavor (of  explaining Indian stuff in European languages ) . They were not enough careful or critical in carrying out this job. 

3. Comparison: Most of the early modern studies in the fields (such as philology, ethnology, comparative mythology) which lead to different contemporary fields of Social Sciences and Humanities were comparative in nature and were trying to arrive at human universals. They were excited by the outward similarities and were not equipped enough to grasp the deeper dissimilarities. 

People like Prof. S. Radhakrishnan were under pressure to prove 'philosophicality' of Indian 'dars'anas' etc. which were being brushed aside as not worthy of being talked about in a University philosophy class room on account of being religious or at the most metaphysical or theological. They were proud of themselves and were patting their own backs for being successful in persuading the western University circles to take dars'anas etc. as worthy of an entry into a philosophy class room. 

But today, we can review all such mistranslations, correct them and help ourselves and our audience grasp things in a way they deserve to be grasped.   

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[N.R.Joshi]

Jan30 2017

 

Dear Dr. Paturi and Dr Jsr Prasad,  I got new gmail address. I will try using that soon, In the meanwhile I will make sure that under my posting no advertisement is included. Please bear with me. Sorry for inconvenience.  NRJOSHI

Jan 28, 2017

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

____________________________________________________________
Warning: Don't Use Probiotics Before You See This
Gundry MD

http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/588fbcc3dbce33cc3585cst52vuc