My Critique on "In Panini We Trust" - PhD Thesis by Dr. Rishi Rajpopat

[Neelesh Bodas]

नमस्ते !

On the onset, I would like to specifically thank all those Sanskrit lovers (novices as well as scholars), who reached out to me asking for my views on this topic.  I also thank this scholarly BVP group for allowing me to post my views. 

Coming to the topic, I have gone through the entire thesis of Dr. Rishi Rajpopat , except for the Appendix. I have captured my detailed critical assessment of this thesis in this document.  The document is open for comments to everyone. 

The summary is as follows - 

1) I believe that Dr. Rishi's new interpretation of the पर word, which is only relevant for the DOI cases, has some potential for further research. However, it needs to be molded a lot, and also needs more exhaustive testing, before we can call it "sound". I have enumerated a few cases in my document where his DOI as well as SOI does not work.  In fact, Dr. Rishi's treatment of SOI is appears ad-hoc at places. He also mentions that it is not based on Panini's system directly. I believe it needs to be replaced by something more concrete.

2) In many examples, Dr. Rishi has also stated his understanding of the tradition.  Unfortunately, Dr. Rishi's understanding of the tradition is pretty weak at places. I have elaborated this with numerous examples. Of course, none of these are directly going to change his discovery, but it would have been much better if Dr. Rishi would have spent some more time in learning and understanding the tradition, before proposing something outside its framework.

3) Dr. Rishi has interpreted some sutras in his own way.  Some of these are flawed interpretations, and I have shown them with examples. 

Anyway, irrespective of all this feedback, it cannot be denied that the thesis enumerates some brilliant techniques, and is worthy of further investigation. While the discovery has its own lacunas / shortcomings / loopholes,  the way in which the whole topic of बाध्यबाधकभाव has been approached in this thesis definitely opens up new doors for further research in Paninian grammar.  

For the record -  I neither support, nor believe, nor encourage statements like “2500 year old puzzle solved” or “Katyanana chose wrong interpretation” and so on. This is not a competition between modern academia and our divine tradition. Instead, we must bring the two together to take the shastra to newer heights. FWIW, the the claim that "Cambridge student solved 250 year old mystery" is fake, baseless and only shows the immaturity of the people involved therein. I sincerely wish Dr. Rishi was more careful with his words in his media interactions, and was extra-cautious while talking about the tradition, which is deeply respected by millions of Sanskrit lovers, including myself. 

Finally, a disclaimer. I am just a passionate student of Sanskrit grammar, with no formal training. I am far from being called a scholar. Therefore please excuse me if there are any gaps in my analysis.  More than anything else, I have been looking at this opportunity purely as an intellectual exercise for me,  and I must admit that my understanding of some of the prakriyas became much stronger after reading this thesis, for which I wholeheartedly thank Dr. Rishi Rajpopat.

Once again here is the link my analysis -  https://bit.ly/neelesh-critique-on-in-panini-we-trust

Regards

Neelesh Bodas

PS: On a lighter note, in the last few days, I have manually worked out so many prakriyas in the DOI / SOI system that I feel like I have started forgetting how I'd do prakriyas in the usual traditional way !!

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Thanks, Sri Neelesh Bodas ji. 

"I have gone through the entire thesis of Dr. Rishi Rajpopat , except for the Appendix." is the best part of your response. 

Thanks for your efforts in preparing such a detailed response in the document. 

Your response has balance and also humility. 

Such responses contribute to a healthy discussion .

Warm regards,

Nagaraj

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/87fa3cd4-4e32-4e87-8925-2b260a2779dbn%40googlegroups.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Senior Director, IndicA

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra

BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.

Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru

BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership

Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education, 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

 

[Dhiren N. Sheth]

 

Neelesh ji,

 

I was one of the persons who specifically asked for your views on the group.

 

I am so impressed with your methodical approach.

 

As said by Nagaraj ji your approach is also very humble and lays a platform for healthy debate.

 

A scholar’s work is being analysed like another scholar should.

 

Thank you.

 

Best Regards

Dhiren N. Sheth

--

[S. Kalyanaraman]

Thanks Dhiren Sheth ji.

I have gone through Neelesh Bodas' A Critique on the PhD Thesis - "In Panini We Trust"

Neelesh Bodas 

neeles...@gmail.com

20-Dec-2022

I am happy that Dr. Rajpopat is in contact with Neelesh ji and together, they can advance the study further.

I am a mere vidūṣaka, buffoon trying to learn the spoken forms of many tadbhava languages of Bhāratam like mleccha aka meluhha, and certainly not competent to comment on the mathematical precision achieved by Pāṇini in defining the language or even rules for right and left morphemic modifiers to create language expressions.

Dr. Rajpopat ji, Neelesh Bodas ji, wishing you all the very best in your tirthayātra to explain the formation and evolution of languages in Bhāratam; जीवेम शरदः शतम् ||

S. Kalyanaraman, Ph.D., D. Litt.

https://srinivasankalyanaraman.academia.edu/research.

https://taksha.org/advisors/kalyanaraman

https://sites.google.com/site/kalyan97/national-water-grid

https://sites.google.com/site/indianoceancommunity1/

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/0c5f01d9152b%249f255020%24dd6ff060%24%40galiakotwala.com.

[Neelesh Bodas]

Namaste, Thank you very much Nagaraj Ji, Dhiren Ji and Kalyanaraman Ji for your positive comments and support.

Many people reached out to me personally asking to prepare a video giving the summary of my view. Therefore I have uploaded a 30 min video now - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i59Gvv1Oj9o

I sincerely urge all the interested members of this group to watch at least the first 10 minutes of the video where I summarize my view. 

Thanks and Pranaam!

Neelesh

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CA%2BaCD%3DUXP9nL6rn0ohSkiKFqNt1AxYYej0bwM6ibO_0eMC3PmQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ananda Maitreya]

As someone with only beginner's Sanskrit, I am fascinated by these minute and intricate discussions. Mystery/puzzle or not,  it seems derivation of words/final-forms in Sanskrit can often involve Pāṇinian rule conflicts. In this case of discussion, para/paratva rules.

Since there is so much talk of tradition, has this "issue," if one at all, been noticed and commented upon by the numerous - and highly skilled - Sanskrit grammarians after Pāṇini? By maybe Pātañjali and others?

I would appreciate any summary or pointers to what the tradition has had to say of such conflicts and the potential for erroneous derivations. It seems unlikely to me that someone is noticing it after only 2500 years or so. And if the traditional means of derivations were watertight, then any such intervention would have been rejected out of hand, not being accorded any merit. But some scholars, even on this list,  have seen some promise for further investigation into Dr. Rajpopat's proposal.

Ananda

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sri Neelesh Bodas ji,

The video too has come out excellently. 

Nowadays, videos are reaching audiences better than texts. 

Timely and necessary. 

Regards,

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAPHkJxn9_waNFONgUr%3D0dY-QSQ3gq%2B0bAEhv2-xe%3D-2dXtGUkQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dhiren N. Sheth]

 

Neelesh ji,

 

 

Very nicely and succinctly compiled video.

 

The summary in the first 10 minutes is a must watch for all.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAPHkJxn9_waNFONgUr%3D0dY-QSQ3gq%2B0bAEhv2-xe%3D-2dXtGUkQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sri Nityanand Mishra's conversation with Sri Sanjay Dixit of The Jaipur Dialogues on " Rishi Rajpopat Sanskrit Text Puzzle Claim Right or Wrong?"

https://youtu.be/zyw21VpHXto

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/017b01d915c0%24ecc8ff80%24c65afe80%24%40galiakotwala.com.

[Rajaram Krishnamurthy]

Sirs

  Beyond all the healthy discussions, Rishi had said what he did; Media had said what it wanted to say for the sake of circulation; but is the grievances of many learned , without proper scientific rebuttal, abuses , as if what right Rishi has, which is unwelcome; also if the grievance is that their papers published, were not considered by the media, that is jealousy. Meet politely the content with the content. Also encourage people to do some thing. But what I find here learnt burners of edifice of knowledge all over. KR IRS 24/12/22

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eYC3J6FGqc86n7KQaALM0uaE6DTfbsyUvLNFMqVszns%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Sri Rajaram Krishnamurthy IRS ji,

Thanks for your encouragement to the young researcher.

But please appreciate the balance in the reviews and opinions being expressed. 

Most of the reviewers are giving credit to the researcher where it is due. 

Pointing out the faults where they are. 

When a scholarly work comes into the scholarly world for discussion, this is what is expected to happen. 

There are no negative emotions like jealousy playing any role in these dispassionate, collegial peer reviews. 

The same Sri Nityanand Mishra ji did not hurry to give any negative comment in the beginning. For a long time, he has been warning others too not to hurry to make any emotional positive or negative judgement. 

In this video, he is sharing only the reviews done by scholars who studied the thesis thoroughly and reviewed it in a balanced way. 

Your thorough reading of the thesis and a different detailed analysis of the same is welcome. It will add great value to the discussion. 

Regards,

Nagaraj

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAL5XZop_EMavy-Fxb25tYvQJB6_xxehj%2B85YwbyM1u6_Za6RQA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

older video by Sri Nityanand Mishra ji :

On Rishi Rajpopat’s claims: It is too early to comment or judge, wait till peer review

https://youtu.be/FJAMsE9p0Jc