Inter-marriage in the ancient times

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear friends,

I have a query. There was a time, either in the beginning of Dwapara yuga or it could have been somewhat before the start of the Dwapara yuga, that Lord Parashurama killed almost all the kshatriyas. There was no kshatriya who could face Parashurama, before the advent of Lord Ram. Lord Ram had shown Lord Parashurama that his time was up, yet on a later occasion, albeit for a cause, he had to try his might against Bhishma and he found Bhishma was a real match for him. Due to Lord Parashurama's killing the Ksjhatriyas, there were left the young kshatriya girls, who could not marry and an appeal was made to the brahmins to marrry the kshatriya girls, and the liberal-minded brahmins did respond to that appeal.

According to "Jatibhaskara" of Pt. Jwalaprasad Mishra (JM) , the children of brahmin father and kshatriya mother were called MurdhAvashikta, but JM had not mentioned their profession, nor their family names (or surnames). Of course, Pt. Harikrishna Sharma in his "Brahmanotpattimartanda", mentioned one event where a Kshatriya boy, whom Dadhichi Rishi taught the Vedas and declared as brahmin, in order to save him from Lord Parashurama and Lord Parashurama also taught him Dhanurvidya thinking him to be a brahmin boy. Later on Lord Parsshurama discovered the truth about the boy and cursed him. At that stage Gautama Rishi and Dadhichi Rishi again came to the boy's rescue and they called upon Lord VishVakarmA to help the boy. Lord VishvakarmA taught him in certain areas, so that he can earn his living and gave the boy's identity as being a "MurdhAvashikta". This means that we cannot accept what Jwalaprasad Mishra wrote, even though he is acknowledged as a great scholar. It is also known that in any anuloma marriage the children after seven generations come back to father's fold if the intervening marriages were with the girls of the father's fold and the rest will go to the mother's fold. Thus eventually some of the offsprings went back to the Kshatriya fold and some to the Brahmana fold.

Now, my query is : what are the family names of those noble brahmin family-trees, which  at one time in the past, had a Kshatriya mother? As regards myself, I belong to Kanyakubja brahmin family and my ancestors moved fron Kanauj to Bengal in the past and later on some of my  forefathers moved out of Bengal during the 18th century.

Regards,
Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Dr. Bhattacharjya,

Is this mail meant for "analytic" discussion?

I wonder why western academics dismiss the contribution of scholars from India.

Should we not distinguish between facts, fiction and assumptions?

BM

--
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.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Namaste Bijoyji,

If this evokes a friendly constructive discussion, it will certainly be welcome.  The facts, fiction and assumptions can be critically looked at. For example,  the mention of Lord VishwakarmA can imply one equipped with the good knowledge of the areas belonging to Lord VishvakarmA.

Regards,

[Bijoy Misra]

The word Lord etc for mortal beings is a problem of nomenclature.

History has to separate from any belief we may have.

We can ascribe divinity" to human beings, but we qualify in our expressions.

Others might comment.  I am an observer on this.

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

The word Bhagavan does not mean Lord. The word indicates addressing a person respectfully see Panini on this. Many beliefs if used with historic sense is also history why narrow down definitions of what is History?

 

 

[Bijoy Misra]

Use Bhagavan, why translate?  Rajiv wrote about this in his book.

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

The word Bhagavan does not mean Lord. The word indicates addressing a person respectfully see Panini on this. Many beliefs if used with historic sense is also history why narrow down definitions of what is History?

 

 

--

[Hnbhat B.R.]

भगवानिति

On 03-Jun-2016 4:30 pm, "Bijoy Misra" <misra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Use Bhagavan, why translate?  Rajiv wrote about this in his book.

It has been translated, not as god in English, but Sanskrit as

उत्पत्तिं प्रलयं चैव भूतानामगतिं गतिम्।
वेत्ति विद्यामविद्यां च स वाच्यो भगवानिति॥

and also

तत्तत्वविदस्तत्वम् यज्ज्ञानमद्वयम् ।
ब्रह्मेति परमात्मेति भगवानिति शब्द्द्यते ॥
              Bhagavatham 1.2.11.
Also

सर्वकर्ता सर्वभोक्ताऽन्वयी नियन्ता सर्वेश्वरो भगवानिति निर्विकल्पनिश्चयः, भगवान् 

etc.

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

I don’t need to Know what Shri Rajiv has written. I wanted to say Bhagavan does not mean Lord always

[Bijoy Misra]

Ajitji,

As I observe, Lord or God are iconic English words.  They are objects and 

not concepts.  Sankrit constructs of Bhagavan and Ishvara are conceptual 

and better to be left alone without mapping.  Yesterday I saw BhartRhari's 

analysis on this in the second book of VakyapadIyam.  What Rajiv Malhotra 

has done, is to create a minimum list of words which should be reproduced 

as such.  I endorse the idea and request the scholars to help convey the 

concept in English for the benefit of the youth.  Many well known translations

suffer in this quick casual "dictionary words."

Thank you.

BM

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Thanks for making me aware of Sri Rajivis’ work.  Between I don’t how qualified I am understand VP. I am sure you are

[Bijoy Misra]

The definition of a word as a label versus the definition from its concept

was researched by my father through his work. I see that the concept

of word creation is fundamentally different in the east and west.  I

happened to encounter the writings of a folk poet of western Orissa who

hardly went to school.  His words are mostly made up from his own

comprehension mapped to sounds.  I plan to take some of these

observations to a Neurolinguistics Conference in London in August.

[S Saha]

Can someone point me as to which work of Shri Rajiv is being talked about? And privately email me if possible?

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

That will be answered by Prof. Bijoy Mishraji, I hope in private as requested as he wrote about Sri Rajiv's book on this thread

[Bijoy Misra]

Rajiv M participates in this list.  He can say more.

He talked about the "non-translatable" as a topic in his book "Being Different".

Reading Valmiki, one discovers that many concepts have no on-to-one translation.

They have been forced in the past leading to total distortion.

While we forgive the errors, we must not continue them!

A translation must not be done using a dictionary. 

(this is where Bhratrhari shines).

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

What has “Non Translatable” “Neuro Linguistics Paper” got to do with the subject of this thread. What translations? No translation is ideal all translations attempt to give the reader a closest possible reading experience the original provides Has Bhratrhari translated? Forgive me for my errors I don’t understand what you are implying. May be another thread? What’s forced in the past is past there are good translations of many texts now. If one is not happy with translations it’s better to read the original. There is nothing like reading the original and commenting than reading a translation. All this is well known.

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bijoy Misra

Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 7:43 PM
To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad

Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Inter-marriage in the ancient times

[Bijoy Misra]

I did comment on the use of word "Lord" in a post.  

Then it has veered.   Yes, the discussion is off-thread. 

--

[N.R.Joshi]

May 7, 2016

 

 Dear DR. B. Mishra,

When you return from London conference ob Neuro linguistics, please inform us on BVP list new research in that subject. Thanks. N.R.Joshi

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Bijoy Misra <misra...@gmail.com>
To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Inter-marriage in the ancient times

Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:12:24 -0400

The definition of a word as a label versus the definition from its concept

was researched by my father through his work. I see that the concept

of word creation is fundamentally different in the east and west.  I

happened to encounter the writings of a folk poet of western Orissa who

hardly went to school.  His words are mostly made up from his own

comprehension mapped to sounds.  I plan to take some of these

observations to a Neurolinguistics Conference in London in August.

On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for making me aware of Sri Rajivis’ work.  Between I don’t how qualified I am understand VP. I am sure you are

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bijoy Misra
Sent: Sunday, June 5, 2016 5:47 PM

To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad
Subject: Re: {

भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Inter-marriage in the ancient times

 

 

Ajitji,

As I observe, Lord or God are iconic English words.  They are objects and 

not concepts.  Sankrit constructs of Bhagavan and Ishvara are conceptual 

and better to be left alone without mapping.  Yesterday I saw BhartRhari's 

analysis on this in the second book of VakyapadIyam.  What Rajiv Malhotra 

has done, is to create a minimum list of words which should be reproduced 

as such.  I endorse the idea and request the scholars to help convey the 

concept in English for the benefit of the youth.  Many well known translations

suffer in this quick casual "dictionary words."

Thank you.

BM

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

I don’t need to Know what Shri Rajiv has written. I wanted to say Bhagavan does not mean Lord always

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bijoy Misra
Sent: Friday, June 3, 2016 4:30 PM
To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Inter-marriage in the ancient times

 

Use Bhagavan, why translate?  Rajiv wrote about this in his book.

 

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

The word Bhagavan does not mean Lord. The word indicates addressing a person respectfully see Panini on this. Many beliefs if used with historic sense is also history why narrow down definitions of what is History?

 

 

--

____________________________________________________________
InsiderTechAdvice
The U.S Government Are Spying On You Online. Stop Them In Seconds
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/575741991439a41981268st02vuc

[Sati Shankar]

mAnyavar,

This thread gave me an unusual feeling and so I started typing.

Interesting is the fact is that we have header "inter-marriages"

And come down to adhikara, of making sense, with a few technical jargon which we find quite often, generally I remain silent, but not here.

Let me put on "certain aspects" discussed in this thread.

(1) It is said 'reading a text' is a compromise between the Author and the reader.

We all know what an author has written, at a certain point of time,was what in his mind that ink recorded.When I say what was in his 'mind', I denote what the author has in the form of thought, in terms of his first, may be mother or any, language.

When the reader comes to picture, he has his own mental (logical and semantic) world, eyes recognise the written characters, search the  semantic field in reader's mind, try match, or superimpose, or corroborate the word and the meaning in mind and forward this to interpreting faculty. The same paradigm applies when we take up language. We find word, search in dictionaries, again try finding if any word gives the "SAME" semantic truth, which author had been having in mind, if not we go through the process stated above and resort to approximations. It falls on the translator if he is justified with his profession and stuggles to find correct semantics for the word and matching word in the dictionary or tries to complete the translation any how by a cursory substitute of sense under translation.

When we say some thing is "non - translatable", refers to the situation where a translator does not find any word in which represents the "mental intent" represented in words by the original writer. Whatever are there as a translation is an approximation only if not inserted delebrately to divert the original semantic toward some intended semantic field. This is what missionaries and some  Indologists have been doing when Indian traditional concepts were hijacked by the Church (or any aiming to convert) to denote as if it was belonging to their semantic field.

(2) Neuro-linguistics.

Let me be here a bit free to explain as a student.There has been a Nobel Laureate, Prof. Herbert Simon., a professor of Psychology, Statistics, Operations Research, economics and Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University. He won Nobel in Economics. He wrote a little but beautiful book, named "The Sciences of the Artificial", where he says almost all the sciences play with artificial models. When a child drawas a map of India on his copy bookand puts dots where rice is produced, he, infact roams place to place in India, mentally, to locate the rice producung places. The same applies to all the sciences, including language. We create a world through words, which are nothing but just mental modeld presented in paper or any medium.

In the same way, computers, cosmology, nuclear reactions, ... just go on adding... all researches and discoveries are within mental models first then we test with actual physical data or generated data.

Without going further.... let us confine to "neuro" . In fact "neuro" is taken as a metaphor, which denotes a process where multiple stimuli associated through variable parametric values to give an output or response or end result whatever one may call.

Earlier  computational sciences were more associated with purely boolean-logical operations, and "assuming" that we have found a "model" of brain which is not real brain but works like that, and knowing that it is the brain which works in almost all the fields, be it science, mathematics, arts, or whatever we see and do, it was thought that when we have an artificial brain like structure which performs brain like operation why not use it as a "research method" in all the explorations? And it was done.Thus far "neuro" had not entered the scene.

There was a big drawback of the above "brain model. Let me explain it in simple terms..When due to some accident some portion of brain becomes damaged, after the wounds are cured, body still behaves "nearly normally". How? This let scientists to depart from logical mental models as introduced above to see what is inside the brain, to make a better model of brain which has the capability or "Learning and correcting itself" . They reached to neurons and a complex inter-networking their of.

Neuro-physiology at its deepest level gives the ionic changes between the neuro-transmitters and receptors, it can give the end result by interconnecting a limited number of neurons....but has not reached to a stage where it can explain how by  complex interconnection of neurons in the brain generates "thought process".

Essentially it is a mind-brain-mathematics paradigm which tries to model brain function as close as possible to real brain. When we model it, we use integral functions as studied in mathematics.

With this sursory background, we can see the same "neuro" taken as a "relation", or ' 'mapping" as we call it in mathematics, between an input stimulus space and the listed response space. Being part of the modelled brain structure, most of the sciences, especially allied sciences like Control engineering, and other engineering sciences, psychology, linguistics, etc etc wherever we find a complex network of cause and effect,  use "neuro" as a link  establishing a relation as stated above, between input and output. 

Infact whereever we see some thing working "automatically" there are chances that Neural Netwrok based control is behind them. When we fli, and when it is stabilized at high altitude and pilot puts it in auto-pilot mode, it is that control.method applied there.

So finally, "neuro-linguistics" refers to a method of analysis where we establish relation between what is read or hear, if phonetics is resorted, with a semantic space to generate meanings, in abstraction or in some context, and ultimately aim to nearest "approximation" of interpretation.

As of now, it is and is going to remain a metaphor in the models of the brain.

Hope this gives the group a taste of how to react when "neuro" metaphor is bombarded in relation to linguistics,when called neur-linguistics, in psychology, neuro-psychology, textual analysis, in semantics as neuro-semantics etc etc.

In short where ever we find "neuro" preficed, leaving physiology aside, where real neurons are studied, hence in the sciences of the artificial, we must know it is just a paradigm of complex, i.e., multilateral connectivity connecting inputs and the output.

Regards

Sati Shankar

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Dr Shankar,

Very well analyzed.  My interest has been in speech, which is the mapping of thought to sound.

Long time ago, I had some work in brain cell structure.  With exposure to Sanskrit, I have been

wondering about the thought segmentation.  We are far away from saying something definitive.

The detection of activity in the neural level is in infancy.  My goal is to create awareness and

help design new experiments.  We had a paper to WSC last year which can be read to appreciate 

our thinking.

Best regards,

Bijoy Misra

  

--

[Sati Shankar]

Thank you Dr Misra

In my studies I have been working in the overlapping area of

{ (mind-brain-mathematics plus control engineering) + (psycho-neuro-physiological behavioural science) + (logic, methodology and philosophy of science)}

 to explore decision making processes in complex business organizations.... LOL.. this is can summarised this way.

There is still complete dark... at micro level , it may be ok... but at the level of Self-Organization of a complex neural system..... there is just trial and error.

and a lot can be done, subject to current scientific and technological constraints...

Any way best wishes for your work and endeavour.

Regards

SS

On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 1:21:58 AM UTC+5:30, Gitarthi wrote:

[Sati Shankar]

Dear Dr. Misra, I too was there at World Sanskrit Conference Thailand, but remained confined to Vedic Section only and also was a stranger despite being a member,  as one  usuallyfeels when attends gathering of other disciplines. Can I see a copy of your WSC paper please?. 

Regards

SS