Article on Kākṣīvān

[Kushagra Aniket]

Dear Scholars,

I am sharing a preprint of my Hindi article refuting the views of Swami Karpatri regarding the birth and status of the Ṛgvedic seer Kākṣīvān Auśija. 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vLBcDKHx8NymuLB-KJFF0qgqw55gpJ7Y/view?usp=sharing

S. Karpatri has attempted to show that Kākṣīvān was a Brāhmaṇa by birth. However, his account is contrary to the traditional position preserved in the Mahābhārata, Purāṇas, and Dharmaśāstras. 

These sources overwhelmingly demonstrate that Kākṣīvān was the son of a Brāhmaṇa father and Śūdrā mother. As such, he was a Pāraśava-Niṣāda by birth. He subsequently attained Brāhmaṇahood through tapas.

In this article, I have examined S. Karpatri's claims against the primary sources and argued for the śāstric position.

Regards,
Kushagra

Kushagra Aniket

Economist and Management Consultant

Columbia University'21

Cornell University'15

New York, NY, U.S.A.

ka...@cornell.edu

[Nagaraj Paturi]

A member of BVP asked me to share a rejoinder to this that he found on X . 

He sent me the following link to the rejoinder :

https://drive.google.com/file/d/116h59f08kwPe0UDYJQq-dy8WJ8imRVM9/view?usp=drivesdk

--
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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADrasQrni7mCPQTR%3D0sBT8d0R3g2u-e%2BpHamZAd4MjZNEpSzMg%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad, Telangana-500044

 

 

 

[Kushagra Aniket]

I have previously warned about the proliferation of "AI slop" in this group. This so-called "rejoinder" is patently an AI generated document replete with errors and hallucinations. No wonder its authors wish to remain anonymous. This group is called Bharatiya Vidvat Parishad -- each of these words is deeply meaningful. It is up to the Indian scholarly community whether they would like to entertain such uncritical and anonymous AI slop in its deliberations.

Regards,

Kushagra

[Nityanand Misra]

I do not know for sure if the so-called rejoinder is AI-generated or not, but the absence of any name in the document raises eyebrows and dents its credibility. Why would the authors wish to remain anonymous? Is this a part of the Kashi Sampradayiya Shastrartha Paddhati? The document accuses Kushagra Aniket of literary fraud (साहित्यिक कपट), when in fact it is the opposite: the whole parampara starting from Karapatra Svami has indulged in blatant literary fraud, with the research and work of many people being published in the name of Karapatra Svami. I looked at some of the arguments in the so-called rejoinder, and they are hilarious (for example, their explanations of dāsī and śūdrā). I guess this group would even defend ludicrous claims of Karapatra Svami, like the earth does not rotate. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The following note is not in connection with the topic of this thread alone: 

I keep receiving offline messages pointing out that BVP is allowing messages that criticize pujya acharyas like Puri Shankaracharya swami, Karapatri Swami etc. 

To all such messages my response has been that BVP would allow counterarguments to the criticisms, provided the message senders offer them. We from the moderating side do not go into the merits of the arguments or the counter arguments as long as the messages follow the etiquette, do not digress from the topic on hand. 

When the message I shared earlier in the thread was shared with me, I asked the person who shared it with me from X,  to share it himself on BVP. 

When I found a hesitation from the person, I brought it to BVP myself to prove that we don't have a bias in favor of criticisms of these swamijis and that we don't disallow any responses to such criticisms. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/50e02d88-a74b-4ef4-bfd9-29557f56fc10n%40googlegroups.com.