``Vedic Science''(!?)
Jagannatha s
आर्याः, स्वस्ति।
वैदिकं विज्ञानमिति यद् वर्तते शब्दद्वयं सांप्रतिकैः संशोधकैरधिकतरं प्रयुज्यमानं, तत्र मम काश्चन संशीतयो वर्तन्ते। तस्मात् संशीतिनिवारणार्थमिदं पृछ्यते-
1.किं लक्षणं वैदिकविज्ञानस्य ?
2.विज्ञानमिति शब्दः आधुनिकस्य सैन्स् इति शब्दस्यैवार्थमभिदधाति इति चेत् लैब्ररीसैन्स्, पोलिटिकल् सैन्स् इति शब्दद्वयस्यापि अत्रान्तर्भावनम् इष्यते वा न वा ? ओमिति यद्युत्तरम्, एतद् द्वयमपि वैदिकविज्ञानकोट्यन्तर्गतं वा? म्यान्युस्क्रिप्टालोजी इत्यस्य अर्थं सैन्स् आफ् म्यान्युस्क्रिप्ट्स् इति शब्दत्रयेण तज्ज्ञा विवृण्वन्ति। किमेतदपि वैदिकविज्ञानत्वरूपधर्मवद् विज्ञानम्?
3.सैन्स् इति शब्देन किमर्थं केवलं मैक्रोबयोलजी, आस्ट्रोफिसिक्स् इत्यादयोऽर्था गृह्यन्ते न पुनर्मीमांसाव्याकरणधर्मशास्त्रादीनि? किमेतेषु शास्त्रेषु विज्ञानत्वरूपधर्मो नास्ति? केरलशास्त्रपरिषदाख्यायां संस्थायां, मलयाळम्भाषया विरचितानामाधुनिकविज्ञानग्रन्थानां प्रकाशनं क्रियत इति श्रुतं मया। अत्र किं नाम शास्त्रत्वम्? सैन्टिफिक् लिट्रेचर् इति शब्देन मीमांसाव्याकरणादिग्रन्थरूपमर्थं स्वीकर्तुं शक्यते वा न वा? यदि शक्यते किमर्थमाधुनिकसंस्कृतसंशोधकाः ऋते आयुर्वेद-ज्यौतिषाभ्यामन्यशास्त्राणां नामोच्चारणेऽप्युदासते? यदि न शक्यते, इण्डियन् आफीस् लैब्ररी इत्यादिसंस्थासु प्रकिटितासु हस्तप्रतिसूचीषु सैन्टिफिक् लिट्रेचर् इत्याख्ये विभागे द्वैताद्वैतविशिष्टाद्वैतप्रभृतयो वेदान्ता, व्याकरणं, मीमांसेत्यादिविषयाणां ग्रहणं क्रियत इति यच्छ्रुतं मया तत्र मया कथं मनः समाधातव्यम्?
4.आधुनिकं यदस्ति ज्ञानं तत् सर्वं वेदेऽस्तीति चेत् सर्वत्र शालासु केवलं वेद एव पाठ्यत्वेन निर्धारणीयो न पुनरन्यग्रन्थाः। किमर्थं वेदिक् सैन्स् इति शब्दस्यासकृत् घोषणया आत्माऽऽयास्यते वृथा?
5.सर्वं वेदेऽस्तीति भावनया यद्यहम् अग्निमीळे पुरोहितमित्यस्मिन् मन्त्रे अग्निरिति शब्दस्य कम्प्रेस्ड् एनर्जी इत्यर्थं कल्पयामि, तत्तु स्यान्ममैकस्य संतोषाय। परन्तु किमनेन असंभव-संप्रदायविरोधौ न प्रसज्येयाताम्? अपि च भक्षितेऽपि लशुने न शान्तो व्याधिरिति न्यायापत्तिः। तथा हि। यदि मया अग्निरिति शब्दस्य कम्प्रेस्ड् एनर्जी इति अर्थः क्रियते, किं नाम करोतु वराकः पुरोहितः? रत्नमिति शब्दस्य च कमर्थं निःसारयेयम्?
6.गृह्य-श्रौत-व्याकरण-च्छन्दो-मीमांसादिज्ञानपूर्वकं वेदज्ञानं यदविच्छिन्नं प्रवर्तत इदानीमपि भारते, तत्र को नाम दोषो येन वैदिक्सैन्स् इति शब्दघोषणपूर्वकं सर्वथा अव्याप्त्यसंभवदोषदूषितानामर्थानां बलादिव वेदमन्त्रेभ्यो निःसारणेन ऐन्स्टीन्-रुदर्फोर्ड्-प्रभृतीनामात्मनस्तृप्त्त्यै मनोव्यायाम आरभ्यते संशोधकैः?
7.निरुक्तादिषु सश्रद्धमध्ययनं कुर्वाणाः किं वेदज्ञानहीनाः? वेदाध्ययनं ये कुर्वन्ति, तेषां सर्वेषां डाल्टन्थियरी, बिग्-ब्याङ्ग्-थियरी, स्टीफन्-किङ्ग् इत्यादीनां शब्दानां संज्ञानां च कण्ठेकरणम् आवश्यकं वा?
8.वेदो नाम ज्ञानं च विज्ञानं चेति किल सर्वत्र जोघुष्यते। वैदिकं ज्ञानं सैण्टिफिक् इति शब्देन विशेषयन्ति सांप्रतिकाः संशोधकाः। त इमे प्रष्टव्याः- सैन्स्-ज्ञानं वैदिक् इति वक्तुं किमर्थं नोपक्रम्यते भवद्भिः?
9.वेदविषयकं वाङ्मयम् अति विपुलम्। अप्रकटिता वेदाङ्गग्रन्था भूयस्या मात्रया अधुनापि हस्तप्रतिषु वर्तन्ते। किमर्थं वैदिकसंमेलनेषु तेषां विषये एकस्याप्यक्षरस्य नोच्चारणम्?
10. वस्तुतस्तु किं नाम वेदज्ञानम्? ग्रीक्-मेसोपोटेमिया-चीना-पर्षियन्-प्रभृतिदेशान्तराणां सम्बन्धस्य वेदमन्त्रैर्बलादानयनं वा, लक्षणाव्यापारस्यानावश्यकेनावलम्बनेन मन्त्राणामभिधार्थतिरस्कारो वा?
अधुना एकादशः प्रश्नः। पूर्वं पृष्टैः प्रश्नैः संबन्धमेष न दधातीति आपाततः प्रतिभायात्। परन्तु वर्तत एव संबन्ध इति तितिक्षया चिन्तयतां ज्ञायते-
11.सैन्स्कान्फरेन्स्-केषु (स्वार्थिकः कप्रत्ययः) केवलसंस्कृतज्ञानां सैन्स्ज्ञानहीनानां प्रबन्धमण्डनाय कदापि नाह्वानं दीयते। परन्तु केषुचन स्यान्स्क्रीट्-कान्फरेन्स्-केषु(स्वार्थिकः कप्रत्ययः) केवलमाधुनिकसैन्स्-ज्ञानयुक्ताः संस्कृतज्ञानहीनाः सादरमाहूता, मण्डितप्रबन्धाश्च मया बहुवारं दृष्टाः। किमर्थं संस्कृतज्ञैरेतन्न केवलं सह्यते परन्तु सकरतालं प्रोत्साह्यते च ?
जगन्नाथः।
iragavarapu narasimhacharya
सादरं प्रणम्य। "ज्ञानं,विज्ञान"मिति पदद्वयविषये अहमेवमभिप्रैमि।
"ज्ञानं"नाम सामान्यज्ञानम्। पदपदार्थविषयकं वस्तुगतञ्च। "अयं
मेघः"इत्यादिकम्। विज्ञानं नाम "तस्य व्युत्पत्तिविषयक,तदाविष्काररूप,
तदन्तर्गतभौतिकसम्बन्धि,तत्रत्य
विद्युत्,तत्संग्रहणात्मकपरिशीलन,प्रयोगादि ज्ञानम्।उदाहरणं पश्यामः।
उदकाद्विद्युच्छक्तिविषयकं ज्ञानम्।"कृष्णयजुर्वेदे तैत्तिरीयारण्यके
चतुर्थप्रश्ने दशमानुवाके एवं वर्णितमस्ति।
"अपां मध्य उद्वासयेत्।अपां वा एतन्मध्या ज्ज्योति रजायत।
ज्योतिःप्रवर्गर्यः।स्व एवैनं योनौ प्रतिष्ठापयति।"
"क्वेदमभ्रं निविशते?"(कृ.य.अरुणम्.८.अनु)
"अभ्राण्यपःप्रपद्यन्ते"(पूर्वोक्तग्रन्थे एव)"क्वेमा आपो निविशन्ते?
यदीतो यान्ति सम्प्रति।आप स्सूर्ये समाहिताः।"(पूर्वोक्तस्थले एव)"याभि
रादित्य स्तपति रश्मिभि स्ताभिः पर्जन्यो
वर्षति।पर्जन्येनौषधिवनस्पतयः-----इत्यादि।व्युत्पत्त्यादिविषयकपरिशीलनादिकं
कर्तुं शक्यते खलु।प्रयोगस्य तु साधनान्यपेक्ष्यन्ते। परन्तु
पूर्वोक्तस्थलेषु वैदिकविज्ञानमस्तीत्येवाङ्गीकर्तव्यं खलु।
ज्ञान,विज्ञान विषये एष ममाभिप्रायः।या विद्या "इदमेवंरूपेण
वर्तितव्य"मिति शास्ति तच्छास्त्रं भवति।उदाहरणाय,व्याकरणादिकम्।
आङ्लभाषायां "nescience"इत्यस्य "अविद्या"इत्यर्थः।"science"इत्यस्य
"विद्या"इत्यर्थो भवति खलु।"science"इत्यस्य "A branch of knowledge
involving systematized observation,experiment and induction"इति
नैघण्टुकोऽर्थोऽस्तु नाम। सोऽर्थो वैदिक,संस्कृतभाषयोरप्यन्वेति।
मे मनसि यदभिप्रेतं तदुपन्यस्तम्। अन्यथा भाव्यते यदि तच्छ्रोतुमिच्छामि।
अभिवन्द्य,
ऐवियनाचार्यः।
स्ती2011/1/6 Jagannatha s <jgra...@gmail.com>:
> अथ चेत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं संग्रामं न करिष्यसि।
> ततः स्वधर्मं कीर्तिं च हित्वा पापमवाप्स्यसि।।
> तस्मादुत्तिष्ठ कौन्तेय युद्धाय कृतनिश्चयः।
> निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
>
Jagannatha s
नव्यां पद्धतिमाश्रित्य नवीनं ज्ञानमाहरेत्।
वृष्ट्युत्पत्तिक्रमं ज्ञातुं किमर्थं ब्राह्मणं पठेत् ? ।।
यच्च ब्राह्मणवेदेषु पुराणेषु स्मृतिष्वथ।
भौतिकं दृश्यते ज्ञानं तत् प्राथमिककल्पकम्।।
उदाहारिषत ब्राह्म्यो वृष्टौ या ब्राह्णणस्थिताः।
बोधात्तन्निःसृताद् बाला अधिकं जानतेऽधुना।।
आसीत् कस्मिंस्तरे वृष्टिज्ञानं प्राचीनकालिकम्।
इति चेद् वस्तु संशोध्यं पुराणे वाङ्मयेऽस्तु दृक्।।
वस्तुतस्त्वधुना नव्यं ज्ञानं लब्धं नवे पथि।
वेदवाक्यैर्मिश्रयित्वा सर्वं वेदस्थमुच्यते।।
तन्न वेदस्य वेदत्वं तत्तु वेदावमानना।
क्व च वेदस्य गाम्भीर्यं क्व संशोधकचेष्टितम् ? ।।
अध्यात्मज्ञानभण्डारे वेदे सुलभमन्यतः।
भौतिकज्ञानमस्तीति वादो वेदत्वभङ्गकृत्।।
अङ्गीकृत्यापि तं वादं पृच्छामो नवकालिकम्।
ज्ञानं किमतिशेते तन्नवज्ञानेन वा समम् ? ।।
इत्थंकारं मदीया धीर्द्वयोरपि विकल्पयोः।
त्याजयन्तु नवान् ग्रन्थान् सर्वान् विद्यार्थिभिर्बुधाः।।
सर्वभौतिकविज्ञानजलधौ जाग्रति क्षितौ।
वेदे शालासु किं ग्रन्थैरन्यैरस्तु प्रयोजनम् ? ।।
Ganesh R
BhavatAm pattra-paThanEna nitAntam tiShTOs'mi.
YadyadbhavatA nyavEdi pratyapAdi ca tattadakhilam nUnamanavadyam iti mepratibAti.
Being a serious student of modern science and technology along with my first hand understanding of the vedic-vedangic-puranic literature with quite a lot of study in these related fields since three decades, I sincerely feel that much of the so called vedic science is utter trash. Yes, our ancient literature has many references to science in the modern sense. But much of it is dated. It is sheer inferiority complex that has made many of our scholars and so called scholars to harp the broken strings of "vedic science". Those who know this home truth well also indulge in such draavidapraanaayaama-s at many instances often with an eye on artha-maana-mOha-bharama-s. All these self styled vedic-scientists are unable to materialize even small things that challenge the modern science. Any number of papers, projects, seminars and claims are only heading towards bhuktayE na tu muktayE... Hence i sincerely feel that it is time at least now to cast off this false mask and understand the Vedic and Sanskritic literature in the light of what our past masters said in the light of our own dispassionate logic so that the respect of both modern science and "vedic science" are faithfully restored.
I once again appreciate your bold and pertinent remarks which are full of reason and rhyme.
I know too well that this is very natural to you as I have the good fortune of knowing you since two decades. Especially your verses in anushtubh in the second mail in this thread are too sharp, crisp and conclusive. these remind me the impeccable BRhaspati sutra-s, Udayanacharya's AtmavidyAvivEka and other such masterly works that boldly challenged the ignorance of their times.
BhavadvashamvadaH
ganesh
iragavarapu narasimhacharya
साधूक्तं श्लोकैः सुश्लोकेन। वस्तुतत्त्वमुदीरितम्। अभिनन्द्यते।
अभिवन्द्य,
ऐवियन्।
2011/1/6 Jagannatha s <jgra...@gmail.com>:
Ramasubramanian Sharma
I too completely concur with the views expressed by our respected scholars
Sri Jangannatha and Sri Ganesh.
By making an outright dismissal of the content of Vedas and the allied
literature, enough damage has been done by some of the orientalists of the
past. Perhaps this was primarily done to fulfil their own agenda. Being
alien to our culture and tradition (not necessarily physically!) this is
quite understandable and pardonable.
However, it is a bit difficult to stomach the other kind of damage. The so
called `enthusiasts', keep making all sorts of tall and absolutely
baseless claims not realizing that far more greater damage is being done
by them in doing so. According to them, every theory - those that have
been already proposed, that are in the making, and the ones that will be
proposed - can all be traced in the Vedic corpus, and that we only need a
certain `divine' vision to `read' them from the text. To make the point
clear as it were, I cite an example. A few years back, in a fairly
respectable gathering, I heard a mathematician (retired from a reputed
institute) making a statement that we have reference to `string theory'
(that which physicists are currently dabbling with) in Bhagavad Gita. I
was shocked to hear this and before I could recover the speaker quoted the
verse. What this gentleman was referring to was the statement -- `mayi
sarvamidam protam suutre manigana iva'. [Idea is: `sutra' refers to
string; so make a link!]
Anyway, kudos to both the scholars for clearly putting forth in this forum
(in Sanskrit as well as in English) that both these views are indeed
damnable and can at most be counterproductive.
Thanks much, and
Best regards,
-Ram.
Ram Sharma
From: Jagannatha s <jgra...@gmail.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, January 6, 2011 11:09:08 PM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} ``Vedic Science''(!?)
Jagannatha s
An Indian stood up forthwith and told:
sadasivamurty rani
Pranams to all scholars!
Does the Vedic Knowledge deserve to be called Scientific or not is the main topic. Just yester day or day before yesterday his topic was placed before the forum for discussion. Yet the arguements have not yet been begun except a few supporting statements from a very few schoaraly members of this group.
Is it to be taken as the end of the discussion? Is it be considered as the equivocal opinion of the entire BVParishat if a few scholars accept the statement?
Even if we conclude that Vedic Literature has no scientific content in it, the
most inconvenient development is the latest posting of these few jokes?
Is this forum a place for posting such jokes?
There are 1001social networks in found in the net which are just for timepass activities. Such networks may feel glad to receive such peanut material.
Can these few self generated jokes of a few learned persons in any way enlighten any single person to understand the realities? What is the target of these jokes? Is it to prove that Vedic Literature has nothing to help the modern world? or Is it to prove that those who propagate the relevance of Vedic literature are imprudent and irrational?
For your kindest information some of those who have supported the present negative notion have a good number of articles to their credit published in many prestigious journals and books having written in support of Vedic Knowledge. Then how to judge the stregnth of such dual standards from a single voice?
It is not wrong in denying the authenticity or value of the Vedic literature. This country has through many centuries been witnessing such disciplines of pro and anti Vedic thought.
But we should very seriously think of the propriety of posting such most ridiculous jokes in this scholarly forum.
Even if we want to refute any stream of thoughts let us refute in a scholarly manner. With Warm Regards,
Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty --- On Fri, 7/1/11, Jagannatha s <jgra...@gmail.com> wrote: |
Jagannatha s
Dipak Bhattacharya
Thaks Dr. Jagannath! One thing that came to my notice is that the existence of the most valuable theories of physical science (this is the only meaning of the word science known to some Vedic scientists) in the Vedas is discovered only AFTER the theory is disvcovered in the West. That the Big Bang theory exists in the Vedas comes to notice only after the theory is propounded in the West. That wireless existed is noticed after the invention of the radio comes to one's knowledge. The same is true of the Vedic television. Did any researcher of the nineteenth century note their existence in the Vedic times? Why they did not is a question.
Best
DB |
|
P R Mukund - NanoArk
I am not a Samskrita scholar. I am not scholar of the Vedas.
I have been a professor of electrical engineering, with many, many publications and chairing many international conference in my field, all over the world.
I can say this. My rudimentary understanding of what is in the Vedas has resulted in really boosting my ability to discover things in the wireless (RF)
engineering, for which the international body Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) recognized the work by awarding me the title of Distinguished
Lecturer. Just 2 months back, I was invited to give the luncheon keynote speech at the IEEE International Conference on Systems on a Chip (SOCC). I owe it all to what is in the Vedas.
I find it extremely sad that our own scholars are ridiculing what is truly our wealth that affects everything. Truly tragic.
I request the people maintaining this site to kindly remove my name from this list.
Prof. P.R. Mukund
PS: You can google search my name, and you will find thousands of hits that the "west" has raved about what "we" have done.
--
P.R. Mukund, Ph.D.
President & CEO
NanoArk Corporation
6605 Pittsford-Palmyra Road, Suite E-5
Fairport, NY 14450
Phone: (585) 223-4334, ext. 18
e-mail: prmu...@nanoarkcorp.com
URL: www.nanoarkcorp.com
Jagannatha s
Dear sirs¸
When a scholar(I can not remember his name) posted the verse अवतारत्रयं विष्णोर्मैथिलैः कवलीकृतम् । इति संचिन्त्य भगवान् नारसिंहमुपेयिवान्।। nobody objected by saying that was ridiculous attack on AVTAARA belief/ philosophy/ theory.
Jagannatha.
VKG
This debate of defining "Vedic Sciece" is too irresistible, for me to
join.
If we conclude the science is the theory of knowledge, then we can
safely conclude that Veda itself is a Science.
However, the term science in its modern context, differs in our
perceptions.
We would like to mention that, most of the so-called experiments,
thesis referred in the quoted Vedic Texts is based on sheer
observations (Spread over millenia) and continous refinement of
thought process, based on the observations/ intellectual observations.
Often this results in the intuitive verses/ revelations etc.
(Nomenclature is not important).
(The Vedic Text itself is a complex word, for one to grasp. Are we
talking about a stanza or two; Samhita, Braahma or Upanishat or
lateral entries qualifying as vedic texts.)
Since the modern science has developed a lot in its mechanisms, it is
highly doubtful, whether we (vedic researchers) would be able to
contribute (Either by deflection, disruption, alternation).
However, the theoritical concepts referred in the texts and the
inspiration there of could be of greater value.
In addition, the concepts of individual disciple, societal discipline
and collective/ individual welfare; referred as Social Sciences are
the forte of Vedic Literature. These should be given highest priority
and the messages should be spread to suit the contemporary context.
Theory of knowledge, in its full spectrum, available in Vyakarana,
Meemamsa, tarka Sastras should be certainly given its due importance
and modern educated persons shall be appraised about the nuances.
Finally, I conclude that the deriving satisfaction from the fact of
correlation is temporary and sentimental. Whereas the immediate or
long term benefits, arising out of a knowledge alone could influence
the society and shape up its thinking/ approach towards a culture/
pattern of knowledge.
With due respects to all the scholars, I conclude my submission.
VKG
> >> 2011/1/6 iragavarapu narasimhacharya <insacha...@gmail.com>
> >>> स्ती2011/1/6 Jagannatha s <jgran...@gmail.com>:
Sampath Kannan
| Namaste ! Has anyone prepared a full catalogue of modern science items discovered in the Veda-s ? : Steam Engine Electricity Wireless etc. - I had heard of these discoveries when I was in school. There must be many more now. A good topic, perhaps, for PhD ? KSKannan Bangalore --- On Sat, 1/8/11, VKG <vkghan...@gmail.com> wrote: |
|
Sampath Kannan
| namaste ! I guess Sri PRMukund is only showing humility when he says that he is no scholar in Sanskrit/Veda-s. If his rudimentary understanding has so much to contribute, how much more should his deep understanding spell ! Every Sanskritist would be obliged to him if he can kindly explain what his "rudimentary knowledge" was, and how it boosted his ability to discover the things he has. A clear and detailed statement should benefit many. He may even get some good students/scholars who would like to carry on research on similar lines. KSKannan --- On Fri, 1/7/11, P R Mukund - NanoArk <prmu...@nanoarkcorp.com> wrote: |
sadasivamurty rani
It is over enthusiastic either to search for or to prove the existence of Steam Engine or Wireless or any other particularized modern inventions in the Vedic and allied literature.
Many scholars through generations have been constantly pursuing and contributing the scientific content in the Vedas. The contribution of those scholars may be keenly studied before coming to any abrupt conclusions regarding the validity of Vedic Knowledge spheres.
But to have a right approach in the field of Vedic Knowledge pursuits the views of Sri Vamsi Krishna Ghanapathi Ji have much importance.
I do not know what is intended by Shri Kannan Ji by the word FULL in his phrase "FULL CATALOGUE" but a dependable catalogue was prepared by CASS, PUNE under the supervison of Prof. VNJha Ji.
Here I would like to propose for a slight change in the phrase "Vedic Sciences". Instead let us say it "Ancient Indian Scientific Literature (May it be pertaining to the Samhita or Brahmana and Arnayaka or Upanishads or Six Vedangas or Puranas and Itihasas or Independent Treatises on different Knowledge Disciplines).
As wished by Sri Kannan ji Ph.D., purusits on various Scietific Disciplines are being carried out from various General and Sanskrit Univerisities.
If the scholars can accept Metallurgy as a science I would like to give an instance here.
One, Professor Koti Veerachari, (A professor in Mechanical Engineering, NIT, Warrangal) sucessfully did his research for the award Ph.D., from Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha, Tirupati under my guidance on the Topic "Metallurgy in the Ancient Indian Rasatantra Granthas".
Similarly Dr. Madabhushi Srinivas, A Sr. Geologist from Geological Survey of India got his Doctorate from Andhra University for his subject on "The Sessimological Zones as found in the Varahamihira's Brhat Samhita in comparison with the Modern Sessimological studies in our Country."
We can list out many such valid and successful pursuits through out the legnth and breadth of our country in the knowledge areas under present debate.
With warm regards,
Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty --- On Sat, 8/1/11, Sampath Kannan <ks_k...@yahoo.com> wrote: |
Veeranarayana Pandurangi
--
Head, Dept of Darshanas,
Yoganandacharya Bhavan,
Jagadguru Ramanandacharya Rajasthan Samskrita University, Madau, post Bhankrota, Jaipur, 302026.
अथ चेत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं संग्रामं न करिष्यसि।
Dipak Bhattacharya
My observations have nothing sarcastic. What I said is a fact. Its cause has to be found.
Best
DB |
|
Shrisha Rao
> My observations have nothing sarcastic. What I said is a fact. Its cause has to be found.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
narayanan er
Sampath Kannan
| Dear All, Jokes and sarcasm apart, my questions are the same as the ones raised by Sri Pandurangi-ji. To elucidate a little more : Are we confusing ourselves when we use the word "Vedic" ? Possibly, it is getting mixed up in the mind of traditional scholars and their followers. The mix up is with the word "Vaidika" in Sanskrit. The Sanskrit word "Vaidika" is often used to refer to whatever comes in the long tradition that starts with the Veda-s, till perhaps recent times. However, the English word "Vedic" is often used to refer to whatever obtains in the corpus of the Veda-s - limiting, that is, to the 4 Veda-s, which encompasses their samhitA-s, brAhmaNa-s, AraNyaka-s, and the upanis"ad-s; and just nothing more. So the question boils down to this : if I find some scientific idea in, say, BhAgavata PurANa, am I to identify it as Vaidika, or Vedic, or both, or neither ? Now let us say, the encyclopaediac work S'iva-tattva-ratnAkara, a rather recent work, has high regard for the Veda-s. Are we to designate it as Vedic or not ? Swamiji Bharati Krishna Tirtha has brought out some mathematical formulae. He was a very devout Vedic scholar. Should we call the mathematics presented by the Swamiji as Vedic or not ? Or even circumscribing the problem to a smaller compass, let us say Mr. X specialises in the Bhagavad GItA. The GItA holds a high place in the mind of Vedic scholars; the GItA no doubt reveres the Veda-s. Now, suppose Mr. Y says Mr X is a Vedic scholar, shall we say laks"aNayA Mr. Y is right (even if Mr. X knows hardly anything of the Veda-s) ? Is Y right ? Or wrong ? And why ? And again, even the word "science" can spell some confusions. So do we find Science Congresses allotting slot for political science too or not ? Why ? Unless we refine technical terms so as to be able to define them properly and fully, I think we will be running into difficulties. And worse, if a person raises an academic question, it is taken as personal, as it were ! How shall we solve this ? It would be ideal, of course, if those who answer these questions have a fairly good knowledge of both the fields. namAmsi. KSKannan Bangalore --- On Sat, 1/8/11, Veeranarayana Pandurangi <veer...@gmail.com> wrote: |
Dr. S. Ramakrishna Sharma
Although the following was posted a few moments ago along the long thread
of Vedic Science(?!) Discussion The Mail was rejected for crossing the limit
of 4MB file. I uploaded the Invitation PDF which happens to be 7+MB
You may download the Invitation which contains details of Sessions and Papers
Conference Invitation.
>Here I would like to propose for a slight change in the phrase "Vedic Sciences". Instead let us say it
"Ancient Indian Scientific Literature (May it be pertaining to the Samhita or Brahmana and Arnayaka or
Upanishads or Six Vedangas or Puranas and Itihasas or Independent Treatises on different Knowledge Disciplines).
and a few others over net-chat I decided to change the title term "Vedic Science/s"
of the Three Day International Conference at Udupi, which is being coordinated by me.
VEDA VIDYA encapsulates vast area of Ancient Indian Scientific Literature(To begin with, this
is a postulate which requires to be researched; the arena of unpublished Manuscripts not to be
spared) and Veda bound(meaning having Shraddha in Astikyam) Traditional Resources(including
experience based practices).
VEDA VIDYA has the UPA-VEDAS(not listed in the above quotation. As rightly pointed out by
Dr.B.V.K Sastry(who is participating in the Veda Vidya Conference) these are APPLICATIONS
involving TECHNOLOGY(of whatever kind/type/grade let it be from the modern stand point).
Ayruvedic Biology would sound a blatant anachronism if "Biology" is reserved only for that
Western/Modern branch of science discipline. But as it is used by Professor M S Valiathan FASc,
an eminent cardiologist and medical scientist, and a profound scholar of Ayurveda, who
has been pioneering the idea that this is a fertile field for original scientific research at the highest level,
let us be magnanimous to extend condescending acceptance to the term, for the time being.
A better term would be आयुर्वेदीयजीवशस्त्रं ।
Foundation for Indian Scientific Heritage as a registered Trust with the active research support of
a growing team of academically competent experts in the disciplines of Modern Science with sufficient
mastery in Vedanga Vyakaranam and Samskrutam, Prakrutam and Pali, and other Indian Languages
(who are NOT slaves of English Dictionary) hopes to redeem the generation from the ऋणत्रयं without
hurting and getting hurt . Of course English will be given due place, which as a window
language is good, but as a door it has dwarfed us, betrayed us.
The Invitation to the Conference is attached. About 40 papers received, of which
a few are only abstracts, will be made available for study and criticism/evaluation in due course.
I really pity them who (sent their papers) are unwilling to attend the Conference for the reason
"why should I, if my paper is not selected?"
Humility is not a policy. It is a quality, a spiritual value; the foundation on which every other virtue is
based and balanced.
VEDA VIDYA,(both Para Vidya and Apara Vidya) denotes holistic, integral and integrated discipline
of Sciences, Arts and Humanities. To isolate, separate and compartmentalize any or each of them would
betray the purpose of Veda Vidya. Keeping in view the inner connectivity and inter-relatedness of
different Vidyas embedded in the Vedas and allied literature we need to develop the world view of
the Rishis from their platform of experience.
वन्दे मातरम् । जयतु संस्कृतं ।
--
Aangirasa/Dr.S.Ramakrishna Sharma. M.A.,Ph.D.(Eng.Lit.),Ph.D.(Sanskrit.).
Dr. Yadu Moharir
| Respected scholars, This subject is a extremely dear to me personally because Swami Rama, (my guru) had told me that the logical approach of science could be a valuable tool for imparting the core message from Veda to the youth that is growing-up with Western ideologies as their benchmark. Science is the only language youth is likely to understand and instructed me “to integrate Sanskrit with Science”. (His exact words were: “marry Science with Sanskrit) that is why my book on GaNesha will be dedicated to Swami Rama. At this time it is with the printers. Dr. BVK Sastry has written the foreword and Dr. Kalyanraman, Dr. David Frawley (Vamadeva Shastri) have kindly written a brief review note for the same. Apart from my personal quest as a scientist of self inquiry, GaNesha atharvashiirSha clearly states: "tvaM j~naanamayo vij~naanamaosi" Meaning - GaNesha is not only j~naana but the process for acquiring that as well. a. sarvaM jagadidaM tvatto jaayateEverything in this world is born from knowledge (represented by the divinity of knowledge, GaNesha). b. sarvaM jagadidaM tvattatiSTatiEverything in the universe is sustained because of knowledge (represented by the divinity of knowledge, GaNesha). c. sarvaM jagadidaM tvayi layameSyati Everything ultimately dissolves in knowledge (represented by the divinity of knowledge, GaNesha), To me, this is a j~naana vij~naana yaJ~na. Furthermore taittariiya upaniShad states: vij~naanaM yaj~naM tanute | karmaaNi tanutpica | tai. upa. 2.5.5.1 | To me as a scientist, it means yaj~na (karma per say) was created out of knowledge and then yaj~na becomes the process of validating that knowledge as well. I sincerely feel that Veda does not need any endorsement from science, but it will always corroborate with the core message of Veda and concecpts stated in Veda can be validated if right model can be applied.for such evaluation.. Unless there is an open dialogue with scholars from both sides both parties are unwilling to entertain ideas from each other. I truly believe that Sanskrit can be a wonderful bridge that would help us solve the conundrum. Ultimately j~naanaa deva tu kaivalyam I look forward for a productive and interaction with Sanskrit scholars, Best Regards Dr. Yadu |
Arun
to see question/answers in fluent sanskrit verses in modern times.
Veda is not a subject of proper Vijnana itself like Physics,
Chemisitry, Biology, or their foundation which is mathematics. It is
foundation of all knowledge, called Sarva-vidya-pratishtha in
Mundakopanishad-
ब्रह्मा देवानां प्रथमं सम्बभूव विश्वस्य कर्त्ता भुवनस्य गोप्ता। स
ब्रह्मविद्या सर्वविद्या प्रतिष्ठां जेष्ठाय पुत्राय अथर्वाय प्राह॥
(मुण्डकोपनिषद् १/१/१)
Brahmarshi Daivarata of Gokarna in his book-Vedartha-Kalpalata has
explained Dhi-yoga which is indicated in third Pada of Gayatri-mantra.
As per my understanding, I have tried to explain it in terms of a
verse of Bhagavata-purana in chapter 4 of my book' Gayatri-Panchadashi
(on my website-www.scribd.com/Arunupadhyay).
नवैकादश पञ्चत्रीन् भावान् भूतेषु येन वै। ईक्षेताथैकमप्येषु तज्ज्ञानं
मम निश्चितम्॥१४॥
एतदेव हि विज्ञानं न तथैकेन येन यत्। स्थित्युत्पत्तिलयान् पश्येद्
भावानां त्रिगुणात्मनाम्॥१५॥ (श्रीमद्भागवत पुराण ११/१९/१४-१५)
First foundation is unity of thought, expressed in various ways-(1)
Rules of science are same for all persons, places and times. (2)
Words/ sentences have same meanings for speaker/listeners-only then a
language system can work.
Brahma is one, but creation and its explanation is based on duality-
Purusha-prakriti, Agni-soma, Vak-artha etc. In science, there should
be correspondence between theory/observation.
There are processes of sanchara-pratisanchara, vidya-avidya (unity-
classification) etc
There are various trinities-(1) adhidaivika, adhibhautika, adhyatmika-
their interlink is Vedic knowledge, (2) Object, knower, knowledge, (3)
Complementary 3 gunas, (4) Explanation of world as Purusha (13 levels
of Vishva), Shri (10 dimensions) and Yajna (transformation or
production etc.)
Brahma or Purusha is seen as Chatushpada-Kshara, Akshara, Avyaya,
Paratpara or by 4 vedas.
World is viewed as of 5 Parvas. Stages of Avidya (classification) are
also 5.
Chetana needs at least 6 dimensions, so complete view is got by 6
Darshanas and is explained in 6 darsha-vaks (scripts).
Processes of managing a system need 10 Maha-vidyas explained in
various ways or 10 stages of creation (sargas) of Bhagavata purana.
11 are Rudras which are 10 organs of action and knowledge controlled
by Mana. These are means of knowledge.
-Arun
On Jan 6, 3:14 pm, Jagannatha s <jgran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> आर्याः, स्वस्ति।
>
> वैदिकं विज्ञानमिति यद् वर्तते शब्दद्वयं सांप्रतिकैः संशोधकैरधिकतरं
> प्रयुज्यमानं, तत्र मम काश्चन संशीतयो वर्तन्ते। तस्मात् संशीतिनिवारणार्थमिदं
> पृछ्यते-
>
> 1.किं लक्षणं वैदिकविज्ञानस्य ?
>
> 2.विज्ञानमिति शब्दः आधुनिकस्य सैन्स् इति शब्दस्यैवार्थमभिदधाति इति चेत्
> लैब्ररीसैन्स्, पोलिटिकल् सैन्स् इति शब्दद्वयस्यापि अत्रान्तर्भावनम् इष्यते
> वा न वा ? ओमिति यद्युत्तरम्, एतद् द्वयमपि वैदिकविज्ञानकोट्यन्तर्गतं
> वा?म्यान्युस्क्रिप्टालोजी इत्यस्य
> अर्थं सैन्स् आफ् म्यान्युस्क्रिप्ट्स् इति शब्दत्रयेण तज्ज्ञा विवृण्वन्ति।
> किमेतदपि वैदिकविज्ञानत्वरूपधर्मवद् विज्ञानम्?
>
> 3.सैन्स् इति शब्देन किमर्थं केवलं मैक्रोबयोलजी, आस्ट्रोफिसिक्स्
> इत्यादयोऽर्था गृह्यन्ते न पुनर्मीमांसाव्याकरणधर्मशास्त्रादीनि? किमेतेषु
> शास्त्रेषु विज्ञानत्वरूपधर्मो नास्ति? केरलशास्त्रपरिषदाख्यायां संस्थायां,
> मलयाळम्भाषया विरचितानामाधुनिकविज्ञानग्रन्थानां प्रकाशनं क्रियत इति श्रुतं
> मया। अत्र किं नाम शास्त्रत्वम्? सैन्टिफिक् लिट्रेचर् इति शब्देन
> मीमांसाव्याकरणादिग्रन्थरूपमर्थं स्वीकर्तुं शक्यते वा न वा? यदि शक्यते
> किमर्थमाधुनिकसंस्कृतसंशोधकाः ऋते आयुर्वेद-ज्यौतिषाभ्यामन्यशास्त्राणां
> नामोच्चारणेऽप्युदासते? यदि न शक्यते, इण्डियन् आफीस् लैब्ररी इत्यादिसंस्थासु
> प्रकिटितासु हस्तप्रतिसूचीषु सैन्टिफिक् लिट्रेचर् इत्याख्ये विभागे
> द्वैताद्वैतविशिष्टाद्वैतप्रभृतयो
> वेदान्ता, व्याकरणं, मीमांसेत्यादिविषयाणां ग्रहणं क्रियत इति यच्छ्रुतं मया
> तत्र मया कथं मनः समाधातव्यम्?
>
> 4.आधुनिकं यदस्ति ज्ञानं तत् सर्वं वेदेऽस्तीति चेत् सर्वत्र शालासु केवलं वेद
> एव पाठ्यत्वेन निर्धारणीयो न पुनरन्यग्रन्थाः। किमर्थं वेदिक् सैन्स् इति
> शब्दस्यासकृत् घोषणया आत्माऽऽयास्यते वृथा?
>
> 5.सर्वं वेदेऽस्तीति भावनया यद्यहम् अग्निमीळे पुरोहितमित्यस्मिन् मन्त्रे
> अग्निरिति शब्दस्य कम्प्रेस्ड् एनर्जी इत्यर्थं कल्पयामि, तत्तु स्यान्ममैकस्य
> संतोषाय। परन्तु किमनेन असंभव-संप्रदायविरोधौ न प्रसज्येयाताम्? अपि च
> भक्षितेऽपि लशुने न शान्तो व्याधिरिति न्यायापत्तिः। तथा हि। यदि मया अग्निरिति
> शब्दस्य कम्प्रेस्ड् एनर्जी इति अर्थः क्रियते, किं नाम करोतु वराकः
> पुरोहितः?रत्नमिति शब्दस्य च कमर्थं निःसारयेयम्
> ?
>
> 6.गृह्य-श्रौत-व्याकरण-च्छन्दो-मीमांसादिज्ञानपूर्वकं वेदज्ञानं यदविच्छिन्नं
> प्रवर्तत इदानीमपि भारते, तत्र को नाम दोषो येन वैदिक्सैन्स् इति
> शब्दघोषणपूर्वकं सर्वथा अव्याप्त्यसंभवदोषदूषितानामर्थानां बलादिव
> वेदमन्त्रेभ्यो निःसारणेन ऐन्स्टीन्-रुदर्फोर्ड्-प्रभृतीनामात्मनस्तृप्त्त्यै
> मनोव्यायाम आरभ्यते संशोधकैः?
>
> 7.निरुक्तादिषु सश्रद्धमध्ययनं कुर्वाणाः किं वेदज्ञानहीनाः? वेदाध्ययनं ये
> कुर्वन्ति, तेषां सर्वेषां डाल्टन्थियरी, बिग्-ब्याङ्ग्-थियरी, स्टीफन्-किङ्ग्
> इत्यादीनां शब्दानां संज्ञानां च कण्ठेकरणम् आवश्यकं वा?
>
> 8.वेदो नाम ज्ञानं च विज्ञानं चेति किल सर्वत्र जोघुष्यते। वैदिकं ज्ञानं
> सैण्टिफिक् इति शब्देन विशेषयन्ति सांप्रतिकाः संशोधकाः। त इमे प्रष्टव्याः-
> सैन्स्-ज्ञानं वैदिक् इति वक्तुं किमर्थं नोपक्रम्यते भवद्भिः?
>
> 9.वेदविषयकं वाङ्मयम् अति विपुलम्। अप्रकटिता वेदाङ्गग्रन्था भूयस्या मात्रया
> अधुनापि हस्तप्रतिषु वर्तन्ते। किमर्थं वैदिकसंमेलनेषु तेषां विषये
> एकस्याप्यक्षरस्य नोच्चारणम्?
>
> 10. वस्तुतस्तु किं नाम
> वेदज्ञानम्?ग्रीक्-मेसोपोटेमिया-चीना-पर्षियन्-प्रभृतिदेशान्तराणां
VKG
Vedic Science has been a term of debate among scholars. Since this is
Parishad, in various sciences room for every opinion should be given,
without insulting any initiative of any individual and organisation.
Now, the debate shrinks to the application of Scientific principles,
in India across ages. Now, what ever we see in heritage exhibitions,
is a depiction of lateral researches/ development by Proponents and
staunch believers of Vedic Philosophy.
The core principles of enlisted in Vedic Texts inspired several
individuals/ thinkers on various subjects. The Vedas continue to
inspire for ages to come.
Many times, I (Myself) get inspired to think the significance of the
meaning of Mantras/ Braahmana Sentences. (My current understanding and
exposure to various contemporary concepts has the major share of
influence in this inspiration).
For an example - a Rik of Goddess Saraswati Saraswatyabhi No neshi...
(Both in Yajur and Rig veda); has inspired me to think about the
availability of Incendiary Materials Hydro carbon Liquids in the
Saraswati Basin. (This was possible for me to guess this way, by
learning that Barmer district of Rajasthan, said to be the erstwhile
basin of River Saraswati has been spotted with Gas/Petroleum reserves
by Cairns Company).
But the essence of the message is that - Let us not got to War Like
situations, in this regard. (This message was relevant at the time of
Iraq War).
It is open for us to name at Vedic Science or otherwise. But, if
scientists are exposed to such ideas and principles, there could be
room for improvement of life for the society.
Hence, dialogue between distinguished persons from both streams of
knowledge will be required. Inspiration for serious researches, cannot
be denied.
Conferences in this respect would serve the purpose, if they help the
interaction.
Principles for Social Sciences, Fundamental Physics and Meta Physics
are the forte of Vedic Texts. Rest of the interpretations (in
ancillary texts) are inspired by these scriptures.
Pranam.