Fwd: दिव्य संस्कृत, प्राकृत और प्रोटो-इण्डो-यूरोपीयन

[संस्कृत संवादः]

---------- फ़ॉरवर्ड किया गया मैसेज ---------
भेजने वाले: संस्कृत संवादः <samv...@googlegroups.com>
तारीख: सोमवार, 16 सितंबर 2024 समय 11:28:55 pm UTC+5:30
विषय: दिव्य संस्कृत, प्राकृत और प्रोटो-इण्डो-यूरोपीयन
पाने वाले:संस्कृत संवादः <samv...@googlegroups.com>

[English Translation at bottom]

संस्कृत कैसे दिव्य?
संस्कृत में जो दिव्यता है, वह उसका सहज गुण है। जैसे सिंह की वीरता, जैसे हाथी की बलवत्ता। चाहे आप संस्कृत में देवताओं का स्तुतिगान करें या दुष्टों की निन्दा, दोनों में संस्कृत दिव्य ही है।

उसे दिव्यता मिलती है उसके अतिसूक्ष्म और सटीक व्याकरण से, उसके वर्णों के सामञ्जस्य और वैज्ञानिक पद्धतियों से।
प्राकृत है सबसे पुरानी भाषा?
कुछ लोग यह मूर्खता फैलाते हैं कि प्राकृत का अर्थ है प्रकृति से निकली कच्ची अकृत्रिम भाषा, जिसे संशुद्ध करके संस्कृत बनाया गया, जो कि एक कृत्रिम भाषा है। जैसे प्राकृतिक अशुद्ध सोने को संशुद्ध करके आभूषण आदि में उपयोग किया जाता है। चलिए, आप ही का उदाहरण लेते हैं। परन्तु सोना तो विश्वभर में पाया जाता है, तो प्राकृत केवल भारत में ही क्यों? उल्टा, संस्कृत के ही शब्द विश्वभर की भाषाओं में मिलते हैं। कारण यह है कि प्राकृतिक भाषा तो वो है जो शिशु बोलता है। उसकी वाणी को, उसके प्रभाव को समझकर उसे व्याकरण द्वारा संस्कृत किया जाता है। जो लोग किसी कारणवश व्याकरणशास्त्र का ठीक-ठीक अनुसरण नहीं कर पाते, वो प्राकृत या अशुद्ध बोलते हैं। तो प्राकृतिक तो है मानव की स्वाभाविक अशुद्ध वाणी।

प्राकृत का तो अपना व्याकरण भी नहीं है, उसका सारा अस्तित्व संस्कृत पर टिका है। संस्कृत में तो आप तर्क कर सकते हैं कि यहाँ 'अ' के स्थान पर 'आ' क्यों है। परन्तु प्राकृत में यह स्वतन्त्रता नहीं मिलेगी। अन्य किसी भाषा में भी नहीं मिलेगी। यदि मिली, तो समझिए संस्कृत का कोई नियम है। क्योंकि संस्कृत का आधार ही उसका दिव्य और वैज्ञानिक व्याकरणशास्त्र है, जो कि सर्वमान्य विश्व का प्रथम व्याकरण है। व्याकरण का प्रथम व्याख्यान ब्रह्मदेव ने ही बृहस्पति को किया था।

प्रोटो इण्डो यूरोपीयन पितामह है?
अब आते हैं एक और भ्रम पर। जब अंग्रेज भारत आए और उन्होंने संस्कृत को देखा, तो वे मान नहीं पाए कि इन भूरी चमड़ी वालों ने संस्कृत जैसी भाषा पाई है। और जब उन्होंने पाया कि अंग्रेजी के शब्द ही मूल रूप में संस्कृत ग्रन्थों में हैं, तो वे इस बात को पचा नहीं पाए कि अंग्रेजी के पितामह संस्कृत ही हैं। तब उन्होंने अपने सत्य को झूठलाने के लिए कहा कि संस्कृत तो अंग्रेजी का ताऊ है। पितामह तो कोई प्रोटो इंडो-यूरोपियन था, जो कि मर गया, यहाँ तक कि न उसका शव मिला, न अस्थियाँ। अर्थात् समझिए उसका अस्तित्व पूर्णतः काल्पनिक है। अब आप पितामह को ताऊ बनाएंगे, तो प्रश्न तो उठेंगे। अंग्रेज आज तक कहते हैं कि संस्कृत का जन्म प्रोटो इंडो-यूरोपियन से हुआ, परन्तु वे इसका उत्तर कभी नहीं दे सकते कि यदि संस्कृत के शब्द किसी अन्य भाषा से आयात किए गए, तो संस्कृत के धातुओं से और संस्कृत की ही प्रक्रिया से शब्द सिद्धि कैसे की जा सकती है?

अन्ततः सत्य यही है कि कोई कितना भी बहलाए, संस्कृत सभी भाषाओं का आदि है, तब पर भी अनादि है।

मोहित डोकानिया ᕦ⁠(⁠ò⁠_⁠ó⁠ˇ⁠)⁠ᕤ #celebrating_Sanskrit

How is Sanskrit Divine?
The divinity in Sanskrit is its inherent quality, much like the bravery of a lion or the strength of an elephant. Whether you praise the gods in Sanskrit or condemn the wicked, in both cases, Sanskrit remains divine.

It derives its divinity from its extremely subtle and precise grammar, the harmony of its sounds, and its scientific methodologies.

Is Prakrit the Oldest Language?
Some people foolishly spread the notion that Prakrit means a raw, unrefined language derived from nature, which was then purified to create Sanskrit, an artificial language. Just as impure natural gold is refined for use in jewelry, they argue. Let’s take your example. However, gold is found all over the world, so why is Prakrit only found in India? On the contrary, words from Sanskrit can be found in languages worldwide. The reason is that a natural speech is what an infant speaks. Its speech, its impact, is understood and then made refined or Sanskrit through grammar. Those who, for some reason, cannot adhere to the rules of grammar speak Prakrit or a raw speech. Thus, the natural speech is actually the inherent impure speech of humans.

Prakrit doesn’t even have its own grammar; its entire existence hinges on Sanskrit. In Sanskrit, you can argue why there is अ instead of आ. However, you won’t find that freedom in Prakrit or any other language. If you do, it indicates it's a rule derived from Sanskrit. The foundation of Sanskrit is its divine and scientific grammar, which is universally acknowledged as the first grammar of the world. The first exposition of grammar was given by Brahma himself to Brihaspati.

Is Proto-Indo-European the Granddaddy?
Now, let’s address another misconception. When the Britishers came to India and encountered Sanskrit, they couldn’t believe that these brown-skinned people had such a language. And when they found that English words were present in their original form in Sanskrit texts, they couldn’t digest the fact that Sanskrit is the granddaddy of English. To deny this truth, they claimed that Sanskrit is merely an uncle to English. The granddaddy was some Proto-Indo-European who has been so long dead, that neither its corpse nor other remains to be found. Thus, understand that its existence is entirely fictional. If you make the grannddaddy an uncle, questions will be raised. The British still claim that Sanskrit originated from Proto-Indo-European, but they can never answer how words could be formed from Sanskrit roots and through Sanskrit word formation methods, if they were imported from another language.

Ultimately, the truth is that no matter how much one tries to deceive, Sanskrit is the cause of birth of all languages, and yet it is unborn.

Mohit Dokania ᕦ⁠(⁠ò⁠_⁠ó⁠ˇ⁠)⁠ᕤ 

Regards,

संस्कृत संवादः

linktr.ee/samvadah

[T.K Gopalan]

Is this some kind of propaganda? Do we need it?

Cordially,

T K Gopalan

***

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/21e8fb1e-4caf-485e-81a9-889498896cb5n%40googlegroups.com.

[Vishvas Vasuki (Vishvas)]

So many mistakes - but will just state as a matter of record plainly (following the style the author) - the notion that "Sanskrit is the cause of birth of all languages" is so stupid.  

How clueless can one be to think that sanskrit is the ancestor of swahili or arabic or jarawa? And that man came out of africa speaking sanskrit? Zero effort in data collection or applying logic.

[संस्कृत संवादः]

I would be happy to reply to someone who really has anything substantial and evidential to say rather than delusional notions or frustrated cries.

मंगलवार, 17 सितंबर 2024 को 9:28:26 pm UTC+5:30 बजे Vishvas Vasuki (Vishvas) ने लिखा:

[Vishal J]

>>Is this some kind >>of propaganda? >>Do we need it?

It's the obsession to talk about the language rather than become fluent in it and investigate into ways to make learning more accessible to the masses.

~Vishal

[Ecneics]

No. There is no mistake in this. This has been attested in the Bhavishya Purana. 

[T.K Gopalan]

Very well said, Vishal.

Regards,

T K Gopalan

***

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/CAF%3DFknW8MjhTxGocJjtKaEQXBs-emyxd1kc4%2B%3DuXf7yKnX3_Hg%40mail.gmail.com.

[T.K Gopalan]

‘The boot is on the other leg!’

TKG

***

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/1c47bea6-4c87-4e65-a13c-5c93c18e05e1n%40googlegroups.com.

[T.K Gopalan]

‘

‘This has been attested in the Bhavishya Purana. ‘

This is a bald statement. What has been attested in bhavisya purana?

T K G

***

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/bf8e155a-8de5-486a-b642-d337808c22bbn%40googlegroups.com.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Tue, 17 Sept 2024 at 22:32, संस्कृत संवादः <samskrit...@gmail.com> wrote:

I would be happy to reply to someone who really has anything substantial and evidential to say rather than delusional notions or frustrated cries.

Just to clarify, I am not in the least frustrated (having long come to terms with the quality distribution of hindu human capital), nor is this a cry.  

Rather, I am amused, and take particular delight in pointing out superficially pro-sanskrit nonsense (esp from this author).

This is antithetical to our evidence bound sages and ancestors - I presume they will be pleased as well.

While I fully support the expression of all sorts of crazy (but topical) beliefs, I don't expect any cogent response from most such.

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/samskrita/DKATdPE9-jM/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/1c47bea6-4c87-4e65-a13c-5c93c18e05e1n%40googlegroups.com.

--

--
Vishvas /विश्वासः

[Ecneics]

Do those 'evidence-bound' sages also involve Vendantadeshika who says भूगोल in Bhagwatam

means गोलकटाह without providing any evidence for his assertion?

[Ecneics]

That all non-sanskrit languages came after the curse of Saraswati upon the non-Aryans

due to which they forgot the Sanskrit language and made their own languages with Sanskrit

restricted to the Bharatakhanda.

[sudar...@gmail.com]

> Ultimately ... Sanskrit is the cause of birth of all languages...

अस्यास्ति उपपत्तिः युक्तिमती काचित् ?

इति सादरं,

- सुदर्शनः

ಸೋಮವಾರ, ಸೆಪ್ಟೆಂಬರ್ 16, 2024 ರಂದು 11:31:57 ಅಪರಾಹ್ನ UTC+5:30 ಗಂಟೆಗೆ, संस्कृत संवादः ಅವರು ಹೀಗೆ ಬರೆದಿದ್ದಾರೆ:

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

This reverse-science gentleman is triggered here by an offline conversation (highlights below) - 

On Tue, 17 Sept 2024 at 21:45, Ecneics <thinkmat...@gmail.com> wrote:

No. There is no mistake in this. This has been attested in the Bhavishya Purana. And have you forgotten the reply I gave you when you brought up this argument with me?

I don't recall whatever you replied (not that it matters),
but I do recall you made some nasty response to sudarshan for pointing out that your username is reverse of science :-P 

If you go by purANa-s, I suppose we should brace ourselves for wisdom about how earth is flat! (thankfully out of topic for this email stream)

I don't object to your placing your purANic opinion on the record, though.

On Tue, 17 Sept 2024 at 22:02, Ecneics <thinkmat...@gmail.com> wrote:

Where? In which Purana? Which Adhyaya? Which Shloka?

https://vishvasa.github.io/jyotiSham/astrophysics/history/heliocentrism_spherical_flat_earth/#bhagavata-s

On Wed, 18 Sept 2024 at 11:40, Ecneics <thinkmat...@gmail.com> wrote:

Do those 'evidence-bound' sages also involve Vendantadeshika who says भूगोल in Bhagwatam

means गोलकटाह without providing any evidence for his assertion?

vedAnta-deshika and his tradition clearly said - "अप्राप्ते हि शास्त्रम् अर्थवत्" - so they would not interpet bhAgavata or whatever in a manner contrary to other more direct pramANa-s - unlike assorted book-thumpers here. 
So, while I wouldn't refer to him as a "sage" (used in the sense of a RShi), certainly he would be among the people who upheld the flame of his sagely ancestors rather than piss on it. :-P

And your sectarian baiting won't work for that reason - he himself would reject even his own former opinion, if proved untenable by newer direct evidence.
You incidentally expose your dishonesty in multiple ways

- by confidently attributing some work to him, which was clearly stated to be (traditionally contested by some scholars since, uncharacteristically, there are no citations to it in his other works).

- by claiming that he says what bhUgola means - in bhAgavata _specifically_

This work, by the way, I suspect you - haven't even read or understood given your expectation of "provision of evidence" in a short summary of less than 10 shloka-s. Nuts.

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/1f14db3f-ecbe-41c6-93f6-aba6f96c4372n%40googlegroups.com.

[T.K Gopalan]

>That all non-sanskrit languages came after the curse of Saraswati upon the non-Aryans

due to which they forgot the Sanskrit language and made their own languages with Sanskrit

restricted to the Bharatakhanda.

Doesn’t in the least sound like scientific reasoning. Curse of Saraswati indeed! On the ‘non- Aryans’ to boot!

T K Gopalan

***

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/7f7a66d4-e3e6-4386-89bf-35d7dff03db5n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ecneics]

भविष्यपुराणे इयं उपपत्तिर् उद्धृता। असंस्कृतभाषाणां उत्पत्तिः सरस्वत्या: शापेन अभवद् एतस्मात् संस्कृतभाषां भारतखण्डे एव चकारयामास। कया भौतिकयुक्त्या इयं समभवद् एष शोधस्य विचारः। 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/75e4396f-7c43-4912-b71e-ca5f74601494n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ecneics]

Well it then just means that you have failed to demonstrate your assertion that the Puranas contain mentions of a flat-earth which was the original contention. All you are doing now is making 'word-jalebis' online by quoting commentaries of people and putting them out as a broader 'traditional' consensus.

[Ecneics]

I find it highly amusing that people who talk the most about science have no scientific credentials by themselves. 

[T.K Gopalan]

One doesn’t have to be a scientist to detect lack of scientific reasoning!

***

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/72c4d9df-954e-4d80-a255-ecc939a8bda2n%40googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

My talk with the title " Speech Divine, Not because it is mine" 

https://youtu.be/N1Fdha2JFco

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/CACzoTWCC6YZUwFrW6u%2BJCG6R%2BNjSycTXZ6cyxyjxjgVJdADFKQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Dean, 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

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education, 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

 

[T.K Gopalan]

Thank you, Sri Nagaraj Paturi, for the insightful talk.

Regards,

T K Gopalan

***

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/CAJGj9eaCYCa5d5%3DFqD1BCUAO-vNFsP8sh_1UrC2UcL8Lt5nvzw%40mail.gmail.com.

[संस्कृत संवादः]

Some interesting arabic words :

वारिज » بَارِجَة  (bārija) [barge]

क्रमेल » جَمَلَ  (jamala) [Camel]

शाल » شَل (šal) [sal tree]

हरिद्रा » هُرُد (hurud) [turmeric]

कर्पास » كُرْسُف (kursuf) [cotton]

मंगलवार, 17 सितंबर 2024 को 9:28:26 pm UTC+5:30 बजे Vishvas Vasuki (Vishvas) ने लिखा:

So many mistakes - but will just state as a matter of record plainly (following the style the author) - the notion that "Sanskrit is the cause of birth of all languages" is so stupid.  

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Wed, 18 Sept 2024 at 16:03, Ecneics <thinkmat...@gmail.com> wrote:

Well it then just means that you have failed to demonstrate your assertion that the Puranas contain mentions of a flat-earth which was the original contention. All you are doing now is making 'word-jalebis' online by quoting commentaries of people and putting them out as a broader 'traditional' consensus.

No inverse science gent - it means (as I demonstrated) that you can't even read and understand simple English properly (they're all jalebi to you) - or if you can - present it honestly.   

I never set out to "demonstrate" my assertion about purANic cosmological model - especially to those such as you - 

I just stated it to indicate the idiocy of book-thumping (not that it is the only one). 

Beyond that, I just gave you pointers in response to your query-  

if you can read sanskrit and make your connections well and good -  

otherwise, you're welcome to live in your la-la land. 

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/f3aad2c7-ed8d-40de-a918-bf48da31a770n%40googlegroups.com.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Wed, 18 Sept 2024 at 17:51, संस्कृत संवादः <samskrit...@gmail.com> wrote:

Some interesting arabic words :

वारिज » بَارِجَة  (bārija) [barge]

क्रमेल » جَمَلَ  (jamala) [Camel]

शाल » شَل (šal) [sal tree]

हरिद्रा » هُرُد (hurud) [turmeric]

कर्पास » كُرْسُف (kursuf) [cotton]

This is actually better than the comedy shrI Inverse Science sent me yesterday - 

 

This is the beginning of data collection - how many words come from sanskrit in Arabic, how many don't? How many of each are common words?

Once such data is collected, one can apply logic - as done by the Europeans (who were mischaracterized by the OP as being motivated more by racism than simple honest curiosity).

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/samskrita/DKATdPE9-jM/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/0a685775-3a67-45c2-a178-571ed232cf65n%40googlegroups.com.

[संस्कृत संवादः]

> Europeans (who were mischaracterized by the OP as being motivated more by racism

Mentally colonised slaves defending superiority complex of their former masters.

बुधवार, 18 सितंबर 2024 को 6:51:25 pm UTC+5:30 बजे विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) ने लिखा:

[Ecneics]

You seem to be forgetting that it was not about reading english properly but reading sanskrit properly which you clearly cannot is the reason why you think that Puranas contain mentions of flat-earth. And 'pointers' are not accepted as a 'shabda-pramana' in the Hindu epistemology, it is the shlokas/mantras quoted with their precise location in the Puranas that carry the weight as pramana. If you are unable provide the precise verses to demonstrate your claims then you have no right to engage in any discourse in this regard.

[Ecneics]

I think what is comical here is a non-academic who has zero contributions to research in sanskrit and not well-read in the sanskrit vyakarana to think of himself being capable of having a final say in the matter of linguistic relations between sanskrit and non-sanskrit languages.

[Sivakumar Ogirala]

श्री नागराज महोदय, 

नमस्ते |

भवत: भाषणं प्रेरणात्मकमस्ति ॥ 

धन्यवाद:

ओगिराल शिवकुमार:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/CAJGj9eaCYCa5d5%3DFqD1BCUAO-vNFsP8sh_1UrC2UcL8Lt5nvzw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Raja Srinivasan]

Dear Nagaraj-swamin

I found your talk thought provoking and also elegant. In 15 minutes you presented some ideas that would take a lot longer to discuss and learn. I wish you had more time. Can you record a longer talk and post on YouTube?

Regards

Raja Srinivasan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/CAJGj9eaCYCa5d5%3DFqD1BCUAO-vNFsP8sh_1UrC2UcL8Lt5nvzw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ecneics]

I am sure this is how non-academics cope with facts they do not understand.

[Ecneics]

Well, I think I have to correct you here in your video. Saraswati is indirectly responsible for the creation of non-sanskrit languages according to Bhavishya Purana like I have mentioned before.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/CAJGj9eaCYCa5d5%3DFqD1BCUAO-vNFsP8sh_1UrC2UcL8Lt5nvzw%40mail.gmail.com.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Wed, 18 Sept 2024 at 23:05, Ecneics <thinkmat...@gmail.com> wrote:

You seem to be forgetting that it was not about reading english properly but reading sanskrit properly which you clearly cannot is the reason why you think that Puranas contain mentions of flat-earth. And 'pointers' are not accepted as a 'shabda-pramana' in the Hindu epistemology, it is the shlokas/mantras quoted with their precise location in the Puranas that carry the weight as pramana.

Did I, at any point in time, promise to spoon feed you "pramANa"-s or engage in any sort of vAda with you regarding "flat earth in purANa-s"?

Rather, you are obsessively dragging in flat-earth cosmology (while showing incompetence, dishonesty and sectarian baiting  along the way)  

and expecting me to play your game. 

No I am not interested in that, nor will I cooperate with your effort to turn a thread on sanskrit being mother on all languages into a purANic cosmology thread. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/54dd217b-96d8-4749-a983-d21f8249a5a4n%40googlegroups.com.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Wed, 18 Sept 2024 at 22:28, संस्कृत संवादः <samskrit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Europeans (who were mischaracterized by the OP as being motivated more by racism

Mentally colonised slaves defending superiority complex of their former masters.

If I may return the psycho-analytical favor-

It is a person who is so insecure about his own capability and that of his civilizational elite 

who shows rabid aversion to any acknowledgement of genuine accomplishments and prowess of others.  

While his fear of his own inadequacies is valid, his insecurity about his civilizational elite is a matter of abysmal learning (which ties into the former inadequacy).

In any case, IE monophyly was recognized and studied by Europeans - no Hindu is known to have done that.
Such careful work is, for the greater part, a product of an intellect which delights in honest open curiosity - not the hatred on insecure display here.

Interested others should read up on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jones_(philologist) . He learned directly from Hindu paNDit-s, and was in awe of what he learned. 

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/fc402e2b-e294-4109-a16c-84cbf88fad32n%40googlegroups.com.

[संस्कृत संवादः]

Let me translate this for everyone :

My former masters were honest and genuinely curious. They learnt directly from my ancestors who were incapable and uninterested in any worthwhile learning. Any allegations of superiority complex to my masters are false and hatred to them by unthankful indians who were blessed by what a gentlemen my masters were. Conclusively, A fellow indian must be insulted because he has said my masters were driven by racial fanatacism.

Glory to Lord Macaulay! The Sun never sets for the British Empire!!!

गुरुवार, 19 सितंबर 2024 को 7:22:03 am UTC+5:30 बजे विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) ने लिखा:

[Mahesh Chandra]

BTW, just curious, which mantra/shloka mentions the Puranas to be pramana. Always heard that Vedas are pramana but never heard about Puranas being pramana.

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/CAFY6qgECi5PWnQXYyzAk7hbvgsrs6Z35SEY50mZW_KepW2hyEw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ecneics]

Look at this nonsense. You are the one who started pointing out flat-earth cosmology of the Puranas when 

I pointed out evidence of sanskrit-centric linguistics mentioned in the Bhavishya Purana. You yourself said that 

if you wish to contend with the facts from the Puranas you have to contend with flat-earth cosmology as well. 

I merely asked you to show proof of your ridiculous statement which you clearly weren't able to supply.

You want to measure our respective competence? I have a journal publication in pure Sanskrit. Do you? And I

suspect that you are not even capable of reading and understanding that even if I spoon-fed the contents of it to you.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

While we have shrI Inverse Science trying to change the topic to "give me paurANika bhUgola for Dummies",  

we now have Always Insecure Sanskrit Poorist who can't distinguish Jones from Macaulay, 

who wants to hide his "sanskrit mother of all" nonsense behind incessant barks about "British slave". :-(

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/189916a2-b58a-481a-844b-2c3428b36f13n%40googlegroups.com.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Thu, 19 Sept 2024 at 09:58, Ecneics <thinkmat...@gmail.com> wrote:

You want to measure our respective competence?

No, because I am nothing like you -

- I don't want to let you change the topic to "measure respective competence" either.
- I find Mr reverse-science ridiculous since he uses anonymous nameless email ID and makes "but you're not even a scientist so you are unqualified to talk about science" to braver people.  

 

I have a journal publication in pure Sanskrit. Do you?

Something of that sort, but I won't encourage anonymous cowards by providing details.
"Pure sanskrit" you say - I'll come to that below.

 

And I

suspect that you are not even capable of reading and understanding that even if I spoon-fed the contents of it to you.

अरे राम - निर्दोषं संस्कृतं लेखितुं यो न वेत्ति, प्रतिवाक्यम् इव दुष्टं यस्य भवति ("चकारयामास", "असंस्कृतभाषाणां उत्पत्तिः" ), यस्य च प्रतिवादिनि ज्ञानं शून्यकल्पम्, तस्येदृश आटोपः :-P

अथवा साध्विदं रचितं मया 

स्वास्त्थ्योत्कर्ष-द्विषो **नौमि**  
**यद्-द्वेषोत्तेजिता** मम ।  
देव-दिव्य-बुधोत्सेध-  
रक्षा-योग-स्पृहादयः॥

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/a230422c-e63b-4a51-a55e-47989f8618f4n%40googlegroups.com.

[संस्कृत संवादः]

> we now have Always Insecure Sanskrit Poorist who can't distinguish Jones from Macaulay, 

who wants to hide his "sanskrit mother of all" nonsense behind incessant barks about "British slave". :-(

Clearly. One who's BARKS loyally for protecting his masters with no selfishness whatsoever are indeed you. Let me tell you that not only your masters were racial and religious fanatics but worst of the creatures to dwell on this planet as evident by numerous famines, cruelty and inhumanity specially to black people. Whatever their study and research was, all for 'civilising' and converting your ancestors. They were quite successful as evident by your very birth. Once holding you in high esteem, I now, fortunately, find myself devoid of any regard for you.

Let me be clear that the concept of a full-fledged language is unattainable for humanity without emulating Sanskrit or its descendants. Proto-Indo-European is merely a hypothetical construct designed to safeguard European identity and spirit. Prakrit was like smoke rising from the eternal flame of Sanskrit, which has now been dispersed.

गुरुवार, 19 सितंबर 2024 को 11:21:27 am UTC+5:30 बजे विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) ने लिखा:

[Ecneics]

चकारयामास -  च कारयामास 

सन्धिज्ञानं शून्यतां गतं यस्य न तु स्वकृतछन्दसा स्ववाक्साधुत्वं सः प्रदर्शयितुं अर्हति | असंस्कृतभाषाणां उत्पत्तिः इति किं पाणिनीयसूत्रं उल्लङ्घते एतद् विना वाग्दोषसम्बोधनं  
तव व्याकरणस्य अल्पज्ञानं परिलक्ष्यते | एतेन अल्पज्ञानेन एव न त्वं हीनात्मादर्पनिमित्तेन पाश्चात्यमोहान्वितः संस्कृतस्य अखिलभाषामातृत्वं द्रष्टुं अर्हसि | 

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Thu, 19 Sept 2024 at 16:54, Ecneics <thinkmat...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

असंस्कृतभाषाणां उत्पत्तिः इति किं पाणिनीयसूत्रं उल्लङ्घते एतद् विना वाग्दोषसम्बोधनं  
तव व्याकरणस्य अल्पज्ञानं परिलक्ष्यते |

ओ - अत्रास्ति खलु "शुद्धसंस्कृत"प्रबन्धप्रकाशकस्य ज्ञानम् - शुश्रूषामहे तर्हि कथम् उपरि प्रथमपदान्ते ऽनुस्वार आगतः?

"पाणिनीयसूत्रम्" इत्यत्र? एवम् अन्यत्राधः?
ततो लङ्घनकर्मसूचकस्य तिङन्तस्य लँकारेण सूचितः कर्ता कः, विवक्षितश्च कः? 

तथा "सन्धिज्ञानं शून्यतां गतं यस्य" +इत्यादि भणतो ऽयम् महाशयः "शुद्धसंस्कृत"प्रबन्धप्रकाशको निगदतु  

स्ववाक्ये विरामेऽविवक्षितेऽपि सन्धिर्न दृश्यते?

एवं स्वशुद्धिकथनेन हासस्योत्पादनं न पर्याप्तम् इति दोषज्ञापकस्योपर्येवोत्पतन् पुनर्हासयति।  

भवतु नाम संस्कृतसर्वभाषामातृत्वविषयम् अपहाय व्याकरणम् प्रत्याकर्षत्ययम् अव्यपदेश्यसाहसः :-) -  

तथापि संस्कृतसन्देशधारेति सकृत् प्रत्युक्तम्। 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/8ec81ada-c594-4f3b-b042-fc947582aa82n%40googlegroups.com.

--

--
Vishvas /विश्वासः

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/8ec81ada-c594-4f3b-b042-fc947582aa82n%40googlegroups.com.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Thu, 19 Sept 2024 at 15:58, संस्कृत संवादः <samskrit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> we now have Always Insecure Sanskrit Poorist who can't distinguish Jones from Macaulay, 

who wants to hide his "sanskrit mother of all" nonsense behind incessant barks about "British slave". :-(

Clearly. One who's BARKS loyally for protecting his masters with no selfishness whatsoever are indeed you. Let me tell you that not only your masters were racial and religious fanatics but worst of the creatures to dwell on this planet as evident by numerous famines, cruelty and inhumanity specially to black people. Whatever their study and research was, all for 'civilising' and converting your ancestors. They were quite successful as evident by your very birth.

So amusing (earlier I would have found it tiresome).

Looking past your reference to "my masters" and "converted ancestors" (all this spiteful obsession makes me wonder about your ancestors and if they were into polishing boots of the Brits), and getting to your intended meaning -

You're revealing yourself to be the racist bigot, who can't distinguish scholarship from genocide amongst individuals of a race.

 

Once holding you in high esteem, I now, fortunately, find myself devoid of any regard for you.

Thank you - that's the greatest compliment I could expect from you :-P 

I must credit you for being better than Mr Reverse-science - at least you reveal your name once in a while (if indeed it is yours), even as you hide everything else.

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/45f194bf-47ae-4b7f-a5c9-36ca4bc0ed41n%40googlegroups.com.

[संस्कृत संवादः]

Only to clarify, unlike you I would never abuse your ancestors. Your racist overlords were successful in not conversion but 'civilising' a large chunk of population, that is mentally colonising. That's evident by your birth and your pitrus might not be much impressed by you, I believe. Furthermore, You aren't worthy of any reply on this by me.  

गुरुवार, 19 सितंबर 2024 को 5:54:24 pm UTC+5:30 बजे विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) ने लिखा:

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

On Thu, 19 Sept 2024 at 19:09, संस्कृत संवादः <samskrit...@gmail.com> wrote:

Only to clarify, unlike you I would never abuse your ancestors. Your racist overlords were successful in not conversion but 'civilising' a large chunk of population, that is mentally colonising. That's evident by your birth and your pitrus might not be much impressed by you, I believe. Furthermore, You aren't worthy of any reply on this by me.  

Oh poor fellow - doesn't consider me worthy of reply, but is forced to "clarify" addressing me due to his own clumsiness ("'civilising' and converting your ancestors") and guilt about being caught.

Anyway, glad that shrI Mohit Dokania (डोकनिया, not दोकनिया IIRC) dropped the "sanskrit mother of all languages" claim in your last bloviation - 

but continually amused by his replacing it with another nonsensical claim - "the concept of a full-fledged language is unattainable for humanity without emulating Sanskrit or its descendants" .

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/samskrita/12a0f8da-67c4-4882-888b-485005d9d441n%40googlegroups.com.