On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:22:02PM +0530, Sarbajit Roy wrote: > Dear Russel > > This may be somewhat Odd-Topic for this list. (apologies) > > Thanks for mentioning your book, I've located the PDF. > > Chapter 2 starts with Gospel John 1:1 > > "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the > Word was God." > > I wonder if this would compare with a verse from the "Ishavasya > Upanishad" (its one of the deprecated Vedas) "purnamadah purnamidam > ... " which is a conventional entry point to the study of Vedas... and > not mentioned in your book at ll. > > http://revolutionwithin.me/2009/11/03/the-whole-remains-whole-oneness-and-nothingness/ > > www.arshavidyacenter.org/verse/purna.pdf > > <snip> > "Om pUrNamadah pUrNamidaM pUrNAt pUrNamudacyate > PUrNasya pUrNamAdAya pUrNamEvAvashiSyate > > This is an innocuous looking verse: one noun, two pronouns, three > verbs and a particle for emphasis. Yet, someone once said: "Let all > the UpaniSads disappear from the face of the earth - I don't mind so > long as this one verse remains." > > Can one small verse be so profound? "Of course not. Utter > nonsense!" would have been the response of a certain Englishman, who > did not find the verse sensible at all, let alone profound. This > Englishman, who was something of a scholar, asked a pundit to teach > him the UpaniSads. The pundit, agreeing, began the course of study > with ISAvAsyOpaniSad, the text traditionally studied first by a new > student. The text begins with the SantipaTa (prayer verse): "Om > pUrNamadah pUrNamidaM ." The pundit carefully translated the opening > verse into English: > > That is whole; this is whole; > >From that whole this whole came; > >From that whole, this whole removed, > What remains is whole. > > The Englishman stopped his study at that point and did not go > further! He said that the UpaniSads are the "prattlings of an > infantile mind." > > Which point of view is correct? Is this verse something which is > wondrous and profound or is it just "infantile prattlings"?" > >
John 1:1 is rather flowery and redundant text, but that could be to emphasise what is being said. It kind of makes sense, at least in comparison with what I discuss on that chapter. As I'm prone to say, the Bible is the most influential work of fiction in English literature, although Shakespeare must be close. It is a good source of quotable quotes. As for the Upanishads, the English translation doesn't immediately make sense to me. That could be because I don't have the requisite cultural background, or it could be that the translation is far from perfect. I wouldn't just assume that they are "infantile prattlings". Cheers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
