>read many materials forwarded in this same group on prevaling caste system
in IIT and major institution. Hence my difference.

I understand. I was considering the meaning of the slokam only.

>I didn't find the use of imagery and sloka as innocent way of tribute to
the learning culture. .

Do we have proof ?


2009/2/27 damodar prasad <[email protected]>

> I think we are dealing this invocation of this sloka in a spcecific conetxt
> of a premier institution like IIT. This is relates to knowledge and
> learning. Sambooka and Ekalvaya incidents are also related to the quest for
> knowledge. and I know and have read many materials forwarded in this same
> group on prevaling caste system in IIT and major institution. It is in this
> context, I read the video. I didn't find the use of imagery and sloka as
> innocent way of tribute to the learning culture. .
> My second mail has also reference to the ideas which resonates the
> Syndicated Hinduism viiew. It is present everywhere.
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 5:22 PM, bobinson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >*Sambhookan and Ekalavyan were treated differently
>>
>>
>> *
>> But, politics was involved there too. Politics and cast system is  very
>> much involved there. And the power politics and caste system was always
>> related in this part of the world.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2009/2/27 Afthab Ellath <[email protected]>
>>
>>  * *Sambhookan and Ekalavyan were treated differently*
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Afthab Ellath
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Afthab Ellath <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> >> And I don't think the scriptures are in any way connected to the
>>>> modern day Hinduism developed for attracting masses to polling booth....
>>>>
>>>> >> Quest of knowledge can be useful for all. (As per one of our old
>>>> sayings the-hot-milk-cat one knowledge is even useful for animals)
>>>>
>>>> While quest of knowledge is useful for all, Sambhookan and Ekalavyan
>>>> were not treated differently, not for attracting masses to polling booth,
>>>> but by the ontological hierarchy of the very tradition itself in treating
>>>> this quest, that is now proposed as the "common wealth"
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Afthab Ellath
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:15 PM, bobinson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am concerned only about the modern and possibily the original
>>>>> interpretation only. I prefer to interpret "He" as knowledge.
>>>>>
>>>>> And I don't think the scriptures are in any way connected to the modern
>>>>> day Hinduism developed for attracting masses to polling booth.
>>>>>
>>>>> >How is that Katho Upansihad sloka becomes a "greater common property"
>>>>> of all?
>>>>>
>>>>> Quest of knowledge can be useful for all. (As per one of our old
>>>>> sayings the-hot-milk-cat one knowledge is even useful for animals)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >secondly, I think many has pointed out here the combination of taliban
>>>>> with saffron. "saffron clad talbans" soemhow denotes saffron as some what
>>>>> "innocent". (am refering to saffron as metonym). Even in a precisley
>>>>> "agraharic" issue, why should we bring in Taliban without any reason? The
>>>>> very reference to "saffron" is enough to make the point.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with you. But I don't think its in anyway make them innocent.
>>>>> Saffron started selectively abusing women like Taliban. Until last 
>>>>> election
>>>>> this anti-female side was not very prominent like this election season. 
>>>>> That
>>>>> was why I used the term "saffron clad taliban". And I think it sounds good
>>>>> as saffron and taliban considers each other as acid and base and like acid
>>>>> and base both are dangerous for human race. (As in if you drink acid and
>>>>> base instead of water or add to water to change pH etc)
>>>>>
>>>>> As for your second mail I don't me or anyone "geninely" here in this
>>>>> group will need an explanation but as you said its good for the kind of
>>>>> people you intended it for. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2009/2/27 damodar prasad <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> May I also add that: some one out there, perhaps not active here, would
>>>>>> definitely think that if two personas with xian and muslim sounding name 
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> no particular issue with this "sloka" recital, why then a caste-hindu,
>>>>>> damodar prasad raise such  issues.
>>>>>> Why should d,prasad wants to "maintain" the difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the -no-doubt- resolution- point of tradition as a greater
>>>>>> common wealth of all  has to be challenged? Why modern-nation leaves out
>>>>>> "other" traditons while narrwoing down it to a selected past? ? Is there 
>>>>>> an
>>>>>> ideoloy in this fabricated consent over tradition? Does this consent 
>>>>>> refers
>>>>>> to "one-nation" obedient theory? For me these are important questions. 
>>>>>> Hence
>>>>>> the reason why I raised those queries...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:40 PM, damodar prasad <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear Ashik and bobinson,
>>>>>>> I may have a few doubts.  How is that Katho Upansihad sloka becomes a
>>>>>>> "greater common property" of all?
>>>>>>> The paraphrase of this sloka is this:
>>>>>>> *May He protect both of us. May He nourish both of us. May we both
>>>>>>> acquire the capacity
>>>>>>> (to study and understand the scriptures). May our study be brilliant.
>>>>>>> May we not argue
>>>>>>> with each other. Om peace, peac*e, *peace.*
>>>>>>> Yes, one can interpret in it modern context. But how does it become
>>>>>>> an invocation song of modern technology institution?How can   religious 
>>>>>>> (
>>>>>>> and bramhnical) scriptural sloka be integtrated to this endevour of
>>>>>>> learning?
>>>>>>> Interestingly, one "*inappropriate"* image in the signatue part is
>>>>>>> the "rose". "lotus" image would've integarted well with the lyric, bg 
>>>>>>> bit
>>>>>>> and sloka.
>>>>>>> secondly, I think many has pointed out here the combination of
>>>>>>> taliban with saffron. "saffron clad talbans" soemhow denotes saffron as 
>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>> what "innocent". (am refering to saffron as metonym). Even in a 
>>>>>>> precisley
>>>>>>> "agraharic" issue, why should we bring in Taliban without any reason? 
>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>> very reference to "saffron" is enough to make the point.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:08 PM, ashik salahudeen <[email protected]
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are correct bobinson.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> >>
>>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to