While opening my old files, I came across the article written by me 75
pages long, after reading the book THE ARGUMENTATIVE INDIAN, a decade back.
Few pages extracted here. Those who have read that book may understand.
Even otherwise, what we are is in these lines, which our own people deem
it. Gregorian blast alone is harder than the krutha yuga mellifluous sound.
If one likes well:
View of K R on Argumentative Indian of Amartya Sen book
K R Justifying the title ARGUMENTATIVE as an angle of approach. Its
weak. Whether the definition of argumentative would fit in as same as
“DEBATE, DISCUSSION, DELIBERATIONS, EXPRESSION OF VIEWS, TALKATIVE, LOGICAL
AND SO MANY OTHER WORDS AND EQUIVALENT? Generally, any writing will have
the conversation where the views are thro expressions of emotions or
discussions to drive-in appointments. Arguments are of 2 types, effective
or ineffective, and a job of a lawyer, to win the case by twisting the
points of the opponent, NOT FINDING AND NOT BASED ON TRUTH. If Sen thinks
Indians are only stuff less persons, it's biased.
Whether HETERODOXY deviating from orthodoxy is only a differing
point of view which is freedom or anti-theism? If there are heterodoxy, can
it be termed as only relating to India or thro out the world. And every
differing view is an orthodoxy within the groove and for that why only
argumentative Indian? As a matter of fact, one devolved out of the other
only. So old cannot become bad to substitute the new. New might become one
day old also.
ANCIENT INDIA was remembered by Indians and foreigners and
where the HINDUTVA movement is dragged in? Political ambit? Hindutva is a
coined phrase, reflecting the HINDU TATVA. And a large nation of >
10000-year-old civilised country, can never become a secular nation, just
because invaders started living here. Migration can cause problems and to
merge, migrators shall think and march on. BIRDS PERCHING ON THE TREE,
CANNOT MAKE THE ROOT OF THAT TREE A SECONDARY OBJECT, GIVING THE CREDIT TO
THE NEW RESIDENCY.
K r A confusion in the presentation.? Why would one translate
other books in another language? When you consider that as a literature or
verses only, it can be translated; bible is translated in so many
languages; Tirukkural is done many languages; Russian novels were
translated in Indian languages. So On. Does it show love of culture? It’s
a commercial activity in the garb of making people know, the language of
another nation. Unless there is stuff, simple act of translation will not
have any attention. ALBERUNI, CHINESE TRAVELLERS and many translated,
INDIAN literature of knowledge, to teach their country.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
K R: Rig vedam, Bhagavat Gita, Brahadaranyaka Upanishad, Yagna
valkya-Gargi, Yagna valkya-Maitreyi, Kautilya Artha sastra, Astronomy of
India is from Greek and Rome, Rabindranath Tagore Gitanjali, Rajaram Mohan
Roy on death and inter-lacing-scepticism, argument, doubts, earth and sun
wrong depictions of Vedic notations as corrected by Arya Batta, and many
diversions only made India unscientific etc etc. -are the words of or
quote of Amartya Sen, to tarnish the ancient cult of India, in the
foot-steps of the west authors. He did not study in depth either the
Sanskrit or other languages nor did he read in clear, no-uncertain terms,
but commented in the brass-level.
PRIMA-FACIE ITS NOT UNDERSTOOD AS TO WHAT IS BEING CULLED OUT AND WHAT IS
BEING EXPRESSED ON INDIAN CULTURE, RELIGION AND BJP POLITICS? FORCED
INTERPRETATIONS OF SCRIPTURES AND POEMS, may be one’s opinion but not a
healthy readable script.
LET’S SEE WHAT THEY REALLY MEAN, OTHER THAN STATED IN FUN BY Mr SEN:
· 4 Rig Veda 10.129 Meaning
The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. The Nasadiya
Sukta (after the incipit ná ásat, or "not the non-existent"), also known as
the Hymn of Creation, is the 129th hymn of the 10th mandala of the
*Rigveda* (10:129).
It is concerned with cosmology and the origin of the universe.
Astronomer Carl Sagan <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan> quoted it
in discussing India's "tradition of sceptical questioning and *unselfconscious
humility before the great cosmic mysteries.*
* it’s not superfluous sceptical as it appears; but the theory of
advancing that “NOTHING CAN EMANATE FROM NOTHING-SAT CANNOT ARISE FROM
ASAT; HAD THERE BEEN A POSITIVE SAT OR BRAHMAM, THERE OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN
THE MATTER TOO ALONG WITH AND SO THERE WAS NEVER EVER A CREATION AT ALL,
BUT EXISTENCE ALL THE WAY; THE SILLY QUESTION OF THE WEST AND AMARTYA SEN
IS ANSWERED WITH THE REVERENCE; HUMAN ELEMENTS CANNOT RESEARCH OR THE
ABILITY TO RESEARCH THE ORIGIN AT ALL IS THE WORDS OF RIG VEDAM.*
not the non-existent existed, nor did the existent exist then" (*ná ásat
āsīt ná u **sát <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sat_(Sanskrit)>** āsīt
tadânīm*), paralleled in verse 2 by "then not death existed, nor the
immortal" (*ná mṛtyúḥ āsīt amŕtam ná tárhi*). But already in verse 2
mention is made that there was "breathing without breath, of its own
nature, that one" *ânīt avātám svadháyā tát **ékam
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekam>*). In verse 3, being unfolds, "from
heat (tapas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapas_(Sanskrit)>) was born that
one" (*tápasaḥ tát mahinâ ajāyata ékam*). Verse 4 mentions desire (kāma
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C4%81ma>) as the primal seed, and the
first poet-seers (kavayas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rishi>) who "found
the bond of being within non-being with their heart's thought".
It means that There was NO NOTHINGNESS IN EXISTENCE; NOR THE KNOWN
EXISTENCE THE MATTER, YOU ARE QUESTIONING ABOUT ALSO EXISTED. In Upanishad
it is explained as HE WAS ALL ALONE. HE WAS IN MEDITATION. All matter
existed in HIM the PURUSHA. Hence only Kapilar named it later as PURUSHA
and PRAKRITHI where the purusha was UNKNOWN and the PRAKRITHI is MAYA. It
appears to be a scepticism as its in question and answer form.
ITS NOT AN ARGUEMENT OF AN INDIAN. Socrates Hitler and Lenin did all these
>Why? Shakespeare did this in Antonio speech in Julius Ceaser. It’s not an
argument or expression of doubts. Its certainty in no uncertain terms. ITS
SCIENTIFIC ALSO HEAT ONLY EXPOSES out of the darkness which is science or
LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS. KR IRS now 23423
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqcOENLPFwPgAcHmfDC3nWuAAHijiLDt4d1ZJ-Vj1pKHw%40mail.gmail.com.
