<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Feb 19 2009, 11:31 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Feb 19 2009, 11:31 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->2. West holds that Gita is younger than MBh and certainly that any references to Krishna as Bhagavan is younger than the relevant parts of MBh which are used to prove that he was not so originally. They've long made it a focal point that the Gita was one of the later added sections to the MBh. (This automatically disallows any Hindu's references to the Gita as argument that "Krishna is God since he declares himself paramaatman in the BG", since this text is supposed to have come later than MBh's origins where Krishna was 'but man'.)
Again, an example from western scholarship follows.[right][snapback]94719[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->"This automatically disallows" is not me at all, I am referring to the drive of western scholarship: the *christowest* is what disallows Hindus referring to the Gita for support.
That was the point: Hindus' past and that of so many other Natural Traditional cultures are entirely at the mercy of christianism's history. Our ideas, our timeframes, everything has to fit into their view and their christian history, their convenience. *They* are the ones narrating history - not just their own any more, but <i>world</i> history - and it is they who determine that "probably" (used by Doniger for Encarta, and in Columbia encyclopaedia) and "perhaps" (used in Britannica Encyclopaedia) become "certainly".
They don't care that the texts you mentioned predate Bauddha Dharma or anything else. This is not data they are interested in or want pursued. Just like Ishwa's findings/discussion on Yavanas will be left to die the 'natural' death that proceeds from carefully-maintained silence (being ignored).
They have a reason for dating Gita after jeebus: so they can say non-existent jeebus' blatherings resulted in the Gita in India. Just as they have reasons for fitting every bit of Hindu literature in a small timeframe.
Here's an example of their modern history-writing (what passes for 'facts') - this is the christoarchive:
http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/02/197...-wikipedia.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>1975 Emergency in Wikipedia</b>
Heh, check out the Wikipedia entry on the 1975 Emergency. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_%28India%29)
It gives a total whitewash to Madame and her coterie of fellow unfortunate victims. People weren't castrated, you see -- they were given vasectomies. (That's like the joke, "It's not rape -- it's surprise sex")
Madame was the poor victim in all this, it seems. She was framed for election-rigging by the evil monsters on the Supreme Court. This is like "being fired for a traffic ticket," we're told. (Reminds me of Musharraf's defense "I had to arrest the Prime Minister -- he was about to launch a coup against me!")
Posted by san at 2/18/2009 07:50:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: pseudo-history, Psychology<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, an example from western scholarship follows.[right][snapback]94719[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->"This automatically disallows" is not me at all, I am referring to the drive of western scholarship: the *christowest* is what disallows Hindus referring to the Gita for support.
That was the point: Hindus' past and that of so many other Natural Traditional cultures are entirely at the mercy of christianism's history. Our ideas, our timeframes, everything has to fit into their view and their christian history, their convenience. *They* are the ones narrating history - not just their own any more, but <i>world</i> history - and it is they who determine that "probably" (used by Doniger for Encarta, and in Columbia encyclopaedia) and "perhaps" (used in Britannica Encyclopaedia) become "certainly".
They don't care that the texts you mentioned predate Bauddha Dharma or anything else. This is not data they are interested in or want pursued. Just like Ishwa's findings/discussion on Yavanas will be left to die the 'natural' death that proceeds from carefully-maintained silence (being ignored).
They have a reason for dating Gita after jeebus: so they can say non-existent jeebus' blatherings resulted in the Gita in India. Just as they have reasons for fitting every bit of Hindu literature in a small timeframe.
Here's an example of their modern history-writing (what passes for 'facts') - this is the christoarchive:
http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/02/197...-wikipedia.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>1975 Emergency in Wikipedia</b>
Heh, check out the Wikipedia entry on the 1975 Emergency. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_%28India%29)
It gives a total whitewash to Madame and her coterie of fellow unfortunate victims. People weren't castrated, you see -- they were given vasectomies. (That's like the joke, "It's not rape -- it's surprise sex")
Madame was the poor victim in all this, it seems. She was framed for election-rigging by the evil monsters on the Supreme Court. This is like "being fired for a traffic ticket," we're told. (Reminds me of Musharraf's defense "I had to arrest the Prime Minister -- he was about to launch a coup against me!")
Posted by san at 2/18/2009 07:50:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: pseudo-history, Psychology<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->