04-12-2004, 12:08 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Kaushal+Apr 11 2004, 09:44 PM-->QUOTE(Kaushal @ Apr 11 2004, 09:44 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> HH, I hope I have not gven the impression that I consider MM to be a dolt. he was a highly intelligent individual with a very impressive and handsome face <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not at all. "Handsome face" : never gave much thought to his looks <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Given that a forumite privately asked if I was lauding MM, I have to clarify that such was not my intention. The point I was trying to make was that MM may merely be an epi-phenomenon of the European fancies of the age and the dramatic impact that the conquest of India had on the Europeans. He was more of a sideshow of the subversion game than the cause. Shortly after MM underdated the vedas (a date steadfastly maintained by most modern mainstream western Indologists to this day), Tilak published his land mark work the Orion in which he basically demolishes all the Indological arguments for a late vedic date. On the basis of astronomical allusions he showed that the R^igveda was definitely older than 2200 BC and had allusions to dates as early as 4000 BC. This view was also supported by the German sanskritist Jacobi. Strangely, the Indians did not build up on Tilak's work but chose ignore it and stick to the classical indological line, which had long gone past MM but retained his date.
Why did our people not examine the texts afresh taking the cue from Tilak?
Not at all. "Handsome face" : never gave much thought to his looks <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Given that a forumite privately asked if I was lauding MM, I have to clarify that such was not my intention. The point I was trying to make was that MM may merely be an epi-phenomenon of the European fancies of the age and the dramatic impact that the conquest of India had on the Europeans. He was more of a sideshow of the subversion game than the cause. Shortly after MM underdated the vedas (a date steadfastly maintained by most modern mainstream western Indologists to this day), Tilak published his land mark work the Orion in which he basically demolishes all the Indological arguments for a late vedic date. On the basis of astronomical allusions he showed that the R^igveda was definitely older than 2200 BC and had allusions to dates as early as 4000 BC. This view was also supported by the German sanskritist Jacobi. Strangely, the Indians did not build up on Tilak's work but chose ignore it and stick to the classical indological line, which had long gone past MM but retained his date.
Why did our people not examine the texts afresh taking the cue from Tilak?