04-13-2007, 08:48 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->At the same time, there is a growing amount of claptrap being passed off as "Hindu science", and I am not in favor of blindly tolerating that, since it is very destructive to our interests. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What you think about Ashoka Iron pillar in Delhi or old Pandav Palace or Temple architecture?
Vedas, Purana, Ramayana, Mahabaratha are not only religious text but they are Hinduâs history. Invaders destroyed majority of literature. From time to time different people came and wrote their narration adding either poetic version during Bhakti movement e.g Tulidas.
If somebody invade India again or government decides to built flyover and destroy Ashoka Iron pillar or use it in foundation or throw in sea, next generation will never believe it ever existed. We will never know actual composition. Yes, Western historians will call it mythology and next generation will call âstupid Hindu Scienceâ created by fundamentalist.
Jawalji temple, Dwaraka are another example.
When poet writes about eye, everyone had their own version. An eye is common entity but is not myth. Same way we should be able to identify poetic addition and actual in later version of religious text.
What you think about Ashoka Iron pillar in Delhi or old Pandav Palace or Temple architecture?
Vedas, Purana, Ramayana, Mahabaratha are not only religious text but they are Hinduâs history. Invaders destroyed majority of literature. From time to time different people came and wrote their narration adding either poetic version during Bhakti movement e.g Tulidas.
If somebody invade India again or government decides to built flyover and destroy Ashoka Iron pillar or use it in foundation or throw in sea, next generation will never believe it ever existed. We will never know actual composition. Yes, Western historians will call it mythology and next generation will call âstupid Hindu Scienceâ created by fundamentalist.
Jawalji temple, Dwaraka are another example.
When poet writes about eye, everyone had their own version. An eye is common entity but is not myth. Same way we should be able to identify poetic addition and actual in later version of religious text.