08-31-2007, 02:39 PM
<<From clothes to architecture, from language to folklores, from epics to sculpture and from religion to sciences. So they also insist that after Alexandar 'the great' defeated India - Indians were so mesmerized by this god-like warrior that they deified him as Skanda-Kartikeya-Muruga.>>
This is nonsense. In this form even main stream Indologists do not accept this garbage. There is no connection between the etymologies of skanda and sikander. In fact the form sikander is derived via a Persian corruption. In Sanskrit Alexander was rendered was alikasundara or alikasandra. Modern Indologists are trying to attribute Greek and Shakha influence for the origin of skanda (though not trough Alexander) but this has no basis in truth either -- Indologist exhibit flaws in both common sense and method. We could discuss this on the I&P thread if there is any interest
This is nonsense. In this form even main stream Indologists do not accept this garbage. There is no connection between the etymologies of skanda and sikander. In fact the form sikander is derived via a Persian corruption. In Sanskrit Alexander was rendered was alikasundara or alikasandra. Modern Indologists are trying to attribute Greek and Shakha influence for the origin of skanda (though not trough Alexander) but this has no basis in truth either -- Indologist exhibit flaws in both common sense and method. We could discuss this on the I&P thread if there is any interest