04-15-2007, 08:26 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-narayanan+Apr 15 2007, 05:59 PM-->QUOTE(narayanan @ Apr 15 2007, 05:59 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->1. Slokas and their sources. This is classy, no doubt, all of us would like to be able to recite the appropriate slokam for the situation ... which of course implies understanding what the slokam means. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Since most of sanskrit literature (which is huge in itself) is in verse-form, instead of prose, this excercise is going to be of a huge scale. So multilevel classification will be required. The same mantra-shloka can be linked through many ways, e.g. original-text, devatA, rishi, message, use etc.
<b>I see a fullscale relational-database here, not just a collection or a webpage.</b>
Also, shlokas are what Valmiki introduced, a 4-part verse. For example Gita contains shlokas, where each verse is in two lines and each with two parts (total of 4 parts).
<i>
yadA yadA hi dharmasya
glAnirbhavati bhArata
abhyththAnamadharmasya
tadAtmAnaM sR^ijAmyaham</i>
In comparison, Vedic mantras (not called shlokas) had different arrangements of parts. The most popular metre Gayatri had 3-parts (tripadA), although other kinds of gAyatrI are also mentioned.
<i>tat-savitur-vareNyaM
bhargo-devasya dhImahi
dhiyo yo naH prachodayAt</i>
So, that quote from Br. Upanishad "asato mA sadgamaya..." is not really a shloka but a mantra.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->2. The fables. The Panchatrantra are the best-known source, translated to many languages, but what is their original source and where can one find the closest to the originals, plus translations?
3. Much of what is known as Grimm's Fairy Tales and Hans Anderson's Fairy Tales are closely related to stories that have been around in India for the usual 145,000,000,000,000,000 years. Where are those stories located originally? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ancient collections of stories include:
1. panchatantra (teaching politics through stories)
2. hitopadesha (similar to panchatantra)
3. kathA-sarit-sAgara (part of a lost much bigger collection bR^ihat-kathA)
4. jAtaka-kathA (stories of buddha's previous incarnations)
5. vetAla-panchavinshati (vikarm & vetAla for chandAmAmA fans)
6. siMhAsana-dvAtriMshikA (stories told by 32 statues on king vikramaditya's throne)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->4. <b>I[/I]f an "ABCD" youth asks me where s(he) can find the inside scoop on what Hinduism says, in particular, to treat depression arising from, say, being in the middle of a Hurricane-hit city, where should I guide him/her? (yes, question arises from urgent need). More to the point, question arises from "comparison of what Catholicism says vs. Hinduism says" and there are two authorities helping out with finding the "good books" on Catholicism</b>. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For someone with limited exposure and a pressing need, theological debates are useless.
It will be most desirable to have dedicated texts (such as addressing depression/loss etc) available for such situations. Otherwise it is best to read talks/question-answers etc from the great sages in such a situation. For a modern mind modern sages may make more sense, such as Q&A/discourse kind of texts from:
Vivekananda, Ramakrishna, Ramana-maharshi, Aurobindo, Yogananda, Sai baba, Ammachi etc.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->5. Digging out the science, and separating it from the distortions and glorifications added to it by the ancient and modern versions of the ddm when describing stuff that they didn't quite grasp. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is lot of scientific/mathematical-virtue in ancient texts. For example, the binary-system maths that pingala had used in his text on metres (chhandaH-sUtra), and the ingenious error-checking mechanisms used to preserve the sAmavedic texts and songs.
Claiming scientific nature unjustifiably and/or prematurely is definitely damaging from many quarters. It may lead to disappointment for an enthusiast who jumped in expecting great science, but eventually got disillusioned. It also may lead to ridicule from more sophisticated opponents who would find tiniest holes, and ridicule whole of the effort in front of influential but otherwise ignorant/innocent people. There can also be an extremist streak in scientific enthusiasts, who could use supposed scientific nature to criticise a large body of extant hindu traditions. A great care is needed in this department to not throw away the baby with the bathwater.
If someone claims scientific nature for some ancient text, put them to strictest scientific gruelling. Going by the fact that no major modern scientific discovery has been based on a "prediction" from an ancient text ( it is always a post justification), one must be very discrete in such cases. And a first and vocal critique must come from hindus themselves and not others.
In the same vein, it is important to puncture the hellenistic bias in western history of science. Based on rather flimsy threads, western historians can weave a glorious fabric regarding greek science. But Indian evidences are never given similar enthusiastic treatment, they are rather suppressed. Europe needed their narrative of past scientific glory in the 18th-19th century and it created such a narrative. Indians need to write their own narrative for history of science too.
Since most of sanskrit literature (which is huge in itself) is in verse-form, instead of prose, this excercise is going to be of a huge scale. So multilevel classification will be required. The same mantra-shloka can be linked through many ways, e.g. original-text, devatA, rishi, message, use etc.
<b>I see a fullscale relational-database here, not just a collection or a webpage.</b>
Also, shlokas are what Valmiki introduced, a 4-part verse. For example Gita contains shlokas, where each verse is in two lines and each with two parts (total of 4 parts).
<i>
yadA yadA hi dharmasya
glAnirbhavati bhArata
abhyththAnamadharmasya
tadAtmAnaM sR^ijAmyaham</i>
In comparison, Vedic mantras (not called shlokas) had different arrangements of parts. The most popular metre Gayatri had 3-parts (tripadA), although other kinds of gAyatrI are also mentioned.
<i>tat-savitur-vareNyaM
bhargo-devasya dhImahi
dhiyo yo naH prachodayAt</i>
So, that quote from Br. Upanishad "asato mA sadgamaya..." is not really a shloka but a mantra.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->2. The fables. The Panchatrantra are the best-known source, translated to many languages, but what is their original source and where can one find the closest to the originals, plus translations?
3. Much of what is known as Grimm's Fairy Tales and Hans Anderson's Fairy Tales are closely related to stories that have been around in India for the usual 145,000,000,000,000,000 years. Where are those stories located originally? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ancient collections of stories include:
1. panchatantra (teaching politics through stories)
2. hitopadesha (similar to panchatantra)
3. kathA-sarit-sAgara (part of a lost much bigger collection bR^ihat-kathA)
4. jAtaka-kathA (stories of buddha's previous incarnations)
5. vetAla-panchavinshati (vikarm & vetAla for chandAmAmA fans)
6. siMhAsana-dvAtriMshikA (stories told by 32 statues on king vikramaditya's throne)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->4. <b>I[/I]f an "ABCD" youth asks me where s(he) can find the inside scoop on what Hinduism says, in particular, to treat depression arising from, say, being in the middle of a Hurricane-hit city, where should I guide him/her? (yes, question arises from urgent need). More to the point, question arises from "comparison of what Catholicism says vs. Hinduism says" and there are two authorities helping out with finding the "good books" on Catholicism</b>. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For someone with limited exposure and a pressing need, theological debates are useless.
It will be most desirable to have dedicated texts (such as addressing depression/loss etc) available for such situations. Otherwise it is best to read talks/question-answers etc from the great sages in such a situation. For a modern mind modern sages may make more sense, such as Q&A/discourse kind of texts from:
Vivekananda, Ramakrishna, Ramana-maharshi, Aurobindo, Yogananda, Sai baba, Ammachi etc.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->5. Digging out the science, and separating it from the distortions and glorifications added to it by the ancient and modern versions of the ddm when describing stuff that they didn't quite grasp. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is lot of scientific/mathematical-virtue in ancient texts. For example, the binary-system maths that pingala had used in his text on metres (chhandaH-sUtra), and the ingenious error-checking mechanisms used to preserve the sAmavedic texts and songs.
Claiming scientific nature unjustifiably and/or prematurely is definitely damaging from many quarters. It may lead to disappointment for an enthusiast who jumped in expecting great science, but eventually got disillusioned. It also may lead to ridicule from more sophisticated opponents who would find tiniest holes, and ridicule whole of the effort in front of influential but otherwise ignorant/innocent people. There can also be an extremist streak in scientific enthusiasts, who could use supposed scientific nature to criticise a large body of extant hindu traditions. A great care is needed in this department to not throw away the baby with the bathwater.
If someone claims scientific nature for some ancient text, put them to strictest scientific gruelling. Going by the fact that no major modern scientific discovery has been based on a "prediction" from an ancient text ( it is always a post justification), one must be very discrete in such cases. And a first and vocal critique must come from hindus themselves and not others.
In the same vein, it is important to puncture the hellenistic bias in western history of science. Based on rather flimsy threads, western historians can weave a glorious fabric regarding greek science. But Indian evidences are never given similar enthusiastic treatment, they are rather suppressed. Europe needed their narrative of past scientific glory in the 18th-19th century and it created such a narrative. Indians need to write their own narrative for history of science too.