Sanskrit

[Guest]

Post 240:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"research on the language and manuscripta in the langage was being spearheaded by Germany and other European countries"<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, which they could not accomplish without the help of Hindu Indians contributing many Hindu religious works (shlokas, epics, stories) in Samskritam to the main sites. I have seen 2 very large western-operated Samskritam sites. Practically all the contributions (definitely all the proper translations and useful works) originate from Hindu contributors. Unfortunately, at least one of these 2 large sites links to Indology organisations. Perhaps we should think of terminating all the assistance from our side until we know what the west plans to do with the study of our language and our Hindu documents on religion, philosophy, military strategies and other indigenous knowledge. Having mined away our material wealth, I can't help wondering whether these new colonials are now sifting for our accumulated wealth of knowledge. Perhaps there's a missionary tactic somewhere as well: trying to insert their lame Jesus sob-story or biblical non-events into our works whilst most of us are still ignorant of the language to recognise the original from the altered. Or perhaps it serves an indological reason: steal our works away and present them as 'Aryan inventions' not native to India. I wouldn't put any of it past them when these sites are willing to link to anti-Hindu indology sites.
More knowledge of Samskritam among Indologists and less knowledge of it among Indians would definitely put the Indology department at an advantage in debates. (This would be a situation that never occurred before, as even during British misrule, missionary 'research' and miscontruing of Indian scriptures, there was a significant Hindu population knowledgable in Samskrit to show us their errors and their faulty understanding.)

There is no doubt that Hindus should learn Samskritam again and that this should happen on a large-scale, but why do people in the west become surprised that the language has such little patronage in India today? The fact that the poverty of India became unimaginable during British rule was precisely due to colonialism (in spite of the west today being shocked at signs of great poverty still extant in India today - India's wealth took millennia to amasse and a century or two for Britain to drain away - how quickly does the west expect us to come up again?) Likewise, the reason for the dwindling usage and teaching of Samskritam in its native India is exactly because the missionaries equated the language with their invented and much-reviled 'brahminism'. Thanks to this western hatred of the Hindu use of Samskritam which created an Indian hatred for the same, we today have the communist Keralan government appointing a communist with no knowledge of the language as the head of the prestigious Samskritam teaching institution there (doubtless, he is positioned there only to destroy the college). And no doubt, this continues to fulfill foreign (Indological) and missionary interests in further bringing down remaining native Hindu usage and knowledge of our language.

India never did "research" on Samskrit (that's what people do with a language that is alien and unnatural to them) - it was our ancestral mother tongue. Though historically, when the language was still proudly recognised as our own, Hindu Indians have written and/or refined grammatical rules on Samskritam and patronised the writing of Hindu poetry and prose - besides its ongoing use as the lingua franca of philosophical treatises (including social and military).

Language is a very important part of any culture. Especially ancestral languages, since they often tend to be the one(s) used in the religious scriptures of a nation. Thus, by severing our natural ties to our mother tongue, the missionaries during the colonial era in one stroke achieved a lot of their designs for India. Today, we have Hindus unnable to defend incessantly false accusations of immorality and unethical behaviour or teachings in our religious scriptures merely because they do not have the knowledge of the language involved. They are unable to pick up the works being accused and look in them, read them for themselves and contradict the lies/feel comfortable knowing the truth again.

[Guest]

since when did sanskrit become saMskriTAM??

[Guest]

Reverse your question to: when did Samskritam become Sanskrit?
What is still pronounced by Samskrit-speaking brahmanas as Samskritam, the English and other Europeans had made 'Sanskrit'. Probably because it sounds more like Dansk, Norsk, Svensk? I don't know. Just like it's Samhita not Sanhita as some European translators like to do (might be indicative of their general mispronunciation of the language). A more crude example: in German, the Upanishads were called Oupkenat or something on initial translation. The Samskrit is of course not the same as the German pronunciation even if the latter were to have ever become the popular way of referring to the works.
Additionally, Sanskrit has no meaning, Samskritam does.

I couldn't find the thread to correct what I said earlier (that it was Mahabharata and Ramayana). But when I went to India recently and asked relatives who know Samskrit, they said the titles of the epics in the original language are Mahabharat<i>am</i> and Ramayan<i>am</i>. So that's in Samskrit. In Tamil we make a nasal 'm' sound at the end for these instead, so it sounds more like Ramayanau and Mahabharatau (but more nasal, like the French 'son').

Anyway, I'm sure you'd like to argue that you know better. I've said what I know.
You might also want to confirm this with experts here before finally deciding I'm right or wrong. Ask Hauma Hamiddha or others knowledgeable about Samskrit here.

[acharya]

Unfortunately, at least one of these 2 large sites links to Indology organisations. Perhaps we should think of terminating all the assistance from our side until we know what the west plans to do with the study of our language and our Hindu documents on religion, philosophy, military strategies and other indigenous knowledge. Having mined away our material wealth, I can't help wondering whether these new colonials are now sifting for our accumulated wealth of knowledge. Perhaps there's a missionary tactic somewhere as well: trying to insert their lame Jesus sob-story or biblical non-events into our works whilst most of us are still ignorant of the language to recognise the original from the altered. Or perhaps it serves an indological reason: steal our works away and present them as 'Aryan inventions' not native to India.

This is the real question which needs to be asked.
One of the conclusion is that they are trying to build a western civilization based on Hindu Civilization. THey need the building blocks of Indian civilization such as sociology, intellectual traditions of sanskrit, value system, kinship- pattern and social network. They are copying from Indian traditions and Hindu civilization.

This is a massive project of gigantic proportion. For that they need to make the Indian intellectuals sub servient to the western traditions and thought process.
They also need to destroy the Indian traditions and hindu values from the mind of the Indian intellectuals and seats of higher learning. Indian intellectuals have to feel that Indian traditions are the root cause of the problems of India and Indian traditions will be discarded by the society.

THey have almost succeded.

This is 200-500 years project. In 1900 the British wanted to keep India as a dominion for 500 years. Kissinger calculataed that the western civilization will be dominant for 500 years. THey are building the foundation of this civilization and make sure that Indian civilization is dead.
This intellectual knowledgebase of India is the biggest gain they are getting from the India and this the most valuable resource of India they are covoting. Indian traditional knowledgebase is the highest prize they are going after.


MODERN MIND - Intellectual History of the 20st century is a good book to understand where they are coming from.
This book does not contain this conclusion. But read other books and history and the trend and the purpose should be clear.

They are working on introducing western concepts into the sanksrit work and sanskrit translation of the Indian classical knowledgebase. At the end they want to derive the entire knowledgebase as a derivative of the western work and make sure that the generations of that will look at the knowledgebase as 'WESTERN' in origin.

[Guest]

Post 244 (Acharya):
Thanks for the book suggestion. Could you summarise the part of it that particularly relates or applies to our situation? (Unless your post 244 has already done just that)

As paranoid as my previous post might have come across, I couldn't help noticing:
- they are western-based websites that are collecting Samskrit documents, neither one of which is Hindu in outlook and at least one, if not both, link to Indology;
- how the contribution to the Samskrit websites were one-sided (from Hindus whose only thought, probably, is that our religious scriptures will be digitised and stored safely - but who don't think about what the 'benevolent' site hosts might be in it for, since they are after all disinterested in Hinduism);
- untransparent interest of the west in Samskrit, whilst simultaneously denouncing Hindu traditions, and supporting communists and missionaries in destroying Samskrit in its native India (this is what the Indologists are doing and supporting).
- Why the interest in Samskrit Hindu documents over and above interest in traditional Native north American or African knowledge? Or Chinese documents for that matter?

My family was pretty excited about the Samskrit sites, until I brought up my misgivings. (They're not knowledgeable about the anti-Hindu Indology departments in the west, nor about their influence in increasing communist power/reliability in India and furthering anti-Hindu perception.)

It's too late to take back the literature that Hindus have already donated to such sites, but is there no way to spread the word to stop future contributions?

I don't know why Indians, Hindus I should say, always feel flattered when others
- adopt Yoga, saying it is non-religious (while it is particularly Hindu) or rename it to Christian Yoga/praise moves,
- learn Ayurveda (patenting and selling it),
- use Hindu construction ideas for boats like catamarans,
- talk of Samskrit as a great logical programming language (all the while denouncing its use by Hindus as 'brahminical'),
- announce they plan to use Hindu texts like the Vedas for something-or-other in their space programme,
- and some Indologists describe themselves as Vedics even merely for having been able to read the Vedas once over (no Samskrit word called 'Vedics' by the way - shows how much they know).

Imitation might be considered the best form of flattery, but only if the original is given due recognition. Here the original is not credited, but ignored, or even made demonical (or is that 'brahminical'?)

[acharya]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't know why Indians, Hindus I should say, always feel flattered when others
- adopt Yoga, saying it is non-religious (while it is particularly Hindu) or rename it to Christian Yoga/praise moves,
- learn Ayurveda (patenting and selling it),
- use Hindu construction ideas for boats like catamarans,
- talk of Samskrit as a great logical programming language (all the while denouncing its use by Hindus as 'brahminical'),
- announce they plan to use Hindu texts like the Vedas for something-or-other in their space programme,
- and some Indologists describe themselves as Vedics even merely for having been able to read the Vedas once over (no Samskrit word called 'Vedics' by the way - shows how much they know).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is due to indoctrination.
Generation of indoctrination from late 1800 have created this class of Hindus who have these symptoms.

If you read Tilak and other people from 1800s the colonization had a profound effect on Indians and the educated Indians like Tilak even believed that the whilte race/Anglo were lost brothers of Indians.

This racial affinity even though it was not reciprocated by the British Anglo saxon is the main reason for the intellectual subservient behaviour of Indians for that generations.

Till the sanskrit was found to have closer relations to Latin and greek it was a common knowledge that Hebrew was considered the mother of European langauges.

Once the depth of the Indian literature and sanskrit was discovered around 1830 by the orientalists there has been a mad scramble to obtain all the manuscripts and understand all the knowledgebase about Indian thought process.

After that they created the AIT to prove to the europeans that they themsleves were the real creater of Sanskrit and vedic knowledge. This fraud was required to create dominant intellectual generation in Europe in the first half of 20th century.

All the orientalists have made sure that the myth of western origin of the sanskrit and vedic knowledgebase remains. The 'Indo European' class of language was created to own the sanskrit langauge as an european langauage.

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Jul 20 2006, 06:33 AM-->QUOTE(acharya @ Jul 20 2006, 06:33 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Once the depth of the Indian literature and sanskrit was discovered around 1830 by the orientalists there has been a mad scramble to obtain all the manuscripts and understand all the knowledgebase about Indian thought process.[right][snapback]54146[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The entire German Philosophical tradition starting from Schopenhauer was lifted from Buddhism. The so called great german philosophical mind had been previously limited to Luther's rants and these semitic rants were in all likelihood an improvement over waht the pagan germans had even previously possessed. The so called modern russian renaissance under Dostoevsky et al can also be directly traced to these same psychologic insights, which Rajiv Malhotra attributes to the later Jung.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>This is 200-500 years project. In 1900 the British wanted to keep India as a dominion for 500 years. Kissinger calculataed that the western civilization will be dominant for 500 years. THey are building the foundation of this civilization and make sure that Indian civilization is dead. </b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

the europeans are not averse to trying to fetishistically <i>possess </i>the pagan elements of other cultures, unlike muslims. one of the reasons why the so called european intellectuals are so much more slippery than the easily managed muslims.

Also this Steve Farmer is part of the US intellingence community. So their investment in the indology enterprise is probably far beyond what we are aware of.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Jul 20 2006, 04:15 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Jul 20 2006, 04:15 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Reverse your question to: when did Samskritam become Sanskrit?
What is still pronounced by Samskrit-speaking brahmanas as Samskritam, the English and other Europeans had made 'Sanskrit'. Probably because it sounds more like Dansk, Norsk, Svensk? I don't know. Just like it's Samhita not Sanhita as some European translators like to do (might be indicative of their general mispronunciation of the language). A more crude example: in German, the Upanishads were called Oupkenat or something on initial translation. The Samskrit is of course not the same as the German pronunciation even if the latter were to have ever become the popular way of referring to the works.
Additionally, Sanskrit has no meaning, Samskritam does.

I couldn't find the thread to correct what I said earlier (that it was Mahabharata and Ramayana). But when I went to India recently and asked relatives who know Samskrit, they said the titles of the epics in the original language are Mahabharat<i>am</i> and Ramayan<i>am</i>. So that's in Samskrit. In Tamil we make a nasal 'm' sound at the end for these instead, so it sounds more like Ramayanau and Mahabharatau (but more nasal, like the French 'son').

Anyway, I'm sure you'd like to argue that you know better. I've said what I know.
You might also want to confirm this with experts here before finally deciding I'm right or wrong. Ask Hauma Hamiddha or others knowledgeable about Samskrit here.
[right][snapback]54135[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

sanskrit was spelled and pronounced as "sanskrit" in classical sanskrit literature a long before any european ever set foot here. same with mahabharat and ramayan.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jul 20 2006, 10:10 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Jul 20 2006, 10:10 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The entire German Philosophical tradition starting from Schopenhauer was lifted from Buddhism. 

Also this Steve Farmer is part of the US intellingence community.  So their investment in the indology enterprise is probably far beyond what we are aware of.
[right][snapback]54157[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

firstly thanks for proving the links for the atenism topic. and now i request you to please provide links and evidence to vindicate the claim in the first line. there's nothing that would come in more handy. that the barbarian germanics would suddenly start producing "philosophers" and even be called "the land of philosophers" (As jokerlal also acknowledged in his "nehruvian glimses of world history") was something that has always struck me as odd. if you provide the links, the fog would lift considerably.

as for the steve farmer bit - yes you are right about that. we have no clue about their actual intentions about india. they like to let the world know that they are only cutivating an academic interest - even the colonials came up with a similar hogwash - but they alhave have had and to this day have, ulterior motives.

[Guest]

Post 248:
The first part of the final line of a post by Hauma Hamiddha:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>hara hara mahAdeva</b> has to prevail over Allah-o-Akbar and the cross of Isa nothing short of that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->The bold bit is Samskritam.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jul 20 2006, 10:10 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Jul 20 2006, 10:10 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The entire German Philosophical tradition starting from Schopenhauer was lifted from Buddhism.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Here's one I found by googling. It appears that Schopenhauer was both into Hindu (Vedanta, Upanishads) and Buddhist philosophy.

[Guest]

i know that bit (about shopen H.). someone taking deep interest in indian philosophy does not prove it. i want to know if all the germanic philosophers of the last 200 years "DERIVED" (or were influenced) their philosophy from hinduism and buddhism. osawld spengler didnt for sure.


i am still waiting for proof that the sanskrit word for sanskrit is saMskriTAM.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->i am still waiting for proof that the sanskrit word for sanskrit is saMskriTAM. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Where's your proof, so far it's merely that you say so. At least I asked brahmanas who know Samskrit and who know the Vedas. And if you want independent proof, like I stated before: <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You might also want to confirm this with the experts here before finally deciding I'm right or wrong. Ask Hauma Hamiddha or others knowledgeable about Samskrit here.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->If you can't bother to do that, then keep waiting.

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jul 20 2006, 07:27 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Jul 20 2006, 07:27 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Geopolitics and Sanskrit Phobia by Rajiv Malhotra

...<b>Europe's highly fruitful interaction with the Indian thought over practically the same time-span contrasts sharply with 150 years of sterile Indian interaction with the western thought. </b>After the founding of Sanskrit chairs in the first decade of the nineteenth century, Europe interacted with the Indian thought, particularly in philosophy, grammar, literary theory and literature, in a big way without abandoning its own powerful tradition. In the process, it created, as we have said a new discipline, Historical-Comparative Linguistics, produced a galaxy of thinkers - Schiller, Schelling, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Jakobson, Trubetzkoy and above all Saussure -...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[right][snapback]54178[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would disagree with RM in that Europe's "own powerful tradition" was nothing more than imported Semitic (Jewish) thought, as has always been the case, including the Greeks, onward.

[Bharatvarsh]

The original is "Samskritam" not "Sanskrit", in Telugu when you pronounce it, it sounds like "Samskrutam" ("u" sound instead of "a" sound), ben ami go refer to a Sanskrit (western way of saying it) dictionary, there are plenty available online and until then stop acting like you are some kind of authority on the language and by the way it is "Ramayana" and "Mahabharatha" in Sanskrit.

[Guest]

proof please. i dont need to be the one to supply it cos that has always been the generally held knowledge/opinion - at least in north india. that it always was sanskrit and not saMskri-TAM and it was always ramayan and mahabharat and yog and not with an "a" suffixed in each case.


when you come up with a claim to throw out existing notions - come with proof.

[Bharatvarsh]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->proof please. i dont need to be the one to supply it cos that has always been the generally held knowledge/opinion - at least in north india.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ahh "North India" is not the sole authority and majority of North Indian languages have more foreign influence than others (due to Muslim rule) and the way things are pronounced in vernacular languages (whether Tamil or Hindi) is not the way things are pronounced in Sanskrit, in Tamil it maybe "Madhavan" and in Hindi it maybe "Madhav" but in Sanskrit it is "Madhava" and as for proof we have "Yoga Sutras" not "Yog Sutras" and like I said go refer to an online dictionary, here is one:

http://p081.ezboard.com/fhinduunityhinduis...cID=29818.topic

[Guest]

ben_ami,
you are confusing with Hindi. Yog, ramayan and mahabharat is hindi.
I am not sure whether you have Samskritan education. If you have, ramAyAna, yoga, mahAbharatha is Samskritam.


Check this for audio lesson.link
read chapter name which is written in Samskritam
Samskritam tam bhAgh 1

[acharya]

<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Jul 19 2006, 06:41 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Jul 19 2006, 06:41 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jul 20 2006, 10:10 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dhu @ Jul 20 2006, 10:10 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The entire German Philosophical tradition starting from Schopenhauer was lifted from Buddhism.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Here's one I found by googling. It appears that Schopenhauer was both into Hindu (Vedanta, Upanishads) and Buddhist philosophy.
[right][snapback]54167[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), German philosopher and writer. He was one of the greatest philosophers of the 19th century. He was the first Western philosopher to have access to translations of philosophical material from India, both Vedic and Buddhist, by which he was profoundly affected. Counted among his disciples are such thinkers as Nietzsche and Wittgenstein, as well as Sigmund Freud, who takes a large part of his psychological theory from the writings of Schopenhauer.

No other major Western philosopher so signalizes the turn towards India, combined with a disenchantment with the European-Christian tradition. He proclaimed the concordance of his philosophy with the teachings of Vedanta. His contribution to the propagation and popularization of Indian concepts has been considerable.

Schopenhauer became acquainted with the thought of the Upanishads through a Latin translation from Persian by a Frenchman, Anquetil Duperron. His eulogy is well known.

"The Indian air surrounds us, the original thoughts of kindred spirits.....And O! how the mind is here washed clean of all its early ingrafted Jewish superstition!
<i>Before the vedantic philosphy the Jewish hersay and thought was permeating the european lands.</i>
It is the most profitable and most elevating reading which is possible in the world."

"How entirely does the Oupnekhat (Upanishad) breathe throughout the holy spirit of the Vedas! How is every one, who by a diligent study of its Persian Latin has become familiar with that incomparable book, stirred by that spirit to the very depth of his Soul!

Schopenhauer was in search of a "philosophy which should be at once ethics and metaphysics." India did not disappoint him. He found it in the Upanisadhic "tat twam asi", "that thou art".

"From every sentence (of the Upanishads) deep, original and sublime thoughts arise, and the whole is pervaded by a high and holy and earnest spirit...."In the whole world there is no study so beneficial and so elevating as that of the Upanishads. They are destined sooner or later to become the faith of the people."

Schopenhauer, who was in the habit, before going to bed, of performing his devotions from the pages of the Upanishads, regarded them as:

" It has been the solace of my life -- it will be the solace of my death."
<span style='color:blue'>
He anticipated later speculations with his claim that Christianity had "Indian blood in its veins" and that the moral teachings of the New Testament had their historical source in Asia beyond Israel: "Christianity taught only what the whole of Asia knew already long before and even better" </span>


To Schopenhauer the Upanishads were documents of 'almost superhuman conception,' whose authors could hardly be thought of as 'mere mortals.'

He also remarked: "How every line is of such strong, determined, and consistent meaning! And on every page we encounter deep, original, lofty thoughts, while the whole world is suffused with a high and holy seriousness."

He spoke of India as the 'fatherland of mankind' which 'gave the original religion of our race,' and he expressed the hope that European peoples, 'who stemmed from Asia,...would re-attain the religion of their home.'

He believed that the Upanishads, together with the philosophies of Plato and Kant, constituted the foundation on which to erect a proper philosophy of representation. It was the Upanishads' analysis of the self which caused Schopenhauer to stamp them as " the product of the highest human wisdom". He dedicated himself to this task, producing his magnum opus, The World as Will and Representation, in 1819. This is what he says in this book:

"We, on the contrary, now send to the Brahmans English clergymen and evangelical linen-weavers, in order out of sympathy to put them right, and to point out to them that they are created out of nothing, and that they ought to be grateful and pleased about it. But it is just the same as if we fired a bullet at a cliff. "In India, our religions will never at any time take root; the ancient wisdom of the human race will not be supplanted by the events in Galilee. On the contrary, Indian wisdom flows back to Europe, and will produce a fundamental change in our knowledge and thought."

Schopenhauer regarded the Hindus as deeper thinkers than Europeans because their interpretation of the world was internal and intuitive, not external and intellectual. For intuition unites everything, the intellect divides everything. The Hindus saw that the "I" is a delusion, that the individual is merely phenomenal, and that the only reality is the Infinite One "That art Thou"

Schopenhauer wrote in the preface of his "The World as a Will and Representation"
<span style='color:blue'>
"According to me, the influence of Sanskrit literature on our time will not be lesser than what was in the 16th century Greece's influence on Renaissance. One day, India's wisdom will flow again on Europe and will totally transform our knowledge and thought." </span>

Schopenhauer, had extracted from Indian philosophy its contempt for the mere intellect. He admitted extracting his philosophical outlook from the Vedanta and attempting to weld "empirical realism" with transcendental idealism."

"Schopenhauer went on from there to vindicate Indian philosophy's rightful place in the world.." He even went so far as to express pleasure at the continuous failure of West-Christian proselytism in Asia and added: "Our religions will never at any time take root; the ancient wisdom of the human race will not be supplanted by the events in Galilee. On the contrary, Indian wisdom flows back to Europe, and will produce a fundamental change in our knowledge and thought." His anti-Christianism was largely based on a fierce anti-Biblism; .....he attributed systematically to subtle influences originating on the "holy-banks of the Ganges."

It is well-known that the book 'Oupnekhat' (Upanishad) always lay open on his table and he invariably studied it before retiring to rest. He called the opening up of Sanskrit literature 'the greatest gift of our century', and predicted that the philosophy and knowledge of the Upanishads would becomes the cherished faith of the West.

The Upanishads came to Schopenhauer as a new Gnosis or revelation. "That incomparable book," he says, "stirs the spirit of the very depths of the soul."

Schopenhauer was fond of saying that the first intuition of the work he was to do came to him while reading these texts, of which he was later to say that they had been “his life’s consolation.”

[Guest]

Ben Ami,
The following is a verse from the text of the Valmiki Ramayana itself. You can see the use of the word: Ramayanam.

In fact, I suspect the existence of some sort of rule, by which Sanskrit words and phrases may be transformed into Hindi words and phrases, probably the removal of the Sanskrit word's ending of 'am'.


etat aakhyaanam aayuSyam paThan <b>raamaayaNam</b> naraH |
sa putra pautraH sa gaNaH pretya svarge mahiiyate || 1-1-99

<b>99. aayuSyam= lifespan-enriching; aakhyaanam= narrative of actuality; etat= this; raama aayaNam = Rama's, peregrination; paThan= while reading - if read; naraH= a human; sa putraH pautraH= [will be] with, with sons, grandsons; sa gaNaH= with, groups [of kinfolk, servants etc]; on enjoying worldly comforts; pretya= after demise; svarge mahiiyate= in heaven, he will be adored.
</b>
"Any man who reads this lifespan-enriching narrative of actuality, Ramayana, the peregrination of Rama, he will be enjoying worldly pleasures with his sons and grand sons and with assemblages of kinfolks, servants etc., as long as he is in this mortal world and on his demise, he will be adored in heaven