April 20
3 mathematical notes on your lecture at Mumbai
Harsha shares three critical notes on a recent lecture by Rajiv Malhotra at IIT Bombay:
"....
1. When you say, that the digits of pi were calculated using adhyatmic vidya. But, if you actually look at how the Kerala school did it, they do it by using the Taylor series for the sin and cos function. This is an impressive achievement, and predates the European school, by a couple of centuries. Adhyatmic vidya is itself much more important. But in this case, we shouldn't conflate the two.
2. On your comment on the speed of light, I think it is very important for you to say in your speech that this is speculative. Even Subash Kak, the original researcher does not definitively state this in his article. He presents some evidence, but leaves it to the reader at the end. Personally, I think there is nowhere near adequate evidence..
3. On vedic maths, it is important to note that what is presented is not special by today's standards. Most of the calculation rules would be considered elementary today. On the other hand, if there was evidence that these were in
the vedas, it would be interesting. But the Shankaracharya's verses do not refer to the Vedas. Here is Prof Dani's take on it, who also makes these points.
4. As a strategy, mentioning these more speculative things in your speeches, isn't helpful to your cause. For someone who is not an expert, it would be just as impressive to mention the more established contributions which haven't been popularized (like the Taylor infinite series for sin an cos anticipating calculus) as mentioning the not more shaky claims.
... Already, the field is inundated with a lot of claims like proof of Goldbach conjecture (an open problem even today) using Vedic mathematics.
Also, someone one who is not sympathetic to your project would disproportionately emphasize these weaker claims. See this for instance, Rajnath Singh isn't correct, but Mr. Bal is chosing a particularly weak opponent, someone who cant accurately portray the known contributions...."
Rajiv comment:
1) I agree with him on the value of pi calculated as a series - but I disagree with him that it should be called "Taylor" series. Agreed that we cannot show any DIRECT role for adhyatma-vidya in this. However, the practice of sadhana was part of the training, and hence at least indirectly part of the methodology of discovery.
2) Regarding the speed of light, I must disagree with him. Unlike value of pi which can be calculated strictly theoretically without use of measuring instruments, the velocity of light is not a theoretical derivation. Yet (and
this is the point I wanted to make), there is no evidence of measuring instruments available to get such a value in those times. So how did they "guess" such a value? My thesis is given in pages 221-234 of BD. Sanskrit mantra
theory is based on integral unity that can be "seen" (not in the normal sense of the word) in the rishi-state. A few examples are given in that chapter of BD where ancient texts indicate physical properties of objects that are remarkably accurate, but there is no evidence of physical measurement being carried out. Had the rishi discoverers used lab instruments, they would be writing about them
and teaching it to students. But they never mention what we today consider to be instruments. Except one instrument - the mind in higher state of consciousness.
So it is my "speculation" that velocity of light was an example of such discoveries. It might surprise many of you that modern Western neuroscience is now (re)discovering many facts about the mind using advanced yogis and tibetan buddhist meditators. This is going to be the subject of some volumes I have been working on that I hope to complete. The use of adhyatma-vidya as methodology of
discovery is not to be dismissed just because it does not fit the criteria of "science" as known today.
3) On Vedic maths: I do not think of the math being promoted as something directly based on vedas. But the man who promoted it starting a century ago claimed that he was "inspired" by vedas. So it could be an indirect influence of vedas. Similarly, the great modern mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan attributed
his genius discoveries to Goddess Lakshmi, who he insisted had brought these breakthroughs to him in visions. His biographers failed to pursue this aspect
adequately, presumably out of fear of being branded as unscientific. But how does one explain such a scientific mind making a claim that seems so unscientific? I would not dismiss it out of hand. Modern science knows very
little about the mind, especially the potentials beyond "normal" states.
On the general point of not mixing more credible claims with less credible ones, I am in full agreement. I judge each context based on the audience and what would motivate them... I would like this to be the first place in India where serious scientists take up R&D on adhyatma-vidya. Why let western institutes have a monopoly on researching our tradition's methodologies?]
Narayana comments:
"...This is with reference to Rajivji's third point, regarding 'being inspired' by the Vedas. The discovery of Benzene ring by visualising the structure in a dream. Not only that but Kekule was believed to have come up with the tetravalent nature of carbon by visualising it in a dream. Western 'scientists' and their Indian acolytes (whom Rajivji refers to as ideological sepoys) dismiss visions of Indian sages and Vedic science but readily believe such 'stories'
when put out by, well, 'Western scientists'!
Read VOXINDICA
Rajiv comment: yes. Thats what Uturn is.
Ashok asks:
"...the 18th chaupai of Sri Hanumaan Chalisa, where the distance of the Sun from the Earth has been described clearly. Yug (12000) Sahastra (1000) yogan (8 miles) par bhanu. Comes to 96,000,000 miles, which I understand is reasonably close. Of course the earth's orbit is elliptical, so the distance will vary during different parts of the year..."
Partha responds:
"...Sant Tulsidas whom many of us consider a reincarnation of Valmiki, lived
in the 16th century, by which time information about the Sun's distance
from the earth could be claimed to have been communicated worldwide,
from wherever it was first learnt by whatever means. That the Sant wrote
his Ram Charit Manas entirely without biblio-aids and that he
practically visualized whatever he wrote should be used as an important
rider, when we talk of this scientifically near-accurate astronomical
data being given by him in his Hanuman Chalisa. He has also used units
from olden times (Yojana, Yug etc)..."
Come adds:
"..There are references to the Sun-Earth distance in other Indian scriptures, going back to the Vedas, at least according to ancient commentators. Some scientists including Rupert Sheldrake have shown that there are other methods to acquire knowledge about nature than the modern "scientific method", ..."
Rajiv comment: Rupert Sheldrake is a prominent UTurner and should not be cited as reference for saying things he has appropriated. We must stop acknowledging as source the person(s) who stole ideas and covered up.
tvikhanas notes:
"...To add to Rajivji's point, a staggering and undeniable example of adhyatmic influence on science is Panini's grammar. The core of this grammar "Shiva sutras" is named so because it was revealed to Panini by Shiva himself. People have remarked how wonderful the grammar is and it keeps revealing amazing new facets when examined from modern viewpoints. A researcher recently found that
the certain choices made in constructing Shiva Sutras when cast as optimization problems turn out to be the best possible solutions (A Mathematical Analysis of Panini's Shivasutras by Wiebke Petersen).
If this seems some how less remarkable, then say a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem from 1500 BC, it's because we have also internalized western view that "linguistics" is an inferior and less fundamental science compared to maths or physics along with many other ill-founded ideas. Indian tradition in fact considers Vyakarana far more important than equivalents of mathematics, metallurgy etc which perhaps explains its survival against impossible odds.
As a side note, western view towards linguistics is also evolving, mainly due to study of Sanskrit and also due to advent of computers. It is interesting to note that technical study of Sanskrit grammar is picking up again in the West. There are "mathematical linguists" like Petersen quoted above, along with Computer Scientists like Gerard Huet who have initiated major projects on parsing Sanskrit. I recently learned that there is a whole area of assigning formal semantics to natural languages in which Gerard Huet with his Sanskrit project is an important member...."
Romanization of Sanskrit
This thread is tied to the 'Sanskrit untranslateables' that is covered in the book "Being Different". Will the use of Roman script for Sanskrit somehow result in a loss in authenticity and meaning? Furthermore, Sanskrit is the language of Yoga. What impact will the Romanization have on the practice of Yoga?
April 9
Romanization of Sanskrit
Ajay comments:
"....Though Sanskrit teaching in other scripts might look good as it will become easier to teach initially. But long term result of not learning Devangari are
1) Losing the relationship between Sanskrit and Devnagari script. I can't imagine [losing] this relationship; like, the 'OM' word (symbol) in Devanagari looks majestic.
2) Not able to read original Sanskrit text as it is...."
Royaldecor comments:
"...I differ with the views.Telugu which is a pali script, is widely used in south and east india can convey the sanskrit sounds perfectly as it has 56 alphabets. All kirtans are in telugu script and in fact telugu is the largest
spoken language in india, if hindi dilects like maghi and bhojpuri are delinked from hindi..."
Karthik adds:
"...IAST is a standard that has been devised to write sanskrit, and is derived from the latin alphabets, with addition of diacritics (ISO 15919 is a later standard for representing all Indian languages). This does not mean it is going to be written using conventions that are used for writing english or french of german. It means it is a different set of conventions to represent sanskrit. IAST can represent sanskrit without ambiguity..."
Aditya responds:
"..I came across another article which appeared in the Indian Express today with the title "‘Romanagari’ can form system for language learning".
RoyalDecor responds:
"....Please understand, there is never a language war on script of sanskrit in india.I am not propagating any language but stated the facts.Sanskrit is used for dual purposes.One for communication and second is for chanting hymns as expressed in vedas and other shastras for performing various rituals.The core hindu religion firmly stands on the pillars of CORRECTLY chanting the
hymns,which involves rigorous practice and training at the vedic schools.A visit to a vedic school as well as any balaji temple in US and interaction with the priest will shed more clarity on the subject.The writer of the post being a
north indian may not be aware that few alphabets are missing in tamil and malayalam and also bengali which may be the reason devnagiri and telugu  scripts were evolved to be compatable for chanting the hymns correctly..."
arrk notes:
"...Roman script is quite unsuitable for Samskrutam. The foundational problem is with the loss of phonetics. The A is phonetically different from the first vowel of Devanaagari. What is the consequence of loss of phoneticity?
(1) The first victim will be Vaiyaakarna of Samskrutam. The Vaiyaakarna of Paanini is a human voice system based Vaiyaakarna. Many rules that appear natural in the human voice system (hence phonetics) and captured in Paanini will be entirely lost in non-phonetic script, and will look arbitrary rule to a learner and un-initiated. In the long run it will have serious consequences.
(2) Samskrutam is not only a communicational language. It is Yoga Bhaashya. In particular the Vaaca Yoga is completely steeped in these notions. Using Roman
alphabet will destroy the Vaac Yoga aspect and will be completely sidelined. The notion of Shabda Shareera and notion of Beeja Mantras will be adversly effected.
3) This will have consequences on the Mantra tradition of the tradition.
4) The Samskrutam phonetic sounds based speech has natural speech recognition aspects to it. I definitely know some who are working towards it. Replacement of Devanaagri will cause irreperable loss to that aspect.
To me this effort to use Roman script either arises out of ignorance of deeper aspects of Samskrutam or intentional plan to destroy the Dharma traditions. In both cases it must be rejected by Dharma tradition people.
Ravindra..."
April 9
Romanization of Sanskrit
Aditya shares: I came across a website learnsanskrit.org
and was excited about what it has to offer. On the whole the idea of
creating a learners guide for English speakers who would like to learn
Sanskrit seems a noble Idea. However as I went through the website
certain issues came to my attention which were not quite palatable to
me.
Two primary issues I had were:-
1) The Introduction
section which mentions the whole question of "Origin or Sanskrit" and
other arguments without enough references thus making all kinds of now
controversial claims about the so called "dravidian" people being pushed
south etc.
2) A claim that
Devanagari script can take a significant amount of time to learn so it
starts off with IAST (Romanized transliteration) along with an
apologetic statement "Western scholars of Sanskrit tend to prefer it
to Devanagari, which is OK; after all, Sanskrit has never really had a
script of its own, and the tradition of using Devanagari instead of
other scripts is actually quite recent."...Ajay comments:
"....Though Sanskrit teaching in other scripts might look good as it will become easier to teach initially. But long term result of not learning Devangari are
1) Losing the relationship between Sanskrit and Devnagari script. I can't imagine [losing] this relationship; like, the 'OM' word (symbol) in Devanagari looks majestic.
2) Not able to read original Sanskrit text as it is...."
Royaldecor comments:
"...I differ with the views.Telugu which is a pali script, is widely used in south and east india can convey the sanskrit sounds perfectly as it has 56 alphabets. All kirtans are in telugu script and in fact telugu is the largest
spoken language in india, if hindi dilects like maghi and bhojpuri are delinked from hindi..."
Karthik adds:
"...IAST is a standard that has been devised to write sanskrit, and is derived from the latin alphabets, with addition of diacritics (ISO 15919 is a later standard for representing all Indian languages). This does not mean it is going to be written using conventions that are used for writing english or french of german. It means it is a different set of conventions to represent sanskrit. IAST can represent sanskrit without ambiguity..."
Aditya responds:
"..I came across another article which appeared in the Indian Express today with the title "‘Romanagari’ can form system for language learning".
This study of course seems silly to a layman like me but after all I am
layman and the NBRC scientist have to do some research. The fact that
they are doing such research shows to me a trend which I was alluding to
earlier which is Romanization of Sanskrit/Indian languages. Do we need
to use Roman alphabets to learn other Indian languages apart from our
mother tongue?
Regarding IAST/Devnagari I fully understand that the
number of people learning in Devanagari is always going to be more, but
the question is which script is being used by influential people in
academia and it seems that among western academia and also western
laymen at least IAST has caught on at the expense of Devanagari.
What was objectionable to me was the justification in LearnSanskri.org about IAST that "Western scholars of Sanskrit tend to prefer it to Devanagari, which is OK; after all, Sanskrit has never really had a script of its own, and the tradition of using Devanagari instead of other scripts is actually quite recent." ..
... With respect to Devanagari rather than Romanized script my larger point
of interest was in securing a debate on an Indic script which is popular
for Sanskrit. But don't see a reason why those who learn Sanskrit in
India cannot learn more than one Indic scripts. After all most Indians
speak and understand 3 or more languages. I wouldn't want this
discussion to go into a language war within India. That in my view would
be a wrong direction to take it to. "
RoyalDecor responds:
"....Please understand, there is never a language war on script of sanskrit in india.I am not propagating any language but stated the facts.Sanskrit is used for dual purposes.One for communication and second is for chanting hymns as expressed in vedas and other shastras for performing various rituals.The core hindu religion firmly stands on the pillars of CORRECTLY chanting the
hymns,which involves rigorous practice and training at the vedic schools.A visit to a vedic school as well as any balaji temple in US and interaction with the priest will shed more clarity on the subject.The writer of the post being a
north indian may not be aware that few alphabets are missing in tamil and malayalam and also bengali which may be the reason devnagiri and telugu  scripts were evolved to be compatable for chanting the hymns correctly..."
arrk notes:
"...Roman script is quite unsuitable for Samskrutam. The foundational problem is with the loss of phonetics. The A is phonetically different from the first vowel of Devanaagari. What is the consequence of loss of phoneticity?
(1) The first victim will be Vaiyaakarna of Samskrutam. The Vaiyaakarna of Paanini is a human voice system based Vaiyaakarna. Many rules that appear natural in the human voice system (hence phonetics) and captured in Paanini will be entirely lost in non-phonetic script, and will look arbitrary rule to a learner and un-initiated. In the long run it will have serious consequences.
(2) Samskrutam is not only a communicational language. It is Yoga Bhaashya. In particular the Vaaca Yoga is completely steeped in these notions. Using Roman
alphabet will destroy the Vaac Yoga aspect and will be completely sidelined. The notion of Shabda Shareera and notion of Beeja Mantras will be adversly effected.
3) This will have consequences on the Mantra tradition of the tradition.
4) The Samskrutam phonetic sounds based speech has natural speech recognition aspects to it. I definitely know some who are working towards it. Replacement of Devanaagri will cause irreperable loss to that aspect.
To me this effort to use Roman script either arises out of ignorance of deeper aspects of Samskrutam or intentional plan to destroy the Dharma traditions. In both cases it must be rejected by Dharma tradition people.
Ravindra..."
Is Narayana Murthy a good ambassador for brand India?
April 19
Is Narayana Murthy a good ambassador for brand India?
Rajiv Malhotra posts: In my recent IIT Mumbai talk, I criticized Mr. Murthy by contrasting him to the way the late chairman of Sony projected Japanese culture.
This generated an angry response by one man who says he is close to Murthy. He stopped watching my Youtube when he heard me say this. His defense of Murthy is not based on citing any facts on Murthy's intellectual positions regarding Indian civilization - such as Aryan/Dravidian issues, dalit divides, foreign nexuses in India, etc. rather it is entirely of a personal kind.
But my critique of Murthy is not personal. Nor do I doubt that he knows his IT/CEO profession well. I am referring to his lack of competence in Indian history and culture to be able to select grant recipients in a manner that benefits Indian civilization.
I have summarized prior messages in this egroup pertaining to this issue, as fyi to refresh memory:
Venkat posts:
A good overview of his thoughts is provided below which is a October 2002 Narayan Murthy gave a talk at IIT-d - Learning From The West".
Come adds:
"...I must refer to a video lecture by Francois Asselineau, an economist and intellectual in France who is warning against the creeping destruction of European nations being promoted by the EU ruling bureaucracies under the influence of the USA. The goal is to break up European countries into smaller provincial "independent" states of Europe, among which the sole common language would be American English and which would be governed by a centralised "transatlantic" Euro-American super-government..."
Gopal notes:
"I remember his speech in Banglore years back where he suggested to one of the event organizers not to sing the Indian National anthem because it can offend foreign students in the audience..."
jp claims:
"...Akshya Patra idea was supported by Narayan Murty. But later he hijacked the entire project in a very shrewd .. way..."
Ajay comments:
"To me it seems, Mr. Murthy doesn't know what exactly he is doing; inadvertently he is harming the very cause he wants to serve. He may not be aware of work of Rajiv ji. Someone who knows Mr. Murthy should present him 'Breaking India' book so that he can understand and realise what elements are working against India and how; should also present him 'Being Different' so that he can better handle the differences various cultures have and doesn't feel sorry or inferior about all this..."
Ananth shares some links:
"...Gail Omvedt embarrassed Narayana Murthy in an article that was published in the Hindu. The article is available in Ref 1
(Digression: Ref 1 cites Ref 2 as the source. I am not able to access Ref 2. However, I was able to dig up Ref 3, which seems to be a reaction to Ref 2 End Digression)..."
Rajiv adds:
"...Rajiv comment: Some of my supporters went to Mrs. Murthy a decade back and presented a Powerpoint on many of the issues i have uncovered, i.e. the things we discuss here. They were told in polite words that it was Mrs. Murthy's decision how she would spend her money. ... Consider, for example, the discussions we had here on Dharma Civilization Foundation. Its chief founders spent over a decade closely following my work with great interest, and with loud expressions of support for me. Yet when it was time to write a donation check, who did they support? Gerry Larson - whose support for foreign Aryans and whose fight against the unity and coherence of Hinduism became the basis for attacking BD."
Come adds:
"The global zeitgeist imposes a reverence for specialisation which makes people like Narayana Murthy, who is not an academic scholar on Hinduism, defer to "recognized' authorities, especially if they are western and teach in major western universities. Independent researchers are held as amateurs and few major "Establishment" foundations would dare extend sponsorships or awards to them since they are afraid that this would discredit them in the eyes of the masters of universitary discourse."
Akshay asks:
"...To understand Murthy, you gotta read Better India Better World. It show's his deep rooted ..."
Additionally, Mr. Narayana Murthy showed up in a few more old threads:
Houston Seminar on Breaking India: September 11, 2011 - Audience Q &
I am looking for a source for the quote from Narayana Murthy that Rajiv-ji mentions in the video.
Timeline: 8:53 to 9:05
<quote> According to Narayana Murthy, when he was asked why Indians were so good in IT, rather than explain that we have a whole learning tradition, he said"Thanks for the British for teaching us Maths and Science."
</quote>
Rajiv response: I heard this in his talk in 2003 at the Bangalore conference organized jointly organized by Templeton and Infinity Foundation. I felt he was impressing the western guests. The "scientific debt to colonialism" is a common theme amongst many leftists. Gyan Prakash of Princeton has written a book on
Indian science during the British period in which the direction of influence is onw-way from Europe to India as if the europeans learned nothing scientific from
Indians. (Mr. Murthy has said that he was rooted as a leftist in his younger days but that he later turned into a capitalist. That kind of rejection of the left is for its economic model only, but it does not automatically involve
embracing the dharma paradigm.) The key issue is: where lies the root of Indians' competence in science? The west claims to have invented the scientific method - a claim many Indians accept. Thats why I started the very ambitious project of doing 20 volumes on the History of Indian Science and Technology, of which 8 are published already. ...For the same amount of money, Mr. Murthy could have re-ignited a whole India based Sanskrit scholarship and translation under the guidance of pandits. Of course, its his hard earned money and we respect his
right to spend it howsoever he chooses. I am merely expressing my personal opinion on how I wish our tycoons would back their own civilization in the same manner as American tycoons helped build their civilizational foundations. The Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie philanthropy did not go to foreign scholars to write American history.
What do you think? Is Narayana Murthy a good brand ambassador for India? and why.
Is Narayana Murthy a good ambassador for brand India?
Rajiv Malhotra posts: In my recent IIT Mumbai talk, I criticized Mr. Murthy by contrasting him to the way the late chairman of Sony projected Japanese culture.
This generated an angry response by one man who says he is close to Murthy. He stopped watching my Youtube when he heard me say this. His defense of Murthy is not based on citing any facts on Murthy's intellectual positions regarding Indian civilization - such as Aryan/Dravidian issues, dalit divides, foreign nexuses in India, etc. rather it is entirely of a personal kind.
But my critique of Murthy is not personal. Nor do I doubt that he knows his IT/CEO profession well. I am referring to his lack of competence in Indian history and culture to be able to select grant recipients in a manner that benefits Indian civilization.
I have summarized prior messages in this egroup pertaining to this issue, as fyi to refresh memory:
Sheldon Pollock (author of "The Death of
Sanskrit") got the Padma Bhushan award by the GOI, and named head of the
project funded by Narayana Murthy ($10+ million initial funds) to bring out translations of Indian classics. Many Indian institutions have
been digested by westerners and used as a winter home. Pollock is a left-wing
Sanskritist who claims that the old "Brahamanical Sanskrit" is long dead;
and he is reviving the "real" Sanskrit that belongs to subalterns
like dalits, women, etc. whose voices have been oppressed. Narayan Murthy's
private foundation funded him to select and translate Indian classical works.
He is selecting certain works and focusing on translations that fragment Indian
civilization into mutually conflicting segments - languages, authors,
interpretations used to show no unity at all except by evil nationalists. He
gets to translate and INTERPRET various classical Indian texts - including supporting
Aryan/Dravidian divides, dalit/non-Dalit divides, and so forth.
The article,
"Columbia U. Professor Broadens Access to Sanskrit, Ancient Language of
the Elite", appeared in Chronicle of Higher Education:
The big picture one must know is as follows: The pseudo-sec scholars have thus far been criticized for
lack of Sanskrit knowledge and are therefore vulnerable to being considered
eurocentric. To remedy this a whole battalion of well indoctrinated young
scholars from places like JNU have been sponsored to get their PhDs under him,
so these next-gen sanskrit scholars will combine pseudo-sec ideology with
knowledge of sanskrit. Imagine a large group of academic professors who are
well educated in Sanskrit but opposed to dharma - as casteist, abusive of
women, anti-Muslim, chauvinistic, etc. - in other words the standard
"caste, cows, curry" stuff. Imagine a sanskrit speaking Arundhati Roy
and dozens like her.
This has been going on for a decade, first under Hawley at Columbia (who fluently speaks Vraj bhasha, sings Krishna bhajans, is seen doing "seva" in Vrindavan - much to the excitement of most Indians). Now it has been expanded and deepened under Pollock. ... Infosys has patronized people like Howard Gardener rather than the original sources of their reformulated ideas such as Sri Aurobindo.
This has been going on for a decade, first under Hawley at Columbia (who fluently speaks Vraj bhasha, sings Krishna bhajans, is seen doing "seva" in Vrindavan - much to the excitement of most Indians). Now it has been expanded and deepened under Pollock. ... Infosys has patronized people like Howard Gardener rather than the original sources of their reformulated ideas such as Sri Aurobindo.
Venkat posts:
A good overview of his thoughts is provided below which is a October 2002 Narayan Murthy gave a talk at IIT-d - Learning From The West".
Come adds:
"...I must refer to a video lecture by Francois Asselineau, an economist and intellectual in France who is warning against the creeping destruction of European nations being promoted by the EU ruling bureaucracies under the influence of the USA. The goal is to break up European countries into smaller provincial "independent" states of Europe, among which the sole common language would be American English and which would be governed by a centralised "transatlantic" Euro-American super-government..."
Gopal notes:
"I remember his speech in Banglore years back where he suggested to one of the event organizers not to sing the Indian National anthem because it can offend foreign students in the audience..."
jp claims:
"...Akshya Patra idea was supported by Narayan Murty. But later he hijacked the entire project in a very shrewd .. way..."
Ajay comments:
"To me it seems, Mr. Murthy doesn't know what exactly he is doing; inadvertently he is harming the very cause he wants to serve. He may not be aware of work of Rajiv ji. Someone who knows Mr. Murthy should present him 'Breaking India' book so that he can understand and realise what elements are working against India and how; should also present him 'Being Different' so that he can better handle the differences various cultures have and doesn't feel sorry or inferior about all this..."
Ananth shares some links:
"...Gail Omvedt embarrassed Narayana Murthy in an article that was published in the Hindu. The article is available in Ref 1
(Digression: Ref 1 cites Ref 2 as the source. I am not able to access Ref 2. However, I was able to dig up Ref 3, which seems to be a reaction to Ref 2 End Digression)..."
Rajiv adds:
"...Rajiv comment: Some of my supporters went to Mrs. Murthy a decade back and presented a Powerpoint on many of the issues i have uncovered, i.e. the things we discuss here. They were told in polite words that it was Mrs. Murthy's decision how she would spend her money. ... Consider, for example, the discussions we had here on Dharma Civilization Foundation. Its chief founders spent over a decade closely following my work with great interest, and with loud expressions of support for me. Yet when it was time to write a donation check, who did they support? Gerry Larson - whose support for foreign Aryans and whose fight against the unity and coherence of Hinduism became the basis for attacking BD."
Come adds:
"The global zeitgeist imposes a reverence for specialisation which makes people like Narayana Murthy, who is not an academic scholar on Hinduism, defer to "recognized' authorities, especially if they are western and teach in major western universities. Independent researchers are held as amateurs and few major "Establishment" foundations would dare extend sponsorships or awards to them since they are afraid that this would discredit them in the eyes of the masters of universitary discourse."
Akshay asks:
"...To understand Murthy, you gotta read Better India Better World. It show's his deep rooted ..."
Additionally, Mr. Narayana Murthy showed up in a few more old threads:
Houston Seminar on Breaking India: September 11, 2011 - Audience Q &
I am looking for a source for the quote from Narayana Murthy that Rajiv-ji mentions in the video.
Timeline: 8:53 to 9:05
<quote> According to Narayana Murthy, when he was asked why Indians were so good in IT, rather than explain that we have a whole learning tradition, he said"Thanks for the British for teaching us Maths and Science."
</quote>
Rajiv response: I heard this in his talk in 2003 at the Bangalore conference organized jointly organized by Templeton and Infinity Foundation. I felt he was impressing the western guests. The "scientific debt to colonialism" is a common theme amongst many leftists. Gyan Prakash of Princeton has written a book on
Indian science during the British period in which the direction of influence is onw-way from Europe to India as if the europeans learned nothing scientific from
Indians. (Mr. Murthy has said that he was rooted as a leftist in his younger days but that he later turned into a capitalist. That kind of rejection of the left is for its economic model only, but it does not automatically involve
embracing the dharma paradigm.) The key issue is: where lies the root of Indians' competence in science? The west claims to have invented the scientific method - a claim many Indians accept. Thats why I started the very ambitious project of doing 20 volumes on the History of Indian Science and Technology, of which 8 are published already. ...For the same amount of money, Mr. Murthy could have re-ignited a whole India based Sanskrit scholarship and translation under the guidance of pandits. Of course, its his hard earned money and we respect his
right to spend it howsoever he chooses. I am merely expressing my personal opinion on how I wish our tycoons would back their own civilization in the same manner as American tycoons helped build their civilizational foundations. The Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie philanthropy did not go to foreign scholars to write American history.
What do you think? Is Narayana Murthy a good brand ambassador for India? and why.
RMF Summary: Week of April 4 - 10, 2013
Going forward, each weekly summary will contain a brief synopsis of the content, which will highlight some of the key points and takeaways. Anybody interested in co-authoring and supporting this blog to keep it productive, and make it more relevant and useful, send me a tweet.
Synoposis
We share Rajiv ji's latest interview (below). A key takeaway for me from this interview is that Rajiv's focus is not as much on the 20% "staunch" Hindus or the 20% anti-Hindu, but the middle 60% who are confused. It appears that the efforts of many well-wishers of Hinduism are either in the form of preaching to those 20% who already cherish Dharma, or to the other 20% who couldn't care less. Reaching out to this middle 60% segment of the Indian population is critical to maintaining the integral unity of India.
The Hindi version of 'Being Different' will be out within a few months (Ati Uttam!). Then there are two articles relating to 'Breaking India':
1. activities in the House of Lords
2. Gospel mischief in India, and egroup members getting spammed by Evangelist group World Vision.
3. Finally, a new and interesting thread on the 'Romanization of Sanskrit' was posted, that appears to be an attempt to digest Sanskrit by doing away with Devanagiri altogether!
April 5
Rajiv Malhotra's interview on Sudarshan News channel (in Hindi)
Devendra comments:
The only way to make real impact is to work unwaveringly for a long period of time on a single goal. Many people dig small holes in many places in their lives,but never forcefully enough with single-minded effort and with a plan to be able to dig out water. Rajiv Malhotra Ji's work is a guiding lesson for Hindus who want to be a part of sustaining and strengthening Hindu culture.
Hindi version of his books Being Different and Breaking India would be published this year. Hindi version of Being Different will be available in July...
People can write me off line to place their orders of Hindi version of Being Different
April 6
Breaking India work in progress in UK House of Lords
Ashok posts: Dear Rajiv I am attaching a transcript of discussion in British House of Lords last week. I have also attached my angry response as you predicted we always do....
Prakash adds:
April 7
Criticism and debate on BD in another forum
... After reading the review, make sure to read the 100+ comments that debate the review. You might enjoy reading and participating there. Its informative for people to find out how the world of discourse is stacked up today...
[this clumsy review in Eurasiareview has been covered in a prior post a while back].
April 7
What is the indian language word for Evangelism?
BVK asks: is there a technically correct indian language word - any one/ sanskrit or other languages / singular or constructed word to properly translate the church-word ' evangelism'?
April 9
Romanization of Sanskrit
Aditya shares: I came across a website learnsanskrit.org and was excited about what it has to offer. On the whole the idea of creating a learners guide for English speakers
Ajay responds:
"A few months back I had also gone to that site. It's good you pointed out. Just to recall where I see the issue:
One more thing, even in India many books are there which teach Sanskrit but without teaching the Devnagari
script.
.... Though Sanskrit teaching in other scripts might look good as it will become easier to teach initially. But long term result of not learning Devangari are
1) Losing the relationship between Sanskrit and Devnagari script. I can't imagine to loose this relationship; like, the 'OM' word (symbol) in Devanagari looks majestic.
2) Not able to read original Sanskrit text as it is...."
April 9
From "Gospel for Asia"
Ravi shares: In 2008, I had circulated two online-newspaper articles (from "The Telegraph", an India-based newspaper and "The Peninsula", a Qatar-based newspaper) on a "DalitFreedomNetwork" google-group, drawing their members' attention to the two newspaper articles' details on the alleged financial finagling by Gospel For Asia's founder (K.P.Yohannan, who is Kerala-born-and-raised, but now settled in Dallas, TX, USA).
... the alacrity
with which I got their beguiling response is interesting and points to
the efficiency and tenacity of this global network.
April 10
World Vision
I am not sure if this is sheer coincidence. But ever since I started posting messages in this discussion group, I have started to receive emails from "World Vision" ...
(yes, it seems many in the group have been spammed. even Rajiv ji :)
Synoposis
We share Rajiv ji's latest interview (below). A key takeaway for me from this interview is that Rajiv's focus is not as much on the 20% "staunch" Hindus or the 20% anti-Hindu, but the middle 60% who are confused. It appears that the efforts of many well-wishers of Hinduism are either in the form of preaching to those 20% who already cherish Dharma, or to the other 20% who couldn't care less. Reaching out to this middle 60% segment of the Indian population is critical to maintaining the integral unity of India.
The Hindi version of 'Being Different' will be out within a few months (Ati Uttam!). Then there are two articles relating to 'Breaking India':
1. activities in the House of Lords
2. Gospel mischief in India, and egroup members getting spammed by Evangelist group World Vision.
3. Finally, a new and interesting thread on the 'Romanization of Sanskrit' was posted, that appears to be an attempt to digest Sanskrit by doing away with Devanagiri altogether!
April 5
Rajiv Malhotra's interview on Sudarshan News channel (in Hindi)
Devendra comments:
The only way to make real impact is to work unwaveringly for a long period of time on a single goal. Many people dig small holes in many places in their lives,but never forcefully enough with single-minded effort and with a plan to be able to dig out water. Rajiv Malhotra Ji's work is a guiding lesson for Hindus who want to be a part of sustaining and strengthening Hindu culture.
Hindi version of his books Being Different and Breaking India would be published this year. Hindi version of Being Different will be available in July...
People can write me off line to place their orders of Hindi version of Being Different
April 6
Breaking India work in progress in UK House of Lords
Ashok posts: Dear Rajiv I am attaching a transcript of discussion in British House of Lords last week. I have also attached my angry response as you predicted we always do....
Prakash adds:
Members may be interested in this comment in relation to developments on caste and the Equality Act in the UK:
Criticism and debate on BD in another forum
... After reading the review, make sure to read the 100+ comments that debate the review. You might enjoy reading and participating there. Its informative for people to find out how the world of discourse is stacked up today...
[this clumsy review in Eurasiareview has been covered in a prior post a while back].
April 7
What is the indian language word for Evangelism?
BVK asks: is there a technically correct indian language word - any one/ sanskrit or other languages / singular or constructed word to properly translate the church-word ' evangelism'?
April 9
Romanization of Sanskrit
Aditya shares: I came across a website learnsanskrit.org and was excited about what it has to offer. On the whole the idea of creating a learners guide for English speakers
Ajay responds:
"A few months back I had also gone to that site. It's good you pointed out. Just to recall where I see the issue:
1) in History of Sanskrit.
2) at De-linking of Sanskrit from Devanagari script.
script.
.... Though Sanskrit teaching in other scripts might look good as it will become easier to teach initially. But long term result of not learning Devangari are
1) Losing the relationship between Sanskrit and Devnagari script. I can't imagine to loose this relationship; like, the 'OM' word (symbol) in Devanagari looks majestic.
2) Not able to read original Sanskrit text as it is...."
April 9
From "Gospel for Asia"
Ravi shares: In 2008, I had circulated two online-newspaper articles (from "The Telegraph", an India-based newspaper and "The Peninsula", a Qatar-based newspaper) on a "DalitFreedomNetwork" google-group, drawing their members' attention to the two newspaper articles' details on the alleged financial finagling by Gospel For Asia's founder (K.P.Yohannan, who is Kerala-born-and-raised, but now settled in Dallas, TX, USA).
Within 24 hours of sending my email, I had received this
detailed reply (email below) from GFA's COO (David Carrol,..... who is also based in Dallas, TX, USA.
And here's a quick look at the GFA's NGO
registration details that shows how the Indian and Western destablisers
brainstorm, synergise and work closely together at their eventual goal
of Breaking India:
World Vision
I am not sure if this is sheer coincidence. But ever since I started posting messages in this discussion group, I have started to receive emails from "World Vision" ...
(yes, it seems many in the group have been spammed. even Rajiv ji :)
Did Devdutt Pattanaik Commit Plagiarism? : The Complete Discussion
Introduction
Thanks to Jitendra who found this (September 2012) youtube video of Mr. Pattanaik and forwarded it to the egroup after noting: "...The ideas he is talking about are striking similar to Rajiv Malhotra's ideas in 'Being Different' (BD)'s chapter #4 Order and Chaos...".
Jitendra subsequently wrote a blog that summarizes his findings and his communication with Mr. Pattanaik here. We summarize the discussion in the e-Group of Mr. Pattanaik's disappointing approach. His conflicting responses to Jitendra are pointed out by contributors here. In his 2009 video on a related topic, there's zero mention of 'Order & Chaos'. Unconvincing claims of having/not-having read BD despite being sent a copy, but then later hiding under the umbrella of 'this is all well known prior work'.
Background
Read Chapter 4 of Rajiv Malhotra's book 'Being Different'. BD's Table of Contents is listed here. You can search "Order and Chaos" by keyword in this site here. Here is a blogpost from early 2012 that discusses BD's chapter 4. Mr. Pattanaik previously featured in a February 2012 egroup discussion that is summarized here. A YT video of the BD book discussion in 2011 around this topic is embedded below:
Rajiv's response:
"Mr. Pattanaik knows my work and was send BD as a gift by Ganesh[] in Mumbai. Mr. Pattanaik was invited for the book launch function to speak but did not accept.
I have since then become familiar with his work, and criticized it as facilitating digestion because he fails to emphasize differences that would cause him difference anxiety. I am glad [Jitendra] took the step he did in this thread. If you send out a tweet and include me, I shall retweet it for wider awareness. This needs to become more widely known."
Jitendra comments:
"I got following response [see his blog post] from Mr. Devdutt Pattanaik. It appears to me that he is avoiding to answer by saying "Sanatan does not have one source; western doctrines do". I replied back with question with Yes/No answer, lets see whether he is open to acknowledge "Order and Chaos" as Rajivji's work?.....
..... Received reply from Devdutt Pattanaik, He plainly rejected to give credit to Rajivji, citing he never read the book Being Different. It is shameful that he accepts that he was invited to BD launch, which implies he was aware of book BD and Rajiv Malhotra. After being shown that his speech has exactly same ideas that are present in Being Different book, he still refuse to acknowledge BD [Mr Pattanaik's response:
I have never read his book . So cannot credit him . Good he thinks like me and many other scholars who existed before both of us."
Discussion
Karthik asks:
""Never read his book" eh?
Then how come in his earlier email Pattanaik criticizes Jitendra ji for not understanding "what Rajiv has been trying to explain so hard"? How does Pattanaik know what Rajiv ji has been trying to explain without ever having read his book? that Rajiv ji has been trying to explain without ever having read his book?.."
Priyadarshi asks:
" Isn't copyright violation/plagiarism itself very western (thus assimilated/digested) accusation? In Indian view it means 'popularizing' the idea. There is an anecdote that when Urdu poet Ghalib was passing by a brothel he heard his Nazm being sung by a Rakkassa (mistress). He went their and met her. She did not know Ghalib- or ever heard about him. But Ghalib was happy and later said that songs that reach such places will never perish..."
Rajiv responds:
"The comment posted [] is a common moronic position of many Indians. According to the same logic, getting digested is OK because resisting would be a "Western" idea of identity, ownership, etc. Any defense of identity is seen as a bad idea (a common postmodern moronic position that BD addresses explicitly in anticipation of this comment) thereby offering oneself as easy target.
Such ideas of dharma are nonsense.
You must know that a major dharmic principle explained in BD is CONTEXT. Dharma depends on what the context is.
If the context is that certain rules control the playing field, but these are not being applied equitably, then I must fight under those rules to get equal treatment. So dont mix up context...
It is moronic to say that:
- Kauravs and Pandavs need not fight because there is no "ownership" concept of kingdom, etc. in dharma. (Similarly, many morons used to argue against Indian freedom movement saying that according to dharma British were the same as us...)
- world is mithya so why bother...
- everything belongs to God so dont defend against any thief. Nothing is mine anyway.
- we are not supposed to see anyone as "other" because he is Brahman.
As illustrated below, urdu poetry and other intoxicants can be cited to make any point under the sun one wants to. That is never a way to argue logically. I can cite some poem to claim that [Priyadarshi] below does not own her house, car, degree, or anything else, and ought to hand these over to me. Right? That some poet somewhere in some context said something --is hardly proof that it is valid.
It is also incorrect and selective quoting to say that Indians always produced knowledge anonymously. This is untrue: Gaurapada, Shankara, Ramanuja, Madhava, Bhaskar, Patanjali, Panini, Bharthrahari, dharmakirti, chandrakirti, Haribhadra, etc. - and a few hundred other great thinkers - are well identified. This has enabled scholars to give concreteness to specific siddhantas linked to specific thinkers, and argue for/against them using the specific sources. Only a person unread in Indian thought can make the silly statement [] about indifference to authenticity of sources and disinterest in accuracy of presenting a given position. The tradition has emphasized rigor in citing one's sources (e.g. every Vedanta school cites brahmasutras and various commentaries on it very explicitly, NOT some mumbojumbo "generic" source.)
.... First [Priyadarshi] should donate everything [] owns to the general public before advocating the role model of sanyasa to others. Second, [Priyadarshi] must convince Mr. Pattnaik to delete all copyright statements from all his own publications in the name of what [] considers to be "dharmic ethos"....
(BTW, Yesterday's IIT Mumbai event was fantastic like all my other events in Mumbai. The highlight was a debate with a woman from social sciences in the audience, preaching this kind of nonsense - all in the name of dalits, Kancha Ilaiah, etc. The students thoroughly enjoyed the thrashing she got in a long fight that she persisted in continuing, and things went from bad to worse for her. I hope they got this fully on the video, because it makes a great case of how we must inspire our youth by fighting such folks.) "
Surya responds to Priyadarshi's position:
"Priyadarshi [] wrote:
Jayant adds:
Ashok posts:
Akshay remarks:
Saket concurs with Rajiv's views on copyright:
Sayvari posts:
Rajiv next comments on the plethora of serious problems that come with plagiarism:
[YT link]
He seems to be more impressed by Greek mythology than Indian Itihaas. All in all he surely looks like a sepoy to me.
I really hope there will be some harsh criticism for plagiarism..."
Rajiv Malhotra comments:
Jayasimha posts:
For those wondering about the reference to Ms. O'Flaherty's (Wendy Doniger) book, here is an interview Mr. Pattanaik has done with her.
Rajiv responds:
"Amazing how Mr. Pattnaik promotes Doniger with such adoration, thereby paving the way for the advancement in India of her recent books on Hinduism.
Also, he is like a student learning from her about Indian "myths", how to interpret them, what Linga means, who is Ram, etc.
In my UTurn Theory, Stage-4 is distortion by Westerners. Stage-5 is when this distorted version gets re-exported back to India, where an eager group of Indian "good cops" are waiting to become franchise operators and do the distribution."
Balbir adds:
"I call this the 'theory of 'idea cycle' just like the' theory of
product cycle' in economics. ... 'idea cycle' hits the
head and could destroy the culture. There will always be individuals like that and we need to stay focused on bringing out the truth."
Rohit shares Devdutt Pattanaik's profile.
Thanks to Jitendra who found this (September 2012) youtube video of Mr. Pattanaik and forwarded it to the egroup after noting: "...The ideas he is talking about are striking similar to Rajiv Malhotra's ideas in 'Being Different' (BD)'s chapter #4 Order and Chaos...".
Jitendra subsequently wrote a blog that summarizes his findings and his communication with Mr. Pattanaik here. We summarize the discussion in the e-Group of Mr. Pattanaik's disappointing approach. His conflicting responses to Jitendra are pointed out by contributors here. In his 2009 video on a related topic, there's zero mention of 'Order & Chaos'. Unconvincing claims of having/not-having read BD despite being sent a copy, but then later hiding under the umbrella of 'this is all well known prior work'.
Background
Read Chapter 4 of Rajiv Malhotra's book 'Being Different'. BD's Table of Contents is listed here. You can search "Order and Chaos" by keyword in this site here. Here is a blogpost from early 2012 that discusses BD's chapter 4. Mr. Pattanaik previously featured in a February 2012 egroup discussion that is summarized here. A YT video of the BD book discussion in 2011 around this topic is embedded below:
Rajiv's response:
"Mr. Pattanaik knows my work and was send BD as a gift by Ganesh[] in Mumbai. Mr. Pattanaik was invited for the book launch function to speak but did not accept.
I have since then become familiar with his work, and criticized it as facilitating digestion because he fails to emphasize differences that would cause him difference anxiety. I am glad [Jitendra] took the step he did in this thread. If you send out a tweet and include me, I shall retweet it for wider awareness. This needs to become more widely known."
Jitendra comments:
"I got following response [see his blog post] from Mr. Devdutt Pattanaik. It appears to me that he is avoiding to answer by saying "Sanatan does not have one source; western doctrines do". I replied back with question with Yes/No answer, lets see whether he is open to acknowledge "Order and Chaos" as Rajivji's work?.....
..... Received reply from Devdutt Pattanaik, He plainly rejected to give credit to Rajivji, citing he never read the book Being Different. It is shameful that he accepts that he was invited to BD launch, which implies he was aware of book BD and Rajiv Malhotra. After being shown that his speech has exactly same ideas that are present in Being Different book, he still refuse to acknowledge BD [Mr Pattanaik's response:
I have never read his book . So cannot credit him . Good he thinks like me and many other scholars who existed before both of us."
Discussion
Karthik asks:
""Never read his book" eh?
Then how come in his earlier email Pattanaik criticizes Jitendra ji for not understanding "what Rajiv has been trying to explain so hard"? How does Pattanaik know what Rajiv ji has been trying to explain without ever having read his book? that Rajiv ji has been trying to explain without ever having read his book?.."
Priyadarshi asks:
" Isn't copyright violation/plagiarism itself very western (thus assimilated/digested) accusation? In Indian view it means 'popularizing' the idea. There is an anecdote that when Urdu poet Ghalib was passing by a brothel he heard his Nazm being sung by a Rakkassa (mistress). He went their and met her. She did not know Ghalib- or ever heard about him. But Ghalib was happy and later said that songs that reach such places will never perish..."
Rajiv responds:
"The comment posted [] is a common moronic position of many Indians. According to the same logic, getting digested is OK because resisting would be a "Western" idea of identity, ownership, etc. Any defense of identity is seen as a bad idea (a common postmodern moronic position that BD addresses explicitly in anticipation of this comment) thereby offering oneself as easy target.
Such ideas of dharma are nonsense.
You must know that a major dharmic principle explained in BD is CONTEXT. Dharma depends on what the context is.
If the context is that certain rules control the playing field, but these are not being applied equitably, then I must fight under those rules to get equal treatment. So dont mix up context...
It is moronic to say that:
- Kauravs and Pandavs need not fight because there is no "ownership" concept of kingdom, etc. in dharma. (Similarly, many morons used to argue against Indian freedom movement saying that according to dharma British were the same as us...)
- world is mithya so why bother...
- everything belongs to God so dont defend against any thief. Nothing is mine anyway.
- we are not supposed to see anyone as "other" because he is Brahman.
As illustrated below, urdu poetry and other intoxicants can be cited to make any point under the sun one wants to. That is never a way to argue logically. I can cite some poem to claim that [Priyadarshi] below does not own her house, car, degree, or anything else, and ought to hand these over to me. Right? That some poet somewhere in some context said something --is hardly proof that it is valid.
It is also incorrect and selective quoting to say that Indians always produced knowledge anonymously. This is untrue: Gaurapada, Shankara, Ramanuja, Madhava, Bhaskar, Patanjali, Panini, Bharthrahari, dharmakirti, chandrakirti, Haribhadra, etc. - and a few hundred other great thinkers - are well identified. This has enabled scholars to give concreteness to specific siddhantas linked to specific thinkers, and argue for/against them using the specific sources. Only a person unread in Indian thought can make the silly statement [] about indifference to authenticity of sources and disinterest in accuracy of presenting a given position. The tradition has emphasized rigor in citing one's sources (e.g. every Vedanta school cites brahmasutras and various commentaries on it very explicitly, NOT some mumbojumbo "generic" source.)
.... First [Priyadarshi] should donate everything [] owns to the general public before advocating the role model of sanyasa to others. Second, [Priyadarshi] must convince Mr. Pattnaik to delete all copyright statements from all his own publications in the name of what [] considers to be "dharmic ethos"....
(BTW, Yesterday's IIT Mumbai event was fantastic like all my other events in Mumbai. The highlight was a debate with a woman from social sciences in the audience, preaching this kind of nonsense - all in the name of dalits, Kancha Ilaiah, etc. The students thoroughly enjoyed the thrashing she got in a long fight that she persisted in continuing, and things went from bad to worse for her. I hope they got this fully on the video, because it makes a great case of how we must inspire our youth by fighting such folks.) "
Surya responds to Priyadarshi's position:
"Priyadarshi [] wrote:
'Rich has become richer, poorer has become poorer'- do we ever acknowledge Poet P B Shelley for turning this phrase (while writing a pamphlet on behalf of his Anarchist father-in-law William Godwin).
This
is just a statement of Shelley, not a fundamental concept. Contrast
this to giving names of Newton, Kepler, Einstein, Boyle, Bose and
Higgins etc.,
Point is not self glory but to
ensure that the specific concepts introduced by these individuals do not
morph over time as others influence these concepts. Others can
influence and modify them but they have to identify the original concept
with the original author and the modified concept with the modified
author. This ensures that things do not get muddled.
The
issue here is that digesti on works precisely by violating this - by
removing the context and authorship and "secularizing" the idea and
later morphing its original intent.
Proper
identification of concepts is an issue of careful categorization and
logic - Dharmic thought pays ample importance to them."
Jayant adds:
"....Its true that in India knowledge was free but any founder of knowledge
has his name attached with it. Even if we look at Vedas we find each
mantra has a rishis name attached to it who is the founder. Even other
knowledge books like book on surgery as Sushruta samhita or ayurvedic
book like charak samhita are named after their founders. So Rajivji
also has full authority to thesis he wrote. Whoever using his thesis
should mentioned him whatsoever. "
Ashok posts:
"...I suspect Mr Pattanaik would have felt privileged to acknowledge his source had it led to him quoting some well known 'western' thinker/philosopher, thus gaining by projecting that he is 'well read'. Shame on the [] Pattanaiks of this world for not acknowledging or
propagating ideas of not needing to acknowlede their sources of information and ideas. It might surprise them about how much more effective it might be, in this particular regard, if they quote someone who their listener/reader might not have come across..."
Akshay remarks:
" Every now and then at least one intellectual Sepoy turns up to sermon (not preach ), ... So please post this [YT] link as response. Rajiv Malhotra talks about the Need for Hindu Identity"
Saket concurs with Rajiv's views on copyright:
"1. There is tradition among Indian authors to acknowledge orginal works
and give due credt to the authors. For eg in Kautilya Arthashatrs
Kautilys himself quotes many earlier Arthashatrs by Brahaspati, Manu,
Kaunabdanta etc but adds his views not by demolishing them but but
augmenting them. Same trend is seen in Panchatra where author recognizes
older Niti Maters.
2. On names of Temple architects, my view is with newer findings it is now increasingly clear that Hindu history as we know today is a sham. We dont know why these names are not made available in public. I also came to know the Govt of India does not permit research in Hindu related topics in National Archives. Present notion that Hindus have writers/engineers have not left their signature is not acceptable. "
2. On names of Temple architects, my view is with newer findings it is now increasingly clear that Hindu history as we know today is a sham. We dont know why these names are not made available in public. I also came to know the Govt of India does not permit research in Hindu related topics in National Archives. Present notion that Hindus have writers/engineers have not left their signature is not acceptable. "
Sayvari posts:
"I had another question regarding Devdutt's book on "Shiva To Shankara - Decoding the Phallic symbaol" wherein the Bibliography contains amongst severeal
other authors references to O'Flaherty,Wendy Doniger trans, Hindu Myths...
Considering the tainted reputation of Wendy Doniger and now that of Devdutt should this book and others be considered a good read at all. Thanks.
Rajiv comment: Yes, he does mainly cut and paste and lacks deep embodied knowing. A charlatan with good PR and sponsorship from "mainstream" Hindus who
tend to be confused and "secularized"."
other authors references to O'Flaherty,Wendy Doniger trans, Hindu Myths...
Considering the tainted reputation of Wendy Doniger and now that of Devdutt should this book and others be considered a good read at all. Thanks.
Rajiv comment: Yes, he does mainly cut and paste and lacks deep embodied knowing. A charlatan with good PR and sponsorship from "mainstream" Hindus who
tend to be confused and "secularized"."
Rajiv next comments on the plethora of serious problems that come with plagiarism:
- Loss of authenticity because the source position gets erased and cannot serve as a foundation. We have pointed out how Pattnaik is digesting Hinduism into "generic spirituality" in many instances. He is especially reluctant to show differences that make the Abrahamic religions seem peculiar and deficient by comparison. This dilution/digestion is destructive. He seems like a good-cop. We know where that leads.
- Leads to scattering rather than consolidation of a new, strong siddhanta like I am trying to build. Major thought systems - be they Marxism or Shankara's Advaita - have retained a core corpus or original works that are cited. Future thinkers may well disagree or try adaptations and extensions. But they always reference the original source to understand the overall system.
- Pattanaik clearly does not know the whole system. Citing isolated parts here and there is going to take us to a synthetic unity. He must understand that dharma's comfort with chaos is linked to integral unity and to adhyatma vidya. On the other hand, the West's obsession with order is linked to synthetic unity and history-centrism. These are well explained in BD. So he cannot take one idea in isolation and claim to understand it. Its a whole system.
- Plagiarism is based on tamas. It encourages laziness as substitute for purushartha. Thats a bad example to set. We need to inspire more people to work hard in understanding our traditions, producing more original works.
"Plagiarism some how has embedded itself within the psyche of current generation Indians. I am sorry for this blanket statement however at a deeper level its true.
....Rajiv Malhotras work of course is an example of original research, we can very obviously see the resistance from sepoys and white supremacist. Similarly the work of Shrikant Talageri's RgVed Mitani research has been demonised by a well known American professor because they currently have the power to control the discourse and grand narrative.
Rajivjis work is the continued struggle to break ourselves free from this hegemony. Patanaiks plagiarism not only is lazy but I suspect a more sinister agenda here.
The people quoted in the references and the aforementioned professor who I wont name perhaps is trying to put Rajivjis seminal work as non innovation. They want to claim its not original this not worthy of the attention he deserves. Perhaps AAR was the moment where it clicked for those collective bone heads that- we cannot co opt Rajiv into our fold, we cant copy him either so why not prove him to be a heretic...
Pattanaik has to be challenged either person or in court because our Hindu Identity rests on us trying to defend what is rightfully ours. We cannot let someone like Pattanaik create these divergence.
Here is a video i found about mr pattanaik at TEDtalks 2009. As alluded to by [Jitendra], mr Pattanaik does not talk about order and chaos at all.
http://www.video.weforchrist.com/2012/03/23/devdutt-pattanaik-east-vs-west-the-myths-that-mystify/
....Rajiv Malhotras work of course is an example of original research, we can very obviously see the resistance from sepoys and white supremacist. Similarly the work of Shrikant Talageri's RgVed Mitani research has been demonised by a well known American professor because they currently have the power to control the discourse and grand narrative.
Rajivjis work is the continued struggle to break ourselves free from this hegemony. Patanaiks plagiarism not only is lazy but I suspect a more sinister agenda here.
The people quoted in the references and the aforementioned professor who I wont name perhaps is trying to put Rajivjis seminal work as non innovation. They want to claim its not original this not worthy of the attention he deserves. Perhaps AAR was the moment where it clicked for those collective bone heads that- we cannot co opt Rajiv into our fold, we cant copy him either so why not prove him to be a heretic...
Pattanaik has to be challenged either person or in court because our Hindu Identity rests on us trying to defend what is rightfully ours. We cannot let someone like Pattanaik create these divergence.
Here is a video i found about mr pattanaik at TEDtalks 2009. As alluded to by [Jitendra], mr Pattanaik does not talk about order and chaos at all.
http://www.video.weforchrist.com/2012/03/23/devdutt-pattanaik-east-vs-west-the-myths-that-mystify/
[YT link]
He seems to be more impressed by Greek mythology than Indian Itihaas. All in all he surely looks like a sepoy to me.
I really hope there will be some harsh criticism for plagiarism..."
Rajiv Malhotra comments:
Lets preempt more plagiarism by taking my ideas to the masses directly fast:
A major publisher in very interested in doing small books with me, each on a specific theme of mine. For instance, Order & Chaos could be the first title.
Each title will be 100 pages roughly. It will be light, easy. Lots of graphics/cartoons etc. This makes it east to follow. Some jokes added. A youthful flavor added in the "dialogues" between persons in some places.
Can someone refer me to graphic artists who do this? I worked with a graphic artist to develop the comics in Invading the Sacred which were very appreciated. But I lost track of him. I know how to direct this kind of effort and what I need is a solid graphic artist.
A major publisher in very interested in doing small books with me, each on a specific theme of mine. For instance, Order & Chaos could be the first title.
Each title will be 100 pages roughly. It will be light, easy. Lots of graphics/cartoons etc. This makes it east to follow. Some jokes added. A youthful flavor added in the "dialogues" between persons in some places.
Can someone refer me to graphic artists who do this? I worked with a graphic artist to develop the comics in Invading the Sacred which were very appreciated. But I lost track of him. I know how to direct this kind of effort and what I need is a solid graphic artist.
Jayasimha posts:
For those wondering about the reference to Ms. O'Flaherty's (Wendy Doniger) book, here is an interview Mr. Pattanaik has done with her.
Rajiv responds:
"Amazing how Mr. Pattnaik promotes Doniger with such adoration, thereby paving the way for the advancement in India of her recent books on Hinduism.
Also, he is like a student learning from her about Indian "myths", how to interpret them, what Linga means, who is Ram, etc.
In my UTurn Theory, Stage-4 is distortion by Westerners. Stage-5 is when this distorted version gets re-exported back to India, where an eager group of Indian "good cops" are waiting to become franchise operators and do the distribution."
Balbir adds:
"I call this the 'theory of 'idea cycle' just like the' theory of
product cycle' in economics. ... 'idea cycle' hits the
head and could destroy the culture. There will always be individuals like that and we need to stay focused on bringing out the truth."
Rohit shares Devdutt Pattanaik's profile.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)