tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post2553084982210703561..comments2024-03-21T00:42:18.535-07:00Comments on Koenraad Elst: The Vienna conference: Dominik Wujastyk on the Buddhist element in the Yoga SutraKoenraad Elsthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02503713923882807510noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-71249563458962432512014-07-23T10:12:22.263-07:002014-07-23T10:12:22.263-07:00Golden Reed I personally think the Krishna of Chan...Golden Reed I personally think the Krishna of Chandogya Upanishad is the Krishna we speak of...I more or less will agree with your position ...but have to study more the genealogy provided by sandalwood..thanks for the new info regarding Chandogya being antecedent to Brihad.Turbolag Panjahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17588337373998480646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-88060182739072889802014-03-19T10:36:26.414-07:002014-03-19T10:36:26.414-07:00Dear Dr. Elst,
An illuminating blog, as always. A...Dear Dr. Elst,<br /><br />An illuminating blog, as always. Apropos your glowing reference to the Samkhya School, Acharya Rajneesh / Osho shares your view. Although he wasn't a scholar, he did have an understanding of a breadth of Dharmic themes as an exegete. And while he didn't write any commentaries or books himself, some of the compilations of his discourses I've come across establish how highly he rated Samkhya. <br /><br />I tend to think amongst all the 20th century Indian-origin religious figures / scholars, he was perhaps the only one to do so. I specifically refer to his exposition on the `psychology of Bhagwat Gita' in which he takes one of the passages referring to Kapila to bring forth the preeminence of Samkhya. In fact, three of the books based on his numerous lectures which I've read broadly uphold Samkhya, and not the more popular Mayavaad of Shankara, to be the key. He certainly refers to Samkhya overwhelmingly, with almost little or no mention of Vedanta. Amongst the Vedantic texts, he was partial towards the Ashtavakra Gita. <br /><br />Max Muller noted in his introduction to the translations of Shankara's works that he faced his biggest challenges from the rigorous Samkhya scholars from amongst all the orthodox schools. <br /><br />Best regards,<br />Apro_scribehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08941378044571396384noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-43030387923259209632014-03-08T10:17:10.406-08:002014-03-08T10:17:10.406-08:00Dr. Elst, interesting that you cite the example of...Dr. Elst, interesting that you cite the example of Viśvāmitra and Vasiṣṭha. Ever since I became better acquainted with the Rgveda and Nirukta, I have doubted the Puranic story of their rivalry. Three facts stand out:<br /><br />(1)There is no evidence (as far as I know) in the Rgveda that Viśvāmitra or his ancestors were kings. There are hymns composed by kings in the Rgveda, but they clearly make that known. If Viśvāmitra gave up his kingdom to become a sage, he would certainly mention this momentous change in his life at least once in his hymns. He certainly is not shy about declaring his moment of illumination, "I am Agni" (3.26.7).<br /><br />(2)An early medieval commentator on the Nirukta, Durgacarya, omits commenting on a Viśvāmitra verse on the grounds that the verse insults Vasiṣṭha, and Durgacarya being of the Vasiṣṭha lineage. The reason is very frivolous: the use of the word "lodha" (="lubdha" greedy) in 3.53.23 is supposed to refer to Vasiṣṭha, which is not the case.<br /><br />(3)If there really was a history of clashes, then Veda Vyasa, the great-grandson of Vasiṣṭha was clearly in a prime position to do damage to Viśvāmitra's legacy by expunging all of the latter's hymns from the Rgveda or some such thing. It seems unbelievable that an older descendant doesn't know of this rivalry, whereas a much younger descendant makes much of it. Golden Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08249389319082539591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-10030742983399986152014-03-08T09:11:35.532-08:002014-03-08T09:11:35.532-08:00@Turbolag: I just read through the posts you menti...@Turbolag: I just read through the posts you mention, and I don't see Brhadaranyaka being said to be the oldest Upanishad. In fact, internal evidence shows that Aitareya is oldest, followed by Chandogya & Taittiriya, followed by Brhadaranyaka & Kaushitaki. Aitareya Up. was written by Mahidasa Aitareya, who is mentioned in Ch. Up. to have lived to 116 years. Further, the "protagonists" of Ch. Up. such as Śvetaketu, Satyakama Jabala and Uddalaka Aruni are mentioned in Brh. Up. as seeking to learn new teachings. The reverse mentioning does not occur, i.e., Ait. Up. doesn't mention Satyakama Jabala, etc; Ch. Up. doesn't mention Yajnavalkya. If these teachers were so famous and comtemporaneous, they would certainly have been mentioned. <br /><br />Also, I wonder if this statement in the Ch. Up. has caught anyone's attention: (3.17)"This doctrine was taught by Ghora Ᾱṅgirasa to Kṛṣṇa Devakiputra, and by that he never again suffered thirst." Of course, the names Kṛṣṇa and Devaki are very common, but the former being the latter's son might be a little rare. How pertinent is this to the dating of Upanishads and Mahabharata? Golden Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08249389319082539591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-72745830734999774242014-03-04T10:23:53.442-08:002014-03-04T10:23:53.442-08:00That was a really weak conclusion to an otherwise ...That was a really weak conclusion to an otherwise interesting article.<br />You seem to take the scriptures literally in the same way as the persons you so generously critise for doing so.Shaashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15332449321855447620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-43431247072788304952014-03-02T06:03:35.934-08:002014-03-02T06:03:35.934-08:00Thank you,Dr. Elst. We will be looking forward to ...Thank you,Dr. Elst. We will be looking forward to it. Could you please also tackle the question of as to where Ramayana should be placed in your chronology? Or will it be too much of a project given the paucity of corroborating evidence?Sir, while you are at it, could you please shed some of your opinion on the construction and dimension of chariots in the Vedic and the immediate post-Vedic times? (Mbh war time). I have tried to find as many resources on this as possible but the only scholarly resource I have been able to find is "Chariots in the Veda" by M.Sparreboom from 1985..It is available partially on Google books ...So Sir what is your opinion...were Indian chariots nimble and light like those of the Egyptians and the later racing chariots of the Romans? or were they much heavier and longer as we are used to in our TV shows from the 80s? Did they use four horses to draw a chariot since the Indian breeds had not developed by then? (I remember in the Dhammapada Buddha had said the horses of the Sindhu region were excellent,noble and thoroughbred---Dhammapada verse 323) <br /><br /><br /><br />and there are few maps on Ancient India doing rounds on Wikipedia which stem from the "Epic India" and "Epic/Ancient Indian Cities" maps created by an Indian history buff and also from worldhistorymapsdotinfo...After a fair bit of research I have found out that they draw their information primarily from Joseph.E.Schwartzberg's A Historical Atlas of South Asia....though its cumbersome it has been enlightening....those maps also seem to concur with your view that the original Aryavarta didnot include lower Sindh, Rajasthan,Madhyapradesh or Eastern Bihar and Chattisgarh<br /><br /><br />Many Indian History Buffs are yearning for good academic resources regarding maps of Ancient India and allied regions....are these good ones to<br />have a trust in based on the current knowledge that the historians possess? (For others who may be interested the Historical Atlas of South Asia is available at the Digital South Asia Library site of U of Chicago---the maps are a bit cumbersome to look at) Turbolag Panjahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17588337373998480646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-63391144009828973082014-03-01T12:24:15.365-08:002014-03-01T12:24:15.365-08:00I promise an in-depth and comprehensive contributi...I promise an in-depth and comprehensive contribution to the Vedda-Mahabharata question. I have some ideas, of which you already know the drift. It holds the middle between the traditionalist chronology (MBh war in 3139 BCE) and the AIT chronology, and in this case I have the impression that the middling position also happens to be the true position supported by the source texts.Koenraad Elsthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02503713923882807510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-46837161157740052502014-03-01T10:10:53.593-08:002014-03-01T10:10:53.593-08:00The list is in Part 2, chapter 6... as found here:...The list is in Part 2, chapter 6... as found here: http://www.swamij.com/upanishad-brihadaranyaka.htm (scroll down a bit)sandalwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06578669426920386938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-75083484964152599712014-03-01T09:40:31.998-08:002014-03-01T09:40:31.998-08:00For Dr. Elst the Mahabharata war is critical in t...For Dr. Elst the Mahabharata war is critical in the dating process....the three articles where he at length discusses this are 1)Dilli,Indraprastha article of 2009,<br /><br />2) the Astronomical Evidence for the Upanishads from dec. 2013 and 3) The Arundhati Omen from feb. 2014<br /><br /><br />Could you please tell me which chapter of the Brihad. are you referring to regarding the list of 50 Gurus?Turbolag Panjahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17588337373998480646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-54210727500699180652014-03-01T08:17:35.657-08:002014-03-01T08:17:35.657-08:00Thanks Turbolag. I had a look and see that Dr. Els...Thanks Turbolag. I had a look and see that Dr. Elst sees the Brhd Upanishad as being at least 500 years older than the commonly held date of 800-900 BCE.<br /><br />If I am not mistaken, there is a list of 50 or so gurus in this Upanishad which are said to predate sequentially the time of the composition, and to whom the knowledge in the Upanishads is accorded. So the Upanishad itself adds about a 1000 years this way (according to Dr. Kazanas) to its own historical genesis. To me, this adds a further wrinkle to the dating process.sandalwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06578669426920386938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-57437223580999781142014-03-01T06:53:03.611-08:002014-03-01T06:53:03.611-08:00Dr. Koenraad Elst dates the Upanishads between 150...Dr. Koenraad Elst dates the Upanishads between 1500BC--400BC...please go to the december and January posts...with Brihad. being the earliestTurbolag Panjahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17588337373998480646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-41089314858223286202014-02-28T10:35:56.168-08:002014-02-28T10:35:56.168-08:00Excellent blog, Dr. Elst. I wonder how you would d...Excellent blog, Dr. Elst. I wonder how you would date the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad and if you agree with Dr. Kazanas in this.sandalwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06578669426920386938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-89644698372151277672014-02-27T19:21:39.700-08:002014-02-27T19:21:39.700-08:00Take also into consideration Saiva Siddhanta were ...Take also into consideration Saiva Siddhanta were the Guru and the highest conceptio of Divinity are one and the same. In Saiva Siddhanta Siva comes as Guru when one attains a critical mass towards enlightenment. Nevertheless Saiva Siddhanta also says that the souls like Siva are uncreated. அரவிந்தன் நீலகண்டன்https://www.blogger.com/profile/04880821933149404354noreply@blogger.com