[HN Gopher] Of Dharma and Doom: A translation revives the ending...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Of Dharma and Doom: A translation revives the ending of the
       Mahabharata
        
       Author : drdee
       Score  : 52 points
       Date   : 2022-09-20 04:40 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (theamericanscholar.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (theamericanscholar.org)
        
       | morbidious wrote:
       | "By calling the writers of the Vedas as nomads Doniger has shown
       | her contempt for the Vedas and the Hindu religion, as she has
       | done in many other places in her book."
       | 
       | "She writes that the nomads who wrote the Vedas were immigrants
       | from Europe, who brought the Indo-European language Sanskrit with
       | them to India"
       | 
       | So-called intellectual.
       | 
       | https://indiafacts.org/wendy-donigers-hindus/
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Please don't take HN threads into religious or nationalistic
         | flamewar, or any kind of flamewar.
         | 
         | If you want to have a curious conversation about translation
         | and scholarship--great. But importing pre-existing flamewar
         | talking points into HN threads is definitely not that, and is
         | against the site guidelines:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
         | 
         | (Needless to say, I have no view on the relative reliability of
         | Sanskrit scholars. This is purely about the sort of comment we
         | do and don't want on this website.)
        
         | KrishnaShripad wrote:
         | That is exactly what I find so inconsistent about the Aryan
         | Invasion Theory. If the Aryans did indeed immigrate from Europe
         | to India, why did Aryans in India invent the Brahmi numerals
         | (which eventually became the Hindu Numeral System, and when
         | Arabs came in contact with Indian Mathematicians transported it
         | to Europe) while Europe had dumbed down Roman numerals for
         | centuries? Why was no Vedic Knowledge or Sanskrit left behind
         | by these Steppe nomads? I don't recall even a single instance
         | of any migratory group not leaving behind any trace of
         | Knowledge of their culture/traditions in their native lands.
        
           | morbidious wrote:
           | There's a good video on it: https://youtu.be/UgLXAQWf_EE
        
             | programmer_dude wrote:
             | Here's a better video:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQX5LlJ7YXg
        
               | morbidious wrote:
               | The video says OIT is probable
        
               | programmer_dude wrote:
               | I have seen Abhijit's video, it lacks merit. The video I
               | linked shows why Abhijit's take on this subject is
               | untenable. Yes, this video was created in response to
               | Abhijit's video and addresses it directly. OIT is
               | improbable.
        
         | bergenty wrote:
         | The only thing incorrect here is that Sanskrit is a syncretic
         | language created in India through influences from Central Asia
         | and the local languages. There are many words even in the rig
         | Veda without any central Asian influence.
        
         | N1H1L wrote:
         | Read the whole link. Nothing about the article shared here, and
         | the points made are really half-baked and highly debatable.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | swayvil wrote:
        
       | c54 wrote:
       | Oddly, the initial image caption in the piece states that there's
       | a battle between Arjuna and Krishna. This is a mistake, Arjuna (a
       | Pandava) and Krishna (an incarnated form of the god Vishnu)
       | fought together against the Kauravas, with Krishna serving as
       | Arjuna's charioteer.
       | 
       | I'm sure this is just a mistake on the part of the editor, there
       | are a lot of names in the Mahabharat, and we're not really
       | exposed to the stories in the west. I'd be really excited to see
       | some TV recreations of the Mahabharat. It's really quite an
       | astounding story and there's a lot of good content there, so to
       | speak.
       | 
       | It's very similar to the Odyssey for those who've read that. Full
       | of little parables and stories with archetypal meanings, exactly
       | as the article discusses
        
         | itsbits wrote:
         | Arjuna and Krishna fought before Mahabharat when Krishna's
         | brother Balarama ordered Krishna to do so.
        
           | KrishnaShripad wrote:
           | No they did not. Just one of many incorrect translations by
           | Western Indologists. Note that I am being very polite in
           | calling it "incorrect translations" as it borders malice.
           | 
           | In fact, in the Mahabharata itself, while Lord Krishna
           | addresses the dead Parikshit (when he was killed by the
           | Brahmastra while being in the womb of Uttara) he states that
           | there has never been a conflict/misunderstanding between
           | himself and Arjuna (also called Vijaya). Forget a fight. He
           | then grants life to Parikshit by saying the following words
           | (Sanskrit transliteration and English translation from Kisar
           | Mohan Ganguli's Mahabharata):
           | 
           | yathA me dayito dharmo brAhmaNAshcha visheShataH | abhimanyoH
           | suto jAto mRRito jIvatvayaM tathA || 20||
           | 
           | yathAhaM nAbhijAnAmi vijayena kadAchana | virodhaM tena
           | satyena mRRito jIvatvayaM shishuH || 21||
           | 
           | yathA satyaM cha dharmashcha mayi nityaM pratiShThitau |
           | tathA mRRitaH shishurayaM jIvatAmabhimanyujaH || 22||
           | 
           | "Having sat up, the daughter of the king of the Matsyas,
           | summoning her patience, joined her hands in reverence and
           | touched the earth with her head for saluting Kesava of eyes
           | like the petals of the lotus. That foremost of beings,
           | hearing those heart-rending lamentations of hers, touched
           | water and withdrew the (force of the) Brahma-weapon. That
           | hero of unfading glory, belonging to the race of the
           | Dasarhas, promised to give the child his life. Then he of
           | pure soul, said these words in the hearing of the whole
           | universe,--'O Uttara, I never utter an untruth.
           | 
           | My words will prove true. I shall revive this child in the
           | presence of all creatures. Never before have I uttered an
           | untruth even in jest. Never have I turned back from battle.
           | (By the merit of those acts) let this child revive! As
           | righteousness is dear to me, as Brahmanas are specially dear
           | to me, (by the merit of that disposition of mine) let
           | Abhimanyu's son, who is born dead, revive! Never hath a
           | misunderstanding arisen between me and my friend Vijaya. Let
           | this dead child revive by that truth! As truth and
           | righteousness are always established in me, let this dead
           | child of Abhimanyu revive (by the merit of these)! As Kansa
           | and Kesi have been righteously slain by me, let this child
           | revive today by that truth!' After these words were uttered
           | by Vasudeva, that child, O foremost one of Bharata's race,
           | became animate and began gradually to move, O monarch."
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m14/m14069.htm
        
             | lioeters wrote:
             | User name checks out. :) Joking aside, thank you for the
             | correction.
             | 
             | > Never hath a misunderstanding arisen between me and my
             | friend Vijaya.
             | 
             | I did learn that there's a 19th-century play called
             | Gayopakhyanam, where they _almost_ fight.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gayopakhyanam
        
               | KrishnaShripad wrote:
               | > User name checks out. :) Joking aside, thank you for
               | the correction.
               | 
               | Haha no issues!
               | 
               | > I did learn that there's a 19th-century play called
               | Gayopakhyanam, where they almost fight.
               | 
               | Yes there are many Sthala Puranas that have their own
               | variations/additions to the main storyline. Which is why
               | we stick to the oldest manuscripts that are available as
               | we do not know if/when distortions happened as this story
               | spans multiple thousands of years.
               | 
               | We have sadly also lost scriptures to invasions.
               | Especially with the burning of Nalanda University (by
               | Muhammad Bakhtiyar Khalji: by some estimates, 9 million
               | scriptures were destroyed) and Takshashila University (by
               | Persians, Greeks, Parthians, Hephthalites, Shakas and
               | Kushanas) though Alexander and future Greeks revived the
               | University again in partnership with Chandragupta Maurya.
               | Hepthalites were most destructive of the lot. Both these
               | Universities contained tomes of Dharmic
               | scriptures/manuscripts (both Buddhist and Hindu).
               | 
               | Nalanda supposedly burned for 3 months.
        
               | lioeters wrote:
               | Fascinating to learn about Nalanda and Takshashila
               | University.
               | 
               | About the latter ("considered to be one of the earliest
               | universities in the world") and the revival of the
               | university - I recently started reading a book called,
               | The Shape of Ancient Thought: Comparative Studies in
               | Greek and Indian Philosophies. I'm interested in learning
               | about the influence of Buddhism on Greek (and later
               | European) philosophy. I know almost nothing about the
               | history of India, so it's been a fun educational journey.
               | 
               | The name of Chandragupta Maurya I hadn't heard before,
               | but I see he is an important historical figure, the
               | grandfather of Ashoka. And they're said to be from the
               | Shakya family from which Gautama Buddha descended.
               | 
               | I've enjoyed your other thoughtful comments in this
               | thread, even the controversial one criticising the
               | "deliberately mistranslated" scriptures. I don't know the
               | truth of the matter, but perhaps the translators simply
               | lacked understanding? And I can see that some words are
               | impossible to translate, with so much meaning lost or
               | wrongly transformed in the process.
               | 
               | Anyway, thanks for sharing your knowledge and
               | perspective. Especially this comment (
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32929993 ) was very
               | thought-provoking, one of my favorite comments ever on
               | this forum.
        
               | KrishnaShripad wrote:
               | > About the latter ("considered to be one of the earliest
               | universities in the world") and the revival of the
               | university - I recently started reading a book called,
               | The Shape of Ancient Thought: Comparative Studies in
               | Greek and Indian Philosophies. I'm interested in learning
               | about the influence of Buddhism on Greek (and later
               | European) philosophy. I know almost nothing about the
               | history of India, so it's been a fun educational journey.
               | 
               | There is a lot of interconnect between Ancient Greek and
               | Ancient Indian civilizations. Even when it comes to
               | Demigods we have lots of similarities. Mostly because we
               | interacted a lot (in spite of the Wars that we fought
               | with each other, we eventually began to respect each
               | others Civilizations more deeply). But with the fall of
               | these Ancient Civilizations much of that relations that
               | were built was lost. In a way, Dharmic Religions are the
               | oldest surviving Religions... or dare I say oldest
               | surviving Ancient Civilizations.
               | 
               | One of my biggest gripes with Western Indologists is that
               | they classified Sanatan Dharma/Hinduism as Polytheist.
               | Which is actually far from the Truth. We have only 1 God
               | (the Brahman of the Vedas -- the Supreme Being) with many
               | Demigods (Devatas). Now depending on the school of
               | Vedanta one follows, there are multiple interpretations
               | of what God is (is God an independent entity --
               | Tattvavada/Dvaita, we are all part of one God --
               | Vishishtadvaita or I am God -- Advaita). Yet all of it
               | just boils down to either Monism or Monotheism. Not
               | Polytheism. But as usual, the latter has stuck on due to
               | wrong translations and will take a long time for it to be
               | fixed.
               | 
               | Buddhism and Jainism on the other hand fall under
               | Charvaka Philosophy. Charvakas deny the Supremacy of the
               | Vedas as they believe in empirical evidence, direct
               | perception alone. So even though we all come under the
               | same umbrella term of "Dharmic Religions" there is a
               | fundamental difference between both, which goes by the
               | terminologies: Astika (Vedic) and Nastika (non-Vedic).
               | 
               | > The name of Chandragupta Maurya I hadn't heard before,
               | but I see he is an important historical figure, the
               | grandfather of Ashoka. And they're said to be from the
               | Shakya family from which Gautama Buddha descended.
               | 
               | Yes you are right. Chandragupta Maurya was the Emperor of
               | Ancient India and the founder of the Mauryan Empire.
               | Emperor Ashoka is his descendent.
               | 
               | > I don't know the truth of the matter, but perhaps the
               | translators simply lacked understanding?
               | 
               | This is a long story but it ties heavily to Evalengelical
               | Christian Missionaries and providing them a fodder by
               | misinterpreting many of the scriptures incorrectly (many
               | Missionaries here use these translated scriptures to fool
               | the local populace). It then becomes really easy to coax
               | local populace in India (typically the lower castes), who
               | due to various unfortunate circumstances (including
               | discrimination they were subjected to in the past by
               | upper castes, coupled with their own economic
               | conditions), weren't versed in Sanskrit, to convert to
               | Christianity or other Abrahamic Religions.
               | 
               | I have no issues with people converting as that is their
               | individual preference/right but I don't want wrongly
               | translated scriptures to be used as fodder for such
               | conversions. I am more worried about these translations
               | gaining a life of its own and cementing itself as the
               | true translations winning over actual translations that
               | was passed down through generations by our Ancestors. I
               | want to preserve this culture/tradition as I feel it
               | holds value to people on Earth and for future generations
               | to research/introspect/learn from. Irrespective of
               | whether they find value in it or not. Irrespective of
               | whether it is perfect, faulty or downright nonsense. It
               | should be looked at as preservation of Ancient
               | Culture/Traditions and not be lost in the annals of Time.
               | 
               | Also, wrong translations builds animosity between groups.
               | People here are converting not out of some profound
               | wisdom or philosophical enlightenment but out of a hatred
               | for the Religion they belonged to. This sort of
               | brainwashing is going on every single day in India.
               | 
               | Very few who bothered to do their own independent
               | research and figure out that the translations are wrong
               | reconvert back.
               | 
               | This is not healthy for a society IMHO. Especially if
               | conversions are forced or happen out of
               | misinformation/animosity, it just ends up creating bad
               | blood, regrets (once you realize you have been taken for
               | a ride) and even divisiveness leading to communal rifts.
               | 
               | So I see it as my moral duty to set things right when I
               | see wrong translations. Even if the World is against me.
               | And I know I am not alone in this endeavour.
               | 
               | > Especially this comment (
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32929993 ) was very
               | thought-provoking, one of my favorite comments ever on
               | this forum.
               | 
               | Thank you so much for your kind words! Means a lot!
        
         | jharohit wrote:
         | One of the quintessential TV recreations
         | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLa6CHPhFNfadNcnVZRXa6...
        
           | naruvimama wrote:
        
           | b800h wrote:
           | I think that used to be on Saturday morning TV in the UK in
           | the 80s.
           | 
           | Edit: 1991 apparently.
        
           | seshagiric wrote:
           | Mahabharata is an epic story. I really wish someone would
           | make a movie with latest CGI.
        
             | DesiLurker wrote:
             | I really want George RR Martin (GoT) & HBO to make a modern
             | series based on Mahabharat. there are so many interesting
             | threads & political clashes in it that it would make an
             | awesome watch.
        
         | lordleft wrote:
         | It's a truly extraordinary epic, and it propounds fascinating
         | philosophical and religious concepts that are worth reckoning
         | with. Also, as a non-hindu desi, it's interesting to see how
         | many of the conceits of the Gita / Mahabharata subtly shape
         | South Asian life.
        
       | drieddust wrote:
        
       | addingadimensio wrote:
        
       | mpreda wrote:
       | "Lord of Light" by Roger Zelazny is a Science-Fiction novel using
       | Hinduism/Buddhist philosophy as background in an intriguing way.
       | 
       |  _His followers called him Mahasamatman and said he was a god. He
       | preferred to drop the Maha- and the -atman, however, and called
       | himself Sam. He never claimed to be a god, but then he never
       | claimed not to be a god._
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_of_Light
        
       | nsenifty wrote:
       | This article makes it seem that the new translation is novel in
       | some way. These are stories (of Krishna's demise and Pandavas
       | hike to Meru) I've read in childhood countless times. Mahabharata
       | isn't just an epic of absolute good vs. evil, but of countless
       | shades of grey ascribing to the real human nature.
       | 
       | In another story, it is said that Yudhishtira's chariot was
       | supposed to not touch the ground due to his virtuousness. When he
       | lied to his guru Drona to trick him to give up his arm believing
       | his son had perished, the chariot sunk back to the ground.
        
       | KrishnaShripad wrote:
       | Can we get over the love for Western Indologists who have, time
       | and again, deliberately mistranslated our Dharmic scriptures?
       | 
       | In particular: Wendy Doniger, Sheldon Pollock and their ilk. An
       | example [1] and the complete talk [2]
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2ke7Higm-Y
       | 
       | [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olQlPZuEWLY
        
         | Issaclabs wrote:
         | Her translations are ignorant at best and malicious at worst.
         | Not a serious academic
         | https://swarajyamag.com/longform/a-critique-of-wendy-doniger...
        
           | KrishnaShripad wrote:
           | Exactly.
        
           | dominotw wrote:
           | I went to one of her talks at my yoga studio here in chicago.
           | I googled her later to find out how much of a controversial
           | figure she was.
        
         | kranner wrote:
         | Do you have an example of a specific _deliberate_
         | mistranslation by, let's say, Wendy Doniger?
        
           | KrishnaShripad wrote:
           | Sure. You can check the article here with translations of few
           | stanzas from Shatapatha Brahamana:
           | https://indiafacts.org/the-world-of-wendy-donigers-
           | translati...
           | 
           | Even the translation by J. Eggeling is not completely
           | accurate because Sanskrit has a lot of words that are non-
           | translatables because of inherent weakness of English as a
           | language (which includes limited vocabulary to describe
           | Sanskrit words accurately) [1].
           | 
           | Irrespective of Eggeling's translation not being completely
           | accurate, it atleast was a decent attempt. She references him
           | but totally twists the translations to make it sexualized in
           | a lot of places. The actual scripture is not at all depicting
           | what is translated by her in the end.
           | 
           | [1]: To understand why English is not accurate enough to
           | describe Sanskrit vocabulary, this video will shed complete
           | light: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7XYCNbLtPQ
        
             | kranner wrote:
             | The video cited claims at 8:55 that the English word
             | "student" comes from the Sanskrit words "stuti" (a text
             | containing learning, according to the video) and "anta"
             | (the final goal, according to the video). This is WhatsApp-
             | level misinformation. "Student" is related to Latin
             | "studere" which means diligent application to a task.
             | "Stuti" (from the Proto Indo Aryan root stu-) primarily
             | means praise, but can also mean by extension a song
             | containing such praise, or a text containing such songs.
             | "Student" and "stuti" are not cognates. Student != stuti +
             | anta. After this point the video is not worth watching.
             | 
             | Ironically, this video which claims to prove that you can't
             | express in English everything that you can express in
             | Sanskrit is itself in English. Sanskrit non-translatables
             | are a myth. Yes, individual English words don't map 1:1 to
             | individual Sanskrit words. This is the case for any two
             | lects. That doesn't mean you can't use a sequence of words
             | in English to describe all possible connotations of a word
             | in Sanskrit, unless English didn't even contain words for
             | the _concepts_ underlying the connotations of this Sanskrit
             | word. If that had actually been the case, Rajiv Malhotra
             | would have had to write his book Sanskrit Non-Translatables
             | _in Sanskrit_ , and not in English as he actually did.
        
               | KrishnaShripad wrote:
               | > Yes, individual English words don't map 1:1 to
               | individual Sanskrit words
               | 
               | That is exactly why words of Sanskrit are "non-
               | translatables". Because not all words map 1:1. Please
               | look up the meaning of "non-translatables". Whenever
               | there is no mapping 1:1 that word is called a "non-
               | translatable". It does not mean what you think it means.
               | I'll explain below.
               | 
               | > Rajiv Malhotra would have had to write his book
               | Sanskrit Non-Translatables in Sanskrit, and not in
               | English as he actually did.
               | 
               | "Non-translatables" does not mean the word cannot be
               | translated. It means that there is no equivalent word in
               | English, necessitating one to provide a lot of extra
               | explanations to convey the meaning. For example, let us
               | assume that there was no word called "Sun" in the English
               | Dictionary. Then to translate "Surya" you would have to
               | put extra effort in translating it by saying: "see that
               | spherical ball of light that is emanating a glow and
               | lighting up the sky? It is a Star which looks different
               | from Stars in the night sky due to proximity to our
               | Planet as well as the fact that our Planet is revolving
               | around it. That object is Surya". Now this is a non-
               | translatable as there is no direct 1:1 mapping.
               | 
               | So if the translation of Surya is inaccurate (say the
               | translator describes it as a bulb in your room -- which
               | is also a shining ball of light) it ruins the entire
               | translation.
               | 
               | You can read the definition of non-translatable here [1].
               | 
               | [1]: https://www.trustedtranslations.com/blog/non-
               | translatable
               | 
               | As far as the video is concerned, yeah even he gets some
               | of it wrong (like in the example you rightly pointed out
               | about Stuti/Student). But this was the only video I could
               | find that explained in English as I had assumed you are
               | an English speaker (from the West). It sort of explained
               | why some words cannot be translated.
               | 
               | Like one non-translatable is Aatma. Aatma in rudimentary
               | sense is just "Soul". But which "Soul" is this? The
               | Abrahamic definition of Soul? Then that is not what Aatma
               | is in Sanatan Dharma. Heck, even in Sanatan Dharma, there
               | are various interpretations of Aatma based on the school
               | of Vedanta you follow (Advaita, Vishishtadvaita,
               | Tattvavada/Dvaita etc). In Advaita/Monism, Aatma is
               | single entity pervading the entire Creation, both within
               | and outside, and the Creation itself is Maya/Illusion
               | whereby the Aatman = Brahman (God). So in essence, there
               | is no difference between God and you as whatever
               | perceived difference you have is an illusion. In
               | Vishishtadvaita, Aatma is divided into infinitesimal
               | parts with all parts eventually combining to form a
               | whole. The Creation is not an Illusion in
               | Vishishtadvaita. But since ultimately, all Aatmas combine
               | into one Brahman, it becomes Advaita in the end. So it is
               | Vishishtadvaita (Qualified Monism). Then you have
               | Tattvavada/Dvaita which states that Aatmas are separate
               | entities yet completely dependent on the Brahman (God).
               | The size of the Aatmas is defined as 1/1000th of 1/1000th
               | of the thinnest strand of hair on a horse. Jains have a
               | different definition of Aatma: where the size of the
               | Aatma is equal to the size of the body that it occupies.
               | Buddhists do not believe in Aatma's existence at all. So
               | as you can see, each Dharmic school has its own
               | interpretation and explanation for what an Aatma is. But
               | when we discuss about Aatma within the schools, we
               | automatically know what is being talked about: the
               | indestructive, immortal part of what makes a inanimate
               | object animate. Now this is not equal to the definition
               | of Abrahamic soul (from my understanding of Abrahamic
               | texts: that God breathed the life-force/soul into
               | Creatures). In Sanatan Dharma, God does no such thing.
               | The Aatmas are literally immortal with no beginning or
               | end. And depending on the school of thought you follow,
               | the Aatma is just one entity or many or none at all.
               | 
               | So which definition will you use for translation?
               | Invariably, Western Indologists use the rudimentary
               | Abrahamic definition "Soul". It is incomplete. And hence
               | is non-translatable.
               | 
               | It does not mean you cannot translate at all. It just
               | means there is no 1:1 mapping because of lack of
               | vocabulary in the language that you are translating the
               | word into.
        
           | rajup wrote:
           | This link lays out a few (from a comment further below):
           | https://swarajyamag.com/longform/a-critique-of-wendy-
           | doniger...
        
             | kranner wrote:
             | No evidence is presented for the purported mistranslations
             | (of pretty subjective things to start with) as
             | _deliberate_. You'd have to show that Wendy Doniger knew
             | what e.g. the painting actually represented, for a fact,
             | and still published information differing from this
             | position in some way. It's possible to be sincere but
             | misinformed.
        
               | rajup wrote:
               | Maybe she was sincere and misinformed but the article
               | points out how this might be misinformed, I don't see any
               | disagreement?
        
               | drieddust wrote:
        
         | uptownfunk wrote:
         | I don't get why you're getting the hate here. This is a known
         | issue, and I don't see how censoring you from discussing it is
         | going to help. You are not being disrespectful and are
         | providing sources and facts to back you up. Meanwhile reddit
         | like "funny" comments are left here but having a debate on
         | mistranslation by western scholarship is some how deemed to be
         | a flamewar. This is a disappointing direction to see HN going
         | down.
        
           | KrishnaShripad wrote:
           | I'm not even going to argue with Dang as I don't want to get
           | banned over this. I'm used to this bias in all social
           | platforms. It's not new to me. Cancel culture is the norm. If
           | you are a square peg in a round hole you will be cast out.
           | Unfortunate reality. Anyways I am happy atleast I have some
           | support here from others who see it for what it is.
        
             | uptownfunk wrote:
             | We used to be able to have data driven civil conversations.
             | Well folks, getting to the truth isn't easy or comfortable
             | and sometimes feelings will get hurt. But is that a reason
             | to shy away from the truth?
        
         | unmole wrote:
         | I don't have any sympathy for Wendy Doniger but Rajiv Malhotra
         | is hardly the beacon of truth. The man spins utterly deranged
         | conspiracy theories:
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/badlinguistics/comments/2t8ze3/a_fe...
        
           | KrishnaShripad wrote:
           | There is no conspiracy theory in here. Like let me break
           | apart the topic for the lazy ones.
           | 
           | > "FeTNA is a US-based Tamil diaspora organization that
           | finances Tamil chair in Berkeley and acted as a vehicle for
           | ethno-political separatism, with links to the Tamil Tigers.
           | It supports the Christianization of Tamil culture and offers
           | a doorway into Indian politics for right-wing evangelican
           | American politicians and western geo-political strategists."
           | 
           | > His sources for these claims? His ass.
           | 
           | WTF? FeTNA has advocated for LTTE (Tamil Tigers) many times.
           | It is openly pro-LTTE. You can check the FeTNA resolution
           | here: http://www.sangam.org/TVOICE/tvFall95.htm#ftna
           | 
           | Let me quote some lines from the resolution:
           | 
           | 1. "D. The Sri Lankan governments propaganda that the Tamil
           | freedom fighters (LTTE) unilaterally broke the peace process
           | is totally and completely false."
           | 
           | 2. "We say that the Tamil people have the right to determine
           | their own future. If any attempt is made to impose an
           | arbitrary political settlement on the Tamil people through
           | military means, the LTTE will resist it."
           | 
           | Stopped reading after this point. His very first quote that
           | FeTNA has no association with LTTE is a big lie.
           | 
           | Another article on FeTNA [3]:
           | 
           | "Also, the coordinator was against converting the convention
           | into yet another pro-LTTE forum where India bashing would go
           | on unabated as in the past conventions and put his foot down
           | that irritated the trio.
           | 
           | Last year, the Government of India abruptly cancelled the
           | Indian visa of Dr. Muthuvel Chelliah, a naturalized US
           | citizen for his continuous anti-India tirade and support to
           | banned anti-Indian organizations that perpetrate violence and
           | terrorism. He has filed a case against the Home Ministry in
           | the High Court of Madras pleading that his Indian visa be
           | restored so that he can meet his aged mother in Tamil Nadu.
           | Support to Tamil Eelam and LTTE have been the undeclared
           | agenda of Fetna in the past and member associations who do
           | not subscribe to its views were either reprimanded or
           | removed.
           | 
           | Various pro-Eelam leaders such as New York based Rudra
           | Kumaran, "Prime Minister" of Transnational Government of
           | Tamil Eelam (TGTE), a government in exile of Tamil Eelams; Dr
           | Elyn Shandler, a fiery pro-LTTE speaker and Jewish-American
           | rabble rouser who was also denied Indian visa for her anti-
           | India rhetoric and Professor Francis Boyle who advocates
           | Tamil Eelam were regular speakers every year at Fetna annual
           | conventions and prime time were allotted to their fiery
           | speeches much against the wishes of Indian Tamils. This year
           | the coordinator Balagan wanted to downplay the pro-LTTE image
           | of Fetna that did not go well with the pro-Eelam supporters
           | who were gunning for his head. Finally Balagan secured
           | majority support and those opposed him were forced to quit.
           | Vice President Dr Dhandapani Kuppuswamy was chosen as interim
           | president and elections were called for to choose new set of
           | office bearers."
           | 
           | And as far as forced conversions to Christianity, it is
           | extremely rampant in Tamil Nadu [1]. I am from the
           | neighboring state of Telangana which is equally affected by
           | this malaise [2].
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.firstpost.com/politics/christian-conversion-
           | mafi...
           | 
           | [2]: https://www.opindia.com/2022/05/tamil-nadu-hindu-woman-
           | tries...
           | 
           | [3]: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Fetna+President+Pazhani+S
           | unda...
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Your account has swerved back towards using HN primarily
             | for political/ideological/nationalistic/religious battle.
             | We ban accounts that do this because it's not what this
             | site is for, and it destroys what it is for.
             | 
             | If you keep doing this, we're going to have to ban you
             | again--not because we disagree with your positions (I don't
             | know what they are, and it doesn't matte) but because
             | you're breaking the intended use of the site.
             | 
             | If you'd please review
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick
             | to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Please don't take HN threads into religious or nationalistic
         | flamewar, or any kind of flamewar.
         | 
         | If you want to have a curious conversation about translation
         | and scholarship--great. But importing pre-existing flamewar
         | talking points into HN threads is definitely not that, and is
         | against the site guidelines:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
         | 
         | Needless to say, I have no view on the relative accuracy of
         | Mahabharata translations. But I know HN threads and I know
         | internet flamebait when I see it. No more of this, please.
         | 
         | Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32927390 also.
        
           | aicaffeinelife wrote:
           | I think you're missing the point here. It's a flame war if
           | and only if there are two perspectives and it comes down to a
           | matter of choice (e.g Vim vs EMacs). The majority of the
           | commenters here are pointing out to the fact that some
           | Western academics either deliberately or ignorantly
           | mistranslate Sanskrit and to a person who has no background
           | in this stuff often form an incorrect or incomplete picture
           | which then leads to a positive/negative bias in their minds.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | It's a flamewar comment when a commenter uses denunciatory
             | tropes and ready-to-go polemical links on a classic
             | flamewar topic. When an account has a history of
             | prosecuting nationalistic and religious flamewar, that goes
             | 100x. Sometimes the account is even one in a sequence of
             | accounts that we've had to ban for this in the past.
             | 
             | I'm not asking anyone to submit to colonial dogmas here--
             | just to abide by the site guidelines when making their
             | substantive points.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | rajup wrote:
           | I don't quite understand how this is "ideological flamebait".
           | The posted article is about translations of Indian epics
           | through a Western lens. Op here pointed out possible issues
           | with such translations, one I am glad to be informed about
           | and will look out for. If this is not curious conversation I
           | don't know what is.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | I've answered this in another reply:
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32931098.
        
               | rajup wrote:
               | Thanks Dan! I do see how the examples you mention in the
               | other reply could be problematic and lead to the
               | discourse taking an unsavory turn.
        
             | uptownfunk wrote:
             | Yes this seems a bit reactive. This wasn't going into a
             | flame war. How have we become so soft to react so strongly
             | to topics like this. The shortcomings and criticism of
             | Western scholarship has a long and storied history - this
             | isn't something new.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | You guys seem to be under the impression that I'm taking
               | a side on this topic. Nothing could be further from the
               | case. I know nothing about it, and for all I know you're
               | all 100% correct. (Also, lest anyone assume otherwise, I
               | have profound respect for India.)
               | 
               | Even if they're 100% correct*, commenters still have to
               | follow the site guidelines. Showing up with an obviously
               | pre-existing agenda, ready-to-go talking points, and
               | denunciatory rhetoric is definitely not curious
               | conversation. Moreover, HN has a problem with Indian
               | nationalist flamewars (as it does with other nationalist
               | flamewars), quite vicious ones in fact, and I
               | unfortunately have had to moderate enough of them to
               | recognize the pattern when I see it.
               | 
               | * ( _especially_ if they 're 100% correct, since that is
               | what everyone feels about their own views in any case)
        
               | KrishnaShripad wrote:
               | Dear Dang,
               | 
               | Thanks for the clarification. You are right and I'll try
               | to tone it down.
               | 
               | > HN has a problem with Indian nationalist flamewars (as
               | it does with other nationalist flamewars), quite vicious
               | ones in fact, and I unfortunately have had to moderate
               | enough of them to recognize the pattern when I see it.
               | 
               | The reason probably has to do with Indian voices being
               | shut down by the Western academia and Western media (both
               | play a big role in the conditioning) which ends up with
               | Indians like me (and many others like me) who come with
               | pitchforks in discussions with people who do not have
               | such intentions. I recognize that and will work on it.
               | 
               | So yes you are right that Indians, off late, have become
               | extremely passionate about certain causes: be it
               | defending Hinduism/Sanatan Dharma or Nationalistic
               | viewpoints (India in general). Please understand that
               | this is reactionary to what we have witnessed/subjected
               | to over years if not decades of being exposed to
               | brainwashing by Western academia and media. It was only
               | recently that we have started to look into our own
               | history without the corrupted lens of the Colonial powers
               | that modified/changed/rewrote/distorted many portions of
               | our historical past (as they say, Victors write History).
               | That anger at being fooled for so long is what is driving
               | the under current of Nationalism today.
               | 
               | We are beginning to stand up for what we believe in to be
               | right (whether that is accepted by the rest of the World
               | or not is immaterial at this point). We have kept quiet
               | and not spoken out against misinformation or
               | mischaracterization of our people for all these years
               | with a hope that it will change. It sadly hasn't
               | happened.
               | 
               | However, you are not wrong in that Indians are generally
               | extremely passionate (which wasn't the case some 20 years
               | back). It will cool down over time I am sure of that. But
               | do give us some leeway to express ourselves (even if we
               | make mistakes) as sometimes we just need an outlet.
               | 
               | Thanks for your clarification and understanding.
        
               | uptownfunk wrote:
               | You implicitly take a side by shutting down discussion
               | that criticizes western indological research under the
               | pre-tense of "I... recognize the pattern when I see it."
               | This may be controversial, but if you don't let others
               | voice their views, then you let the predominating opinion
               | retain its influence.
               | 
               | I recognize moderation is required but I was genuinely
               | engaging with someone's viewpoint curiously. It is not
               | frequent you come across someone here that is conversant
               | with tattvavAda philosophy of MadhvacArya - doesn't seem
               | acceptable to shut them down, especially given the
               | history of colonial influence in India and throughout the
               | world.
               | 
               | These countries are finally now finding their voice after
               | centuries of occupation, and it seems quite harsh to shut
               | down that down on the basis of flamewars. Ultimately you
               | probably have more experience on this topic so will
               | ultimately defer to your judgement and authority but
               | wanted to share another POV.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | > _You implicitly take a side by shutting down discussion
               | that_
               | 
               | By that argument, all moderation is "implicitly taking a
               | side", in which case we might as well have no rules at
               | all.
        
               | uptownfunk wrote:
               | Well that's a bit of a leap, but I still stand by that
               | content moderation can lead to a bias in the
               | conversation. But judging by the downvote people seem to
               | disagree.
        
           | naruvimama wrote:
        
         | dartharva wrote:
         | You should also provide links to better or more "authentic"
         | translations then, because any curious individual will find
         | these first upon rudimentary searching.
        
           | KrishnaShripad wrote:
           | You are right that links to better translations are what I
           | should link to. However, even here, you should be mindful
           | that translations of Dharmic scriptures are tied to
           | Philosophical schools of thought (or Schools of Vedanta). So
           | if you are asking me to give you a link I would have to give
           | you links to Tattvavada (which is the school of Vedanta I
           | follow). However, there are translations provided by Advaita
           | and Vishishtadvaita (and other sub-schools) that differ
           | slightly in their interpretations and I'll be doing
           | disservice to them by not linking their work too. So
           | eventually you will end up with having to learn under a
           | learned Guru anyways. And you won't find Gurus who are well
           | versed in their concepts in the Western academia at the very
           | least. You will have to travel to India and explore the
           | various Mathas (study centers) and figure out which
           | Philosophy appeals to you. This is purely because Sanatan
           | Dharma is not Dogmatic like Western Religions. Here you have
           | the choice to choose your path. You have Monism in the form
           | of Shankara's Advaita, Qualified Monism of Ramanuja's
           | Vishshitadvaita to Dualism of Madhva's Tattvavada. All 3
           | schools (these are primary schools with many sub-schools with
           | subtle differences from the main school they branch out from)
           | differ in their interpretations significantly when it comes
           | to answering few broad philosophical questions:
           | 
           | 1. Who am I? Do I really exist or am I an illusion?
           | 
           | 2. What is this Creation? Is this real or an illusion?
           | 
           | 3. What is Time?
           | 
           | 4. Is there a Creator? Or is there none?
           | 
           | 5. If there is a Creator then what is the relationship
           | between me and the Creator?
           | 
           | 6. Are we many individual Aatmas with each having separate,
           | distinct reality or one Aatma living in an illusion that it
           | is separate, distinct reality?
           | 
           | All these Philosophical questions derive from the Vedic
           | scriptures viz: Vedas, Upanishads, Brahma Sutras, Bhagavad
           | Gita, Mahabharata, Ramayana and the Puranas. The
           | Philosophical Schools (or schools of Vedanta) have spent
           | thousands of years researching on these fundamental
           | Philosophical questions. To point a link to an authentic
           | translation is hence a very difficult task: for one, there
           | are very few and far between. Two: it is a mammoth
           | undertaking to translate the entire corpus of literature that
           | has accumulated in Sanskrit over the past thousands of years.
           | Three: most of the English translations from Indian
           | Indologists exist only for one school: Advaita. Other schools
           | haven't been translated yet (though for Tattvavada there is
           | translation now available in the form of 37 Sarvamoola
           | Granthas of Madhvacharya -- the founder of the Tattvavada
           | school of Vedanta).
           | 
           | The problem also is that Sanskrit has a lot of "non-
           | translatable" words. There is no such "authentic" translation
           | as when you "translate" you will have to find meanings that
           | fit the language you are translating into which eventually
           | leads to dumbing down the translation as the vocabulary is
           | not sufficient to describe the Sanskrit word.
           | 
           | For example, most Western Indologists wrongly translate Aatma
           | as "Soul". However, what is Soul exactly? It has Religious
           | connotations attributed and inline with Abrahamic
           | interpretations of what a Soul is which is not what Aatma is
           | in Sanatan Dharma.
           | 
           | What is Dharma in English? Most Western Indologists
           | incorrectly translate it as "Religion" (or some use the
           | slightly better term "Righteousness"). But Dharma is not
           | Religion at all. It is "Eternal Truth" (hence is called
           | Sanatan Dharma) that is based on concepts of "Righteousness"
           | and "Duties" tightly interwoven into the "Karmic cycle". It
           | is not Dogmatic in any way, shape or form. There are no
           | "Commandments".
           | 
           | What is Karma in English? "Every action has an equal and
           | opposite reaction"? Nope. That is just rudimentary
           | translation of what Karma is. Because in this translation,
           | there is an expectation that the Karmic result would happen
           | immediately or within a short period of time. However, in
           | Sanatan Dharma, Karma spans not just one lifetime but
           | infinite lifetimes. The Karmic cycle of the Aatma started
           | from the very beginnings of Creation (through the breaking of
           | the Hiranyagarbha roughly translated as "Golden womb" or Big
           | Bang in modern parlance). So when Sanatan Dharma talks of
           | Karma it talks in terms of Cosmic timescale which runs in
           | trillions of years. The Age of Brahma (who is the one who
           | ushers in the Creation on the command of God - Lord Vishnu),
           | according to Sanatan Dharma, is 311 trillion years (this is
           | the lifetime of birth and death of Creation itself, before it
           | restarts all over again (Big Crunch followed by Big Bang),
           | with Lokas (Multiverses) within it). The Karmic cycle starts
           | at the very beginning of Creation itself and ends with the
           | end of Creation to restart again in a cyclical manner. So how
           | do I fit all this in a 1:1 mapping between Karma and an
           | English equivalent? There is no such word in English which
           | defines Karma in its entirety.
           | 
           | How do you translate Prana in English? "Life force" or "Vital
           | principle". Both don't sufficiently describe Prana as Prana
           | is closely tied to Vayu (also called Mukhya Prana or the
           | controller of the life force). Without explaining Vayu you
           | cannot explain Prana as Vayu is the controller and the cause.
        
       | belfalas wrote:
       | Mahabharata translation by William Buck is great for Westerners
       | like myself with no prior introduction. I liked the Ramayana also
       | in William Bucks translation.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-09-21 23:02 UTC)