Only for the few?

July 29, 2001

Advance apologies to anyone taking offence at this post! However, it seems

that a number of threads recently have become very heavily laden with

Sanskrit. It seems to me that these would be better aimed at the Advaita-L

list i.e. the list more obviously frequented by those studying Advaita in an

academic way and interested in discussing diverging commentaries on esoteric

sutras from obscure Upanishads etc. I had formed the opinion over the past

fifteen months (since I joined) that topics tended to be open and accessible

to all and this was, for me, an enormous advantage. We are all potentially

interested in these topics but I feel sure that many must be frustrated by

the Sanskrit content. After all, I have studied it to some degree and am

familiar with most of the more common words but I find some of the recent

posts incomprehensible.

I would like to suggest an amendment to the 'constitution', namely that

academic topics are posted only to the Advaita-L list and that all topics

posted to this list either translate all but the most common Sanskrit words

or omit them altogether and use acceptable English equivalents. Also, all

quoted sutras/verses from scriptures should always be accompanied by a full

translation - many of us do not know these off by heart! I cannot accept

that it is always necessary to use Sanskrit words. I know that there are

often no easy correspondences but, in those case, one or two short phrases

usually give a good alternative and these must be preferable to simply not

having any idea what the original means! I know that the 'real' meaning will

only ever be obtained in the original but if you don't know the language,

then you don't know it and that's all there is to it! If only a small

percentage of your recipients will have any idea what you are talking about,

then where is the benefit? Surely the aim of a list such as this is to

communicate?

As an example, I would like to refer you to Sunder's message of 27th July

'Re: Reposting again' in which he provides a quotation from Prof. Renade.

This quotation talks about tracing the source of the doctrine of maya in the

Upanishads. I suggest that, if this had been made by some members of the

list, it would be laden with Sanskrit and references and be virtually

unreadable. Yet Prof. Renade tells us exactly what he wants to say in a

readable and comprehensive manner without using a single additional word of

Sanskrit. Why can't we all do this? (I have no objection to Ruben's recent

excellent posts on the Gayatri mantra, incidentally, because each word is

comprehensively translated and explained.)

If a majority disagree with these suggestions, then I have an alternative,

though less preferred one. This is that the Glossary so excellently prepared

by Sunder over the past months for Sadananda's Brahmasutra notes be extended

for use as a glossary for all posts. Any poster could then check that any

words he was using were present in the glossary. If not, then it would be

his responsibility to ensure that they were added prior to the post.

(However, although this sound fine in theory, I am doubtful that it would

work in practice, human nature being what it is!)

Dennis

July 29, 2001

Hari OM! Narayana Smrithis,

Blessed Dennisji,

It is true that if we Use Sanskrit, we should have correct

translation for English, But English language itself is handicapped

to have the correct translation of Sanskrit word. Sanskrit being

"Mother of all languages".

Vedas and Upansihads are Originally written in Sanskrit, and when we

describe things, unconsiously the Sanskrit word comes, as you rightly

said a glossary can be added after each posting which contains lot of

Sanskrit word. Whcih helps everybody atleast to understand the

postings.

With prem & OM!

Krishna Prasad

--- Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote:

> Advance apologies to anyone taking offence at this post! However,

> it seems

> that a number of threads recently have become very heavily laden

> with

> Sanskrit. It seems to me that these would be better aimed at the

> Advaita-L

> list i.e. the list more obviously frequented by those studying

> Advaita in an

> academic w and interested in discussing diverging commentaries on

> esoteric

> sutras from obscure Upanishads etc. I had formed the opinion over

> the past

> fifteen months (since I joined) that topics tended to be open and

> accessible

> to all and this was, for me, an enormous advantage. We are all

> potentially

> interested in these topics but I feel sure that many must be

> frustrated by

> the Sanskrit content. After all, I have studied it to some degree

> and am

> familiar with most of the more common words but I find some of the

> recent

> posts incomprehensible.

>

> I would like to suggest an amendment to the 'constitution', namely

> that

> academic topics are posted only to the Advaita-L list and that all

> topics

> posted to this list either translate all but the most common

> Sanskrit words

> or omit them altogether and use acceptable English equivalents.

> Also, all

> quoted sutras/verses from scriptures should always be accompanied

> by a full

> translation - many of us do not know these off by heart! I cannot

> accept

> that it is always necessary to use Sanskrit words. I know that

> there are

> often no easy correspondences but, in those case, one or two short

> phrases

> usually give a good alternative and these must be preferable to

> simply not

> having any idea what the original means! I know that the 'real'

> meaning will

> only ever be obtained in the original but if you don't know the

> language,

> then you don't know it and that's all there is to it! If only a

> small

> percentage of your recipients will have any idea what you are

> talking about,

> then where is the benefit? Surely the aim of a list such as this is

> to

> communicate?

>

> As an example, I would like to refer you to Sunder's message of

> 27th July

> 'Re: Reposting again' in which he provides a quotation from Prof.

> Renade.

> This quotation talks about tracing the source of the doctrine of

> maya in the

> Upanishads. I suggest that, if this had been made by some members

> of the

> list, it would be laden with Sanskrit and references and be

> virtually

> unreadable. Yet Prof. Renade tells us exactly what he wants to say

> in a

> readable and comprehensive manner without using a single additional

> word of

> Sanskrit. Why can't we all do this? (I have no objection to Ruben's

> recent

> excellent posts on the Gayatri mantra, incidentally, because each

> word is

> comprehensively translated and explained.)

>

> If a majority disagree with these suggestions, then I have an

> alternative,

> though less preferred one. This is that the Glossary so excellently

> prepared

> by Sunder over the past months for Sadananda's Brahmasutra notes be

> extended

> for use as a glossary for all posts. Any poster could then check

> that any

> words he was using were present in the glossary. If not, then it

> would be

> his responsibility to ensure that they were added prior to the

> post.

> (However, although this sound fine in theory, I am doubtful that it

> would

> work in practice, human nature being what it is!)

>

> Dennis

>

Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Messenger

http://phonecard./

July 29, 2001

Namaste Dennisji:

You have done a great service to this list by raising some valid

issues so that we can all get maximum benefit from the posted

articles. I request all members who use Sanskrit terms to provide the

meanings appropriately. Those who feel that some Sanskrit terms are

trivial, please be considerate to those who are not exposed to any

Sanskrit.

There are two sides to the problem addressed by Sri Dennis. On the one

side those who post have the responsibility to provide english

translations adequately. On the otherside, those who don't understand

a Sanskrit term also should request for explanations. Posters would

love to get positive feedback and requests from members with more

explanations. I strongly urge members to interact more often so that

we can all fulfill the objectives of this list to enhance our

understanding and knowledge.

I want to assure Sri Dennis and others that the topics of this list

will continue to be open and accessible to those who have no

background in Sanskrit language. At the same time, I also feel that

some knowledge of Sanskrit will greatly benefit our understanding of

Advaita Philosophy. We should be thankful to those who use Sanskrit

(with appropriate and adequate English translation) and there is no

reason for us to avoid using Sanskrit terms when they can bring new

insights. I am sure that Sri Dennis is fully aware that there are no

exact english equivalents to the Sanskrit terms such as Dharma,

Sadhana, Yoga, etc. The issue is always where to draw the line and we

the members of this list have the vivekam (discriminating intellect)

and so we will be able accomodate the wishes of Sri Dennis

appropriately.

When the list members follow the list guidelines and objectives, the

moderators have no power to control the topics and articles that

members post. Currently we have 425 members with varied backgrounds

and interests. It is inevitable that the list receives a mix of

academic and non-academic topics for discussion. There is nothing

in the list guidelines or objective to prohibit the members in

posting academic articles that you described. Most important, the list

is obligated to serve all the members irrespective of their

background.

warmest regards,

Ram Chandran

Advaitin List Moderator

advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite@d...> wrote:

> Advance apologies to anyone taking offence at this post! However, it

seems

> that a number of threads recently have become very heavily laden

with

> Sanskrit. It seems to me that these would be better aimed at the

Advaita-L

> list i.e. the list more obviously frequented by those studying

Advaita in an

> academic way and interested in discussing diverging commentaries on

esoteric

> sutras from obscure Upanishads etc. I had formed the opinion over

the past

> fifteen months (since I joined) that topics tended to be open and

accessible

> to all and this was, for me, an enormous advantage. We are all

potentially

> interested in these topics but I feel sure that many must be

frustrated by

> the Sanskrit content.

July 30, 2001

Dennis has a valid point. In my Brahmasuutra notes I asked for feed

back from the readers of the notes whether to stop the usage of

Sanskrit or to continue at the same style that I was posting. As one

recalls the input from the members, only one preferred less use of

Sanskrit and rest wanted to continue at the same style. I tried to

provide as much translation as needed to understand the notes get

most of it by skipping the Sanskrit. Some wanted the original

Upanishad sloka-s that were referenced by Shankara. While giving

list of the sloka-s I refrained from giving complete meaning of the

sloka-s since they are intended more for reference. The essence of

the sloka-s bearing the context was provided in the text. Many a

time Sunder in his postingw provides sloka-s more for reference for

those who really want and those may be of less use for a general

audience. Dennis point that one should provide the meaning of the

sloka is well taken.

The purpose of the posting is to communicate with others and if we

fail in that the very purpose is not served. I was reading some of

the English commentaries particularly on Brahmasuutra I could not

make head and tail out of it. I wished they used at least the

original Sanskrit words in parenthesis and we would have known what

that English word they have translated mean. The translation of the

word maaya as illusion does not really provide the true import of the

word as it is used in advaitic tradition. nirguNa literally means no

guNa. Actually it should be guNa atiita or one who transcends the

guNa. But Ramanuja interprets nirguNa as dosha guNa rahita or the

absence of only bad qualities while Lord is defined as the locus of

sakala kalyaana guNa - locus of all infinite auspicious qualities.

The spirit of Dennis comments are well taken and one should at least

provide the English translation of it side by side for the benefit of

the others. Otherwise the post will remain unread by those who do

not understand.

Hari Om!

Sadananda

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

July 30, 2001

Can I suggest that, if people provide glossaries for their posts that they

do so in the format of Sunder's BSB Glossary. This is as below for those who

have not downloaded this: -

vraja = take

vratam = vow

vyaadhi = sickness

vyaakhyaanam = expounding

You need only provide translations for words that are not already present.

There are currently translations for nearly 2000 words. I can email an MS

word macro to anyone wishing to utilise this. (Double click on a word that

you do not know and then call the macro via a button on the toolbar. If the

word is in the glossary, the translation is provided in a message box.) N.B.

You should ideally have some knowledge of how to set up macros in Word in

order to be able to make use of this. I tried describing the process to

Sunder and Sada in the early days without a lot of success!

Dennis

July 30, 2001

I would like for you to e mail me the macro, if you don't mind.

Thanks

Geetha