interpolation in puranas

[Guest guest]

narasimhan -

 

as you said the scholarly opinion on interpolation of puranas cannot be accepted

in toto. their analysis is based on comparative linguistics, astronomical

calculations and hagiographical evidences. there are others based on cross

references between various texts, chronology, internal inconsistency etc.

definitely there is a science behind it and it cannot be said to be without

fault. some of the faults are due to motivations of the researchers as most of

their work is funded by christian / islamic missionaries and by communists -

none of whom by and large are favourable to vedic dharma. most of them do work

without learning sanskrit, tamil, apabrahmsa, pali or any of the indic

languages. for example, romila thappar who is at the helm of affairs in JNU

writing all of our history that is learn by millions of school and college

students is clueless about tamil or sanskrit.

 

in the same breadth it cannot also said that every thing they say is completely

faulty. there are definitely some neutral scholars who have done a reasonable

amount of good work. there is no one encycloepaedia of indological work. if you

are interested in a particular topic, you can post it at indian civilization

. they have some genuine scholars who may point you to the right work

but they may not respond immediately as they are busy working on different

projects.

 

 

 

 

 

New and Improved Mail - Send 10MB messages!

 

 

[Guest guest]

achintya, Rajaram Venkataramani

<v_raja_ram> wrote:

 

>

> in the same breadth it cannot also said that every thing they say

is completely faulty. there are definitely some neutral scholars who

have done a reasonable amount of good work. there is no one

encycloepaedia of indological work.

>

 

The main point is to see what the rationale is for assuming a given

passage to be interpolated, rather than assuming it is so simply

because Dr. XYZ says so, and Dr. XYZ has a degree from Benares

Sanskrit University, etc.

 

Some individuals here have been quite vocal in their opinion that

certain sections of the Puraanas (like the section describing Lord

Shiva's descent as a braahmana in Kali Yuga to preach maayaavaada)

are interpolation. But the rationale for these arguments rarely

follows; instead, the plea for us to accept them seems to be "oh, but

he is a scholar, and he has done so much good work, he even published

his opinions," etc. This is the mentality that must go.

 

>From a traditional point of view, the Puraanas are the fifth Veda,

and so what they say must be accepted wherever it does not contradict

the shrutis. Admittedly, this might get a little tricky when dealing

with "historical passages," as these things will certainly not be in

shruti, yet will likely not be contradicted by anything in shruti,

since shrutis do not have the same historical thrust.