Who is Plagiarising from whom?/Translations of Ancient texts

September 19, 2003

Aum Namah Shivaya

Dear Mukund,Manu,and group,

Though this doesn't concern me, I think I can identify the source of

that reading. If my memory is right I have seen this reading from

the website that you mention, in Das Goravani's software. Moreover

the website that you mention has used Goravani's software for all

calculations. Probably both Sanjay ji and Mr. Harini (is that his

name?) are licensed users of the software. Though it doesn't amount

to plagiarism really, I guess the author of that article should have

acknowledged that he is using Das Goravani's software for some of

the readings. Most of those articles there (nearly 75%) draw heavily

from Goravani's readings. I guess that as a licensed user he may be

entitled to use the readings. Probably Sanjay is also a licensed

user. One of my students owns a copy of Goravani's software. I have

seen him taking the readings from the software and modifying them

wherever he felt the need to, and just giving them to his

clients.

As for Manu Batura's comments about translations of Sanskrit texts,

translation does not amount to plagiarism. Translation is a fully

original work and is as demanding as writing a new one. In fact each

translation has its own copyright. Again why do we prefer one

translation and not the other? It is not just the information, but

also the expression and accuracy that we look for in a translation.

While the spirit of the original is most important, quite often the

choice of words is equally important. Take a work like the I Ching-

the Chinese classic. I have at least 50 translations and

commentaries with me. None of the first few translations in English

are as good as some of the current ones. And even if there are ten

good translations/commentaries, each of them offers its own unique

insights and perspective. Another instance is that of Kautilya's

Arthasastra. I have six translations with me. Again the first

translation is just fine. The later authors have done a better job.

Now this brings me to another topic that I have often thought of

responding to here – the various discussions and debates on the

Vedas and the Tantras.

I have read many discussions here on the Vedas and/or Tantras where

people quote a verse or two and start a hot discussion. Most such

quotes are from the translations of Griffith, Muller, Wilson etc.

Something like the Veda has, quite often, a symbolic meaning which

we miss if we do not know of its existence. For understanding's

sake all commentaries on the Vedas should be broadly classified into

1. Pre-Sayana commentaries

2. Works of Sayana and those who follow his school of thought

3. Western scholars's commentaries

4. Dayananda's commentaries

5. Aurobindo and those who either follow or are inspired by his

ideas (like Kapali Sastriar who in turn has influenced R.L.Kashyap)

6. Commentators who have attempted to compare some of the above

Many do not even know that most Western and Indian scholars rely

heavily on Sayana. Sayana himself belonged to the 14th century AD,

and is thus more of our contemporary than of the ancient seers.

Sayana himself belongs to our own times, when the true meaning of

ancient wisdom is largely lost. Sayana adopted mostly a literal and

ritualistic approach. Behind the persistent ritualistic note, all

else is lost! It has always been held that Revealed Wisdom has deep

spiritual, philosophic and psychological meanings. Sayana. His

commentaries mould the language of the Veda into a principally

ritualistic mould. At some places he mentions older interpretations,

but does not admit them. Take for instance the word Vrtra. Sayana

himself admits of an older interpretation of Vrtra as

the `Aacchaadaka' (one who covers or hides) who holds back

from man the objects of his desire and aspirations. This ancient

psychological interpretation is more in the lines of Aurobindo's

school of thought. But Sayana simply treats Vrtra as the physical

demon (contextually the physical CLOUD) who holds back the water and

has to be pierced by the Giver of Rain (Indra). Sayana too (like

most modern scholars) was pre-occupied with giving a SCIENTIFIC and

RITUALISTIC interpretation. The Vedas deal with science etc, but

that is not the main objective. And where there are obvious

parallels between modern science and the Ancient seers, one may

freely draw a parallel. But any attempt to ARTIFICIALLY read one

into the other can be misleading if not dangerous. The wisdom of the

Vedas is timeless, while science has shifting paradigms.

While the Vedas HAVE a Ritualistic basis TOO, the roots are even

deeper, running into psychological, philosophical and Spiritual

depths. And Sayana does injustice in this regard. Yet Sayana's

commentaries have their own role and value. He was the only one to

even attempt a commentary on the whole body of the Veda. The very

task is unparalleled and has not been equaled by scholars either

before or after him. Neither has Aurobindo nor Dayananda or any

other commentator commented on even One Veda fully. Neither do we

have any other ancient commentator who seems to have achieved this

feat. So all commentators behind Sayana are forced to study him, at

least because he is the only one available, rather the default

commentator. But one has to keep Sayana's limitations in mind.

As for the western scholars, a majority of them have largely

followed or at least drew from Sayana, apart from suffering from

certain pre-conceived notions. These translations were among the

earliest and suffer from many faults. And since most of the older

translations are in the public domain now (copyright ceases after

some time period, say 60 years), you find websites that give you

these texts freely. But in the past 60 years or 100 years new

research and investigation must have led the scholars to change some

of their opinions. Better translations too have come, though only of

selected portions. But people still hang on to the incorrect

translations. Not many have the ability to even judge for themselves

if a translation has caught the spirit of the original. Moreover

interpretation or revelation of the symbolic significance (where

applicable) often needs a spiritual adept if not a realized soul.

And what to speak of the Tantras? Unless one is initiated and

studies the Agamas, most textual interpretations do not make sense.

All this biased and talk of left handed Tantra arises from a lack of

internal knowledge and only betrays our ignorance . The

classification of the Tantric path into the threefold or sevenfold

path has little or nothing to do with black magic or harmful

practices. It has more to do with specific sadhanas and attitudes.

While I have lot to share, I do not have the time now. So I will end

the post here.

Regards,

Satya

September 19, 2003

Hello Dr. Satya:

First and foremost, thanks for a comprehensive reply and having the

guts to reply as plagiarism is a very sensitive issue and especially

sensitive as it involves the resident Guru of this discussion group,

Sanjay Rath.

Dr. Satya, I was aware that Das Goravani had a Jyotish software that

he sold commercially, but didn't know that this software is

programmed to produce an actual reading of planets in houses/rashis.

The extract the I took from this website is from Das Goravani's own

horoscope reading listed on this website. Now, I understand why that

website included Das' horoscope amongst other celebrities as Das is

not a celebrity or an internationally known public figure.

Ya, I agree with you that translation from the classical text is MOST

DEFINITELY NOT plagiarism. However, copying someone else's literary

work, word for word, is INDEED plagiarism.

At first I thought the website was stealing Sanjay's work. Now, we

know the whole truth.

Thank you.

Mukund

vedic astrology, "Dr Satya Prakash Choudhary"

<satyaprakasika> wrote:

>

> Aum Namah Shivaya

>

> Dear Mukund,Manu,and group,

>

> Though this doesn't concern me, I think I can identify the source

of

> that reading. If my memory is right I have seen this reading from

> the website that you mention, in Das Goravani's software. Moreover

> the website that you mention has used Goravani's software for all

> calculations. Probably both Sanjay ji and Mr. Harini (is that his

> name?) are licensed users of the software. Though it doesn't amount

> to plagiarism really, I guess the author of that article should

have

> acknowledged that he is using Das Goravani's software for some of

> the readings. Most of those articles there (nearly 75%) draw

heavily

> from Goravani's readings. I guess that as a licensed user he may be

> entitled to use the readings. Probably Sanjay is also a licensed

> user. One of my students owns a copy of Goravani's software. I have

> seen him taking the readings from the software and modifying them

> wherever he felt the need to, and just giving them to his

> clients.

>

> As for Manu Batura's comments about translations of Sanskrit texts,

> translation does not amount to plagiarism. Translation is a fully

> original work and is as demanding as writing a new one. In fact

each

> translation has its own copyright. Again why do we prefer one

> translation and not the other? It is not just the information, but

> also the expression and accuracy that we look for in a translation.

> While the spirit of the original is most important, quite often the

> choice of words is equally important. Take a work like the I Ching-

> the Chinese classic. I have at least 50 translations and

> commentaries with me. None of the first few translations in English

> are as good as some of the current ones. And even if there are ten

> good translations/commentaries, each of them offers its own unique

> insights and perspective. Another instance is that of Kautilya's

> Arthasastra. I have six translations with me. Again the first

> translation is just fine. The later authors have done a better job.

> Now this brings me to another topic that I have often thought of

> responding to here – the various discussions and debates on the

> Vedas and the Tantras.

>

> I have read many discussions here on the Vedas and/or Tantras where

> people quote a verse or two and start a hot discussion. Most such

> quotes are from the translations of Griffith, Muller, Wilson etc.

> Something like the Veda has, quite often, a symbolic meaning which

> we miss if we do not know of its existence. For understanding's

> sake all commentaries on the Vedas should be broadly classified into

>

> 1. Pre-Sayana commentaries

> 2. Works of Sayana and those who follow his school of thought

> 3. Western scholars's commentaries

> 4. Dayananda's commentaries

> 5. Aurobindo and those who either follow or are inspired by his

> ideas (like Kapali Sastriar who in turn has influenced R.L.Kashyap)

> 6. Commentators who have attempted to compare some of the above

>

> Many do not even know that most Western and Indian scholars rely

> heavily on Sayana. Sayana himself belonged to the 14th century AD,

> and is thus more of our contemporary than of the ancient seers.

> Sayana himself belongs to our own times, when the true meaning of

> ancient wisdom is largely lost. Sayana adopted mostly a literal and

> ritualistic approach. Behind the persistent ritualistic note, all

> else is lost! It has always been held that Revealed Wisdom has deep

> spiritual, philosophic and psychological meanings. Sayana. His

> commentaries mould the language of the Veda into a principally

> ritualistic mould. At some places he mentions older

interpretations,

> but does not admit them. Take for instance the word Vrtra. Sayana

> himself admits of an older interpretation of Vrtra as

> the `Aacchaadaka' (one who covers or hides) who holds back

> from man the objects of his desire and aspirations. This ancient

> psychological interpretation is more in the lines of Aurobindo's

> school of thought. But Sayana simply treats Vrtra as the physical

> demon (contextually the physical CLOUD) who holds back the water

and

> has to be pierced by the Giver of Rain (Indra). Sayana too (like

> most modern scholars) was pre-occupied with giving a SCIENTIFIC and

> RITUALISTIC interpretation. The Vedas deal with science etc, but

> that is not the main objective. And where there are obvious

> parallels between modern science and the Ancient seers, one may

> freely draw a parallel. But any attempt to ARTIFICIALLY read one

> into the other can be misleading if not dangerous. The wisdom of

the

> Vedas is timeless, while science has shifting paradigms.

>

> While the Vedas HAVE a Ritualistic basis TOO, the roots are even

> deeper, running into psychological, philosophical and Spiritual

> depths. And Sayana does injustice in this regard. Yet Sayana's

> commentaries have their own role and value. He was the only one to

> even attempt a commentary on the whole body of the Veda. The very

> task is unparalleled and has not been equaled by scholars either

> before or after him. Neither has Aurobindo nor Dayananda or any

> other commentator commented on even One Veda fully. Neither do we

> have any other ancient commentator who seems to have achieved this

> feat. So all commentators behind Sayana are forced to study him, at

> least because he is the only one available, rather the default

> commentator. But one has to keep Sayana's limitations in mind.

>

> As for the western scholars, a majority of them have largely

> followed or at least drew from Sayana, apart from suffering from

> certain pre-conceived notions. These translations were among the

> earliest and suffer from many faults. And since most of the older

> translations are in the public domain now (copyright ceases after

> some time period, say 60 years), you find websites that give you

> these texts freely. But in the past 60 years or 100 years new

> research and investigation must have led the scholars to change

some

> of their opinions. Better translations too have come, though only

of

> selected portions. But people still hang on to the incorrect

> translations. Not many have the ability to even judge for

themselves

> if a translation has caught the spirit of the original. Moreover

> interpretation or revelation of the symbolic significance (where

> applicable) often needs a spiritual adept if not a realized soul.

>

> And what to speak of the Tantras? Unless one is initiated and

> studies the Agamas, most textual interpretations do not make sense.

> All this biased and talk of left handed Tantra arises from a lack

of

> internal knowledge and only betrays our ignorance . The

> classification of the Tantric path into the threefold or sevenfold

> path has little or nothing to do with black magic or harmful

> practices. It has more to do with specific sadhanas and attitudes.

> While I have lot to share, I do not have the time now. So I will

end

> the post here.

>

> Regards,

>

> Satya

September 19, 2003

Hello Dr Satya,

Thank you for your comments. It was filled with

knowledge.

Thanks & Regards,

Manu

--- monmuk111 <monmuk111 wrote:

> Hello Dr. Satya:

>

> First and foremost, thanks for a comprehensive reply

> and having the

> guts to reply as plagiarism is a very sensitive

> issue and especially

> sensitive as it involves the resident Guru of this

> discussion group,

> Sanjay Rath.

>

> Dr. Satya, I was aware that Das Goravani had a

> Jyotish software that

> he sold commercially, but didn't know that this

> software is

> programmed to produce an actual reading of planets

> in houses/rashis.

>

> The extract the I took from this website is from Das

> Goravani's own

> horoscope reading listed on this website. Now, I

> understand why that

> website included Das' horoscope amongst other

> celebrities as Das is

> not a celebrity or an internationally known public

> figure.

>

> Ya, I agree with you that translation from the

> classical text is MOST

> DEFINITELY NOT plagiarism. However, copying someone

> else's literary

> work, word for word, is INDEED plagiarism.

>

> At first I thought the website was stealing Sanjay's

> work. Now, we

> know the whole truth.

>

> Thank you.

> Mukund

>

> vedic astrology, "Dr Satya

> Prakash Choudhary"

> <satyaprakasika> wrote:

> >

> > Aum Namah Shivaya

> >

> > Dear Mukund,Manu,and group,

> >

> > Though this doesn't concern me, I think I can

> identify the source

> of

> > that reading. If my memory is right I have seen

> this reading from

> > the website that you mention, in Das Goravani's

> software. Moreover

> > the website that you mention has used Goravani's

> software for all

> > calculations. Probably both Sanjay ji and Mr.

> Harini (is that his

> > name?) are licensed users of the software. Though

> it doesn't amount

> > to plagiarism really, I guess the author of that

> article should

> have

> > acknowledged that he is using Das Goravani's

> software for some of

> > the readings. Most of those articles there (nearly

> 75%) draw

> heavily

> > from Goravani's readings. I guess that as a

> licensed user he may be

> > entitled to use the readings. Probably Sanjay is

> also a licensed

> > user. One of my students owns a copy of Goravani's

> software. I have

> > seen him taking the readings from the software and

> modifying them

> > wherever he felt the need to, and just giving them

> to his

> > clients.

> >

> > As for Manu Batura's comments about translations

> of Sanskrit texts,

> > translation does not amount to plagiarism.

> Translation is a fully

> > original work and is as demanding as writing a new

> one. In fact

> each

> > translation has its own copyright. Again why do we

> prefer one

> > translation and not the other? It is not just the

> information, but

> > also the expression and accuracy that we look for

> in a translation.

> > While the spirit of the original is most

> important, quite often the

> > choice of words is equally important. Take a work

> like the I Ching-

> > the Chinese classic. I have at least 50

> translations and

> > commentaries with me. None of the first few

> translations in English

> > are as good as some of the current ones. And even

> if there are ten

> > good translations/commentaries, each of them

> offers its own unique

> > insights and perspective. Another instance is that

> of Kautilya's

> > Arthasastra. I have six translations with me.

> Again the first

> > translation is just fine. The later authors have

> done a better job.

> > Now this brings me to another topic that I have

> often thought of

> > responding to here – the various discussions and

> debates on the

> > Vedas and the Tantras.

> >

> > I have read many discussions here on the Vedas

> and/or Tantras where

> > people quote a verse or two and start a hot

> discussion. Most such

> > quotes are from the translations of Griffith,

> Muller, Wilson etc.

> > Something like the Veda has, quite often, a

> symbolic meaning which

> > we miss if we do not know of its existence. For

> understanding's

> > sake all commentaries on the Vedas should be

> broadly classified into

> >

> > 1. Pre-Sayana commentaries

> > 2. Works of Sayana and those who follow his

> school of thought

> > 3. Western scholars's commentaries

> > 4. Dayananda's commentaries

> > 5. Aurobindo and those who either follow or are

> inspired by his

> > ideas (like Kapali Sastriar who in turn has

> influenced R.L.Kashyap)

> > 6. Commentators who have attempted to compare some

> of the above

> >

> > Many do not even know that most Western and Indian

> scholars rely

> > heavily on Sayana. Sayana himself belonged to the

> 14th century AD,

> > and is thus more of our contemporary than of the

> ancient seers.

> > Sayana himself belongs to our own times, when the

> true meaning of

> > ancient wisdom is largely lost. Sayana adopted

> mostly a literal and

> > ritualistic approach. Behind the persistent

> ritualistic note, all

> > else is lost! It has always been held that

> Revealed Wisdom has deep

> > spiritual, philosophic and psychological meanings.

> Sayana. His

> > commentaries mould the language of the Veda into a

> principally

> > ritualistic mould. At some places he mentions

> older

> interpretations,

> > but does not admit them. Take for instance the

> word Vrtra. Sayana

> > himself admits of an older interpretation of Vrtra

> as

> > the `Aacchaadaka' (one who covers or hides) who

> holds back

> > from man the objects of his desire and

> aspirations. This ancient

> > psychological interpretation is more in the lines

> of Aurobindo's

> > school of thought. But Sayana simply treats Vrtra

> as the physical

> > demon (contextually the physical CLOUD) who holds

> back the water

> and

> > has to be pierced by the Giver of Rain (Indra).

> Sayana too (like

> > most modern scholars) was pre-occupied with giving

> a SCIENTIFIC and

> > RITUALISTIC interpretation. The Vedas deal with

> science etc, but

> > that is not the main objective. And where there

> are obvious

> > parallels between modern science and the Ancient

> seers, one may

> > freely draw a parallel. But any attempt to

> ARTIFICIALLY read one

> > into the other can be misleading if not dangerous.

> The wisdom of

> the

>

=== message truncated ===

September 19, 2003

Om Namah Shivaaya

Dear guru Dr.Satya,

Pranaams. Your posts have been a real eye opener. I salute your

profound knowledge in this divine science and your style of writing.

You have an amazing talent. I bow down at your feet for your blessings.

I'm just a student in this divine science. You are a real inspiration

for hundreds and hundreds of learners like me. I know that you are

pretty busy with your profession (dentist, I guess) and astrlogical

teachings etc.. But do write and contribute to the vedic astrology or

varahamihra or groups, among others, whenever you find

time. Your words carry so much meaning and maturity. May God bless you!

May I ask you a question. Can you please recommend me a good English

transluation book on Bhagavat Geetha, Ramayanam and Maha Bharatham. I

don't know Sanskrit. But I have immense faith in these scriptures. I

feel I have wasted 34 years w/o knowing so many things. Only since

last 2 years I'm channeling my spare time in this divine science and

already feeling so much joy and confidence in my life.

Thank you so much,

With your blessings,

Palanivelu, USA