Guest guest Posted July 4, 2009 Report Share Posted July 4, 2009 Dear Joshiji,  You have raised some doubts as to who are the Devas, the upanishadic verse was referring to.  The Vedas do have secret speeches (passages) according to the Rig Veda. Please see the following verse:  à¤à¤¤à¤¾ विशà¥à¤µà¤¾ विदà¥à¤·à¥‡ तà¥à¤à¥à¤¯à¤‚ वेधो नीथानà¥à¤¯ अगà¥à¤¨à¥‡ निणà¥à¤¯à¤¾ वचांसि | निवचना कवये कावà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¨à¥à¤¯ अशंसिषम मतिà¤à¤¿à¤° विपà¥à¤° उकà¥à¤¥à¥ˆà¤ƒ || (RV 4.3.16)  Griffith's translation of this verse is as frollows :  <<To thee who knowest, Agni, thou Disposer, all these wise secret speeches have I uttered, Sung to thee, Sage, the charming words of wisdom, to thee, O Singer, with. my thoughts and Praises.>>  Hope this clarifies.  Regards,  Sunil K. Bhattacharjya   --- On Fri, 7/3/09, giravani <giravani wrote: giravani <giravani [WAVES-Vedic] From N.R.Joshi WAVES-Vedic Friday, July 3, 2009, 10:28 AM June 29, 2009  Whi is interpreting Paroksha knowledge?  by Dr.N.R.Joshi   The original discussion between Dr. Sunil Bhattacharya and his Virodhaka was about Vedic astrology. It shifted to Rashis in the ancient Indian books. What is in the ancient Indian scriptures is totally unimportant as far as astrology is concerned. Everybody is born at some time. He knows his own Rashi. He is the best judge to check whether astrology works or not. We took computers from the western sciences because it works. Whatever works is important, its source is not important. It may give pride to somebody when he finds something in his ancient scriptures. There is no need of using Paroksha knowledge in order to prove existence of Rashis in somebody?s ancient scriptures. If you believe it is there, then so be it. It does not prove or disprove the validity of astrology. So this topic is finished. Who is interpreting Paroksha knowldge and for what purpose make a big difference. I am highlighting the misuse of Paroksha knowledge. If somebody gets solace to his mind by the idea of existence of Paroksha knowledge (whether he knows or not), then he found the use of Paroksha knowledge. My advice please keep using it. When you are happy, I am happy.  I definitely believe Anumaana (inference) theory. Here it is. A dollar Guru in USA is talking about Paroksha knowledge in a big hall. Doctors and engineers are sitting at his feet. Since it is Paroksha knowledge, they cannot ask any questions. Now using Anumaana theory, I know who is outside the hall. Outside of the hall volunteer ladies are sitting asking for donations to Guru?s foundation. Inside Paroksha knowledge and outside Pratyaksha knowledge. In this way Anumaana theory of ancient India works in Houston,Texas. Another gentleman gave us different meanings of Kumbha and Meena. So now we are entering the realm of Semantics of Sanskrit words and I love this subject. Now Devas like Paroksha knowledge. I asked many times questions to Saadhus and Gurus about Devas. Who were they? Where were they living? There are thirty three Devas in Hindu religion. Some believe 33 crores. That is too large number for me. These 33 Devas are 12 Aadityas, 11 Rudras, 8 Vasus and 2 twin brothers (if numbers mixed, pardon me) I asked Gurus whether these Devas were on the earth or they were hanging in sky somewhere? I never got straight answer (Gurus have only Paroksha knowledge). Indra was the leader of Devas. He had fight with Asian amazons. He defeated them and kept two lady soldiers for himself. And for ancient Iranians Devas were beyond their borders in the north and they had frequent war with Devas. Indians on the other hand were friendly with Devas. However Raama and Krishna do not belong to this group 33 Devas. Krishna even had war with Indra on Pariyaatra mountain. So when we say that Devas like Paroksha knowledge, which Devas are we talking about? With the word Paroksha knowledge one is opening Pandora?s box of multiple interpretations. Then a stage will come when your interpretation is as good as mine. However the science of semantics of Sanskrit of the ancient India does not like such mushy, mushy softy, softy knowledge. If you love mushy knowledge, then you are a professor of Anthropology. Thanks guys. Pardon me for long e-mail. N.R.Joshi ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ___ Save on Digital Photography Serivces and Hardware. Click Now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Mr Joshi should read the biggest of all upanishadas (Brihadaranyaka) for getting the true meaning of 33 types ( " koti " meant 'type/category', which later was mis-translated as crore). But I guess he will not benefit due to his approach to devas. -VJ ============================= === ________________________________ Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya WAVES_Vedic Cc: giravani; vedic_research_centre ; ; vedic astrology Sunday, July 5, 2009 6:06:30 AM [vedic astrology] Re: [WAVES-Vedic] From N.R.Joshi Dear Joshiji, You have raised some doubts as to who are the Devas, the upanishadic verse was referring to. The Vedas do have secret speeches (passages) according to the Rig Veda. Please see the following verse: à¤à¤¤à¤¾ विशà¥à¤µà¤¾ विदà¥à¤·à¥‡ तà¥à¤à¥à¤¯à¤‚ वेधो नीथानà¥à¤¯ अगà¥à¤¨à¥‡ निणà¥à¤¯à¤¾ वचांसि | निवचना कवये कावà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¨à¥à¤¯ अशंसिषम मतिà¤à¤¿à¤° विपà¥à¤° उकà¥à¤¥à¥ˆà¤ƒ || (RV 4.3.16) Griffith's translation of this verse is as frollows : <<To thee who knowest, Agni, thou Disposer, all these wise secret speeches have I uttered, Sung to thee, Sage, the charming words of wisdom, to thee, O Singer, with. my thoughts and Praises.>> Hope this clarifies. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Fri, 7/3/09, giravani (AT) juno (DOT) com <giravani (AT) JUNO (DOT) COM> wrote: giravani (AT) juno (DOT) com <giravani (AT) JUNO (DOT) . COM> [WAVES-Vedic] From N.R.Joshi WAVES-Vedic Friday, July 3, 2009, 10:28 AM June 29, 2009 Whi is interpreting Paroksha knowledge? by Dr.N.R.Joshi The original discussion between Dr. Sunil Bhattacharya and his Virodhaka was about Vedic astrology. It shifted to Rashis in the ancient Indian books. What is in the ancient Indian scriptures is totally unimportant as far as astrology is concerned. Everybody is born at some time. He knows his own Rashi. He is the best judge to check whether astrology works or not. We took computers from the western sciences because it works. Whatever works is important, its source is not important. It may give pride to somebody when he finds something in his ancient scriptures. There is no need of using Paroksha knowledge in order to prove existence of Rashis in somebody?s ancient scriptures. If you believe it is there, then so be it. It does not prove or disprove the validity of astrology. So this topic is finished. Who is interpreting Paroksha knowldge and for what purpose make a big difference. I am highlighting the misuse of Paroksha knowledge. If somebody gets solace to his mind by the idea of existence of Paroksha knowledge (whether he knows or not), then he found the use of Paroksha knowledge. My advice please keep using it. When you are happy, I am happy. I definitely believe Anumaana (inference) theory.. Here it is. A dollar Guru in USA is talking about Paroksha knowledge in a big hall. Doctors and engineers are sitting at his feet. Since it is Paroksha knowledge, they cannot ask any questions. Now using Anumaana theory, I know who is outside the hall. Outside of the hall volunteer ladies are sitting asking for donations to Guru?s foundation. Inside Paroksha knowledge and outside Pratyaksha knowledge. In this way Anumaana theory of ancient India works in Houston,Texas. Another gentleman gave us different meanings of Kumbha and Meena. So now we are entering the realm of Semantics of Sanskrit words and I love this subject. Now Devas like Paroksha knowledge. I asked many times questions to Saadhus and Gurus about Devas. Who were they? Where were they living? There are thirty three Devas in Hindu religion. Some believe 33 crores. That is too large number for me. These 33 Devas are 12 Aadityas, 11 Rudras, 8 Vasus and 2 twin brothers (if numbers mixed, pardon me) I asked Gurus whether these Devas were on the earth or they were hanging in sky somewhere? I never got straight answer (Gurus have only Paroksha knowledge). Indra was the leader of Devas. He had fight with Asian amazons. He defeated them and kept two lady soldiers for himself. And for ancient Iranians Devas were beyond their borders in the north and they had frequent war with Devas. Indians on the other hand were friendly with Devas. However Raama and Krishna do not belong to this group 33 Devas. Krishna even had war with Indra on Pariyaatra mountain. So when we say that Devas like Paroksha knowledge, which Devas are we talking about? With the word Paroksha knowledge one is opening Pandora?s box of multiple interpretations. Then a stage will come when your interpretation is as good as mine. However the science of semantics of Sanskrit of the ancient India does not like such mushy, mushy softy, softy knowledge. If you love mushy knowledge, then you are a professor of Anthropology. Thanks guys. Pardon me for long e-mail. N.R.Joshi ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ___ Save on Digital Photography Serivces and Hardware. Click Now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.