jijaji Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by ram: How can anyone take all 100,000 verses Mahabharata as real when most of them are interpolations anyway that were added way after the Mahabharata War! [This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-10-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 I seriously doubt whether you have read the Mahabharata text at all, thus to me, personally, your statement is really a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 But the matter at hand here is not if I have read the Mahabharata or not but if all 100,000 verses of the present edition are original or not. My doubt is as to whether you are a sanskrit scholar competant to identify interpolations in an ancient text, and whether you studied the Mahabharata text for this purpose. Only then would your comment as to the authenticity of mahabharata have any meaning. Or maybe you just read something on a website and thought you would look smart. Go ahead and be honest. Just reread you post: How can anyone take all 100,000 verses Mahabharata as real when most of them are interpolations anyway that were added way after the Mahabharata War! Yup, sure. Guess I better chuck out my mahabharata, cause Jijaji says most of the verses are interpolations. I hope he has actually read them and isn't just passing around a rumor. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-10-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karthik_v Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 J N Das Prabhuji, Is it not true that there have been interpolations in both Ramayana and Mahabharat? If you look at Gita press edition of VR, they do mention that some verses are interpolated. Similarly, Uttara kanda didn't exist even till the days of Tulasidass. So, these are the indications that there are interpolations. The same with Mahabharat too. There are many recensions with varying number of verses. All cannot be original. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 There are interpolations in many texts, but most of these are minor things (a few verses here and there). The idea that the majority of the Mahabharata is an interpolation is nonsense. It is the modern indologists view that every single Vedic text is nothing but interpolation after interpolation. We prefer to accept the divine origin of Vedic knowledge. We understand interpolation has occured over time, but the fundamental text has remained the same. As far as texts like Srimad Bhagavatam, we know the absolute authenticity of it from the commentaries of the acharyas (i.e. by writing a commentary to a verse, they are authenticating it). [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-10-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jijaji Posted May 10, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Here's a very good link to this subject. An entire book on the subject in fact with many scholars from both sides of the fence. Make sure to look at the names of the participants who contributed in this book. They are not a bunch of 'Idiots' as some closed-minded here would have you believe but very qualified as their credentials show. Just because some of them do not accept everything on face value and doesn't mean their points of view should be dogmaticaly cast aside. link... http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/maha/ you will have to download a djva viewer (no biggie) Seems lately anything said that jndas disagrees with is meet with some angry response with something belittling added i.e "I doubt if you ever read mahabharataThat's nonsense" how original.. gimme a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Don't mind me. I just take exception when people who have little academic sanskrit knowledge pass off absurd statements like "the majority of the mahabharata is an interpolation..." And based on what? On a website they visited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jijaji Posted May 10, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by jndas: Don't mind me. I just take exception when people who have little academic sanskrit knowledge pass off absurd statements like "the majority of the mahabharata is an interpolation..." And based on what? On a website they visited. Not just a 'WEBSITE'.. I visited jndas! ha ha, how cute jndas But the Link was to nothing less than AN ENTIRE BOOK ON THE SUBJECT by some of the most noteworthy scholars on the subject in our present times.... Always some litte snide remark from you these days, gettin a little grumpy in your old age perhaps..? I don't care nothing is good enough to those blinded by their dogma only! Interpolation in the Mahabharata is something that has a lot of support outside your 'one and only view' and something I myself have studied from various sources... here's another.. The Mahabharata translated by L.A.B van Buitenen. see the introduction, page xxiii Authorship & Date (but of course van Buitenen is an idiot huh?) BTW..Did I mention that Madhavacarya said the majority of Mahabharata was interpolated in his own time..? There ya go that should keep ya busy for a few minutes... You really need to get out more! [This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-10-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karthik_v Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by jijaji: Always some litte snide remark from you these days, gettin a little grumpy in your old age perhaps..? When I accidentally ran into J N Das prabhu in Tamilnadu 4 years ago, he was still a vibrant 22 year old American. Perhaps, in just 4 years he has become an old man Who knows what pastimes Krishna can enact? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karthik_v Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by jndas: There are interpolations in many texts, but most of these are minor things (a few verses here and there). The idea that the majority of the Mahabharata is an interpolation is nonsense. I don't know about the extent of interpolation in Mahabharata, but there is a lot of interpolation in Ramayana. Atleast one canto, uttara kanda was entirely interpolated. All those stories about Rama banishing Sita to forest, Luv and Kush etc., were never written by Valmiki. Also, I have read that the available recensions of VR have verses varying in number anywhere between 24,000 to 48,000. That means there is a lot of interpolation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 The account of Rama banishing Sita to the forest is repeated in the ninth canto of SB. Hmmmmmm...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karthik_v Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by theist: The account of Rama banishing Sita to the forest is repeated in the ninth canto of SB. Hmmmmmm...... Perhaps, that is what lends credence to the claim of interpolation. This episode figures in uttara kanda, which is not to be found in Kamba Ramayana [9th or 10th century AD], original Tulsidass' Ramcaritamanas [he died in 1623]. It is unthinkable that 2 great devotees will leave out an entire canto in their translation. Hence there is reason to believe that this canto was either written after 1623 CE or it was written before by some interpolator but never became mainstrean till much after 1623 CE. Interestingly, in Tamil this canto starts appearing only in 1807 CE. One shouldn't forget that there was a flurry of activity in Auragazeb's court interpolating our texts. So, even that mention in SB could have had its origins during those times and then crept into Ramayana. Interestingly, even Sri Vaishnavas consider SB only as a secondary text and accept it only if it is in line with shrutis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Also, I have read that the available recensions of VR have verses varying in number anywhere between 24,000 to 48,000. That means there is a lot of interpolation. It doesn't necessarily mean there is interpolation. There are different authentic branches of the text, and there are many lost verses in manuscripts. Valmiki Ramayana was authored perhaps in the 24th divya-yuga of the present manvantara (when Valmiki was serving as Vyasa). From then till the present a lot of time has passed (we are in the 28th Divya-yuga). As far as differences in regards to the various versions of Rama's incarnation (from Puranas, from Ramayana, and from saints), Tulasidas concludes it is because of Kalpa Bheda (variance in the Lord's pastimes in different incarnations). Ramachandra appears in every Treta-yuga, thus there have been four more recent incarnations of Rama since the time of Valmiki Ramayana. Thus saints may be envisioning a different lila than what occured in Valmiki Ramayana. As far as the Uttara khanda being an interpolation, I don't agree, but that will require another thread. For now lets not diverge, we can come back to that topic later. The verses in Bhagavatam are known to be authentic due to them being commented on by various vaishnava acharya's from prior times. From a traditional angle, we accept the acharyas as having divya-drishti, and therefore capable of authenticating a scripture themselves. From a practical angle, we know those verses have existed at least from the time they were commented on. As far as Sri Vaishnava's view of Srimad Bhagavatam, I think that is more a general view of all smriti texts. But they also hold Divya Prabandham as superior (or at least equal) to the Vedas, so the tradition is not much different (to Gaudiya vaishnava's holding Srimad Bhagavatam as the topmost). [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-10-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jijaji Posted May 10, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 jndas is 26 years old...? boy THAT explains alot here... I became a Gaudiya vaishnav before you were born... And you have the nasty attitude to say... "I seriously doubt if you ever read Mahabharata" ha ha ha.. Please pay no attention to that man (boy) behind the curtain. [This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-10-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagat Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Wow! That's a great explanation of interpolations!! Do you know how critical texts are edited, JN? Have you seen the Poona critical edition? There is a very good explanation of the methodology they used in the introduction of that or the Harivamsa done by basically the same editing team. Jagat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jijaji Posted May 10, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Like I said..This is part of the problem.... A twenty six year old kid who moderates and deletes anything and everything to his limited liking... Boy OH Boy has this been an eye-opener tonight! THE GOOSE IS OUT...!!!!!!!! [This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-10-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by jijaji: Like I said..This is part of the problem.... A twenty six year old kid who moderates and deletes anything and everything to his limited liking... Boy OH Boy has this been an eye-opener tonight! THE GOOSE IS OUT...!!!!!!!! [This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-10-2002).] JNDas is only 26 years old. Jijaji, this explains why we should completely reject everything that JNDas says whether it is reasonable or not. Looking at his photograph on the website, I really thought he is atleast 62. Perhaps like you I was blind to the reality JNDas come out clean - you should give up this effort because you are too young to do it. And when you are old like Jijaji and myself you cannot do it anyway. ha ha ha. Traditionally Jijaji Saar - Elders are respected. But knowledge is to be respected more and old age cannot fill in for lack of it. It is one thing to debate what JNDas says which all the members of this forum will appreciate and it is another to make personal comments. If you diasgree, I can loan you my tortoise (he is 250 years old) so that you and my tortoise can run this website. I am sure my tortoise is a lot nicer than JNDas - he wont delete non spiritual posts from the Spiritual Discussion forums [This message has been edited by ram (edited 05-10-2002).] [This message has been edited by ram (edited 05-10-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by karthik_v: Thanks for correcting me Avinashji. Then this brings up an interesting question. After the conch shells were blown by both sides, why didn't the war start? Why did the armies wait till Krishna finished speaking? Can anyone eloborate on it? It has been nearly 25 years since I read the Mahabharatham. But from my vague memory, it goes like this. Even though the conch shells were blown, every one was waiting for grandsire Bhishma to give the signal to fight which is taking his bow and tying the wire - sorry about the poor style of English. And the war actually starts only after he did that and pulled the strings. But Bhishma would not do it because he was mesmerized by the words of Lord Krishna. In fact, Duryodhana asks him to shoot Arjuna but he refuses to because he is dumbstuck hearing the enchanting voice of the Lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jijaji Posted May 10, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 I'm not sayig that being young is a disqualification. In jndas's case perhaps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2002 Report Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by jijaji: How can anyone take all 100,000 verses Mahabharata as real when most of them are interpolations anyway that were added way after the Mahabharata War! [This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-10-2002).] I am not suggesting that. But if there is some thing we do not understand we have to discuss that specific case and see if it is real or an interpolation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted May 11, 2002 Report Share Posted May 11, 2002 Originally posted by jijaji: I'm not sayig that being young is a disqualification. In jndas's case perhaps jijaji, green with envy? You duffer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jijaji Posted May 11, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2002 Originally posted by jndas: I seriously doubt whether you have read the Mahabharata text at all, thus to me, personally, your statement is really a waste of time. If your speakin to me jndas about never reading Mahabharata, you are most inaccurate in your assumption, which is a chance you take in assuming. But the matter at hand here is not if I have read the Mahabharata or not but if all 100,000 verses of the present edition are original or not. Most mahabharata scholars agree on the point that it was originaly much much smaller than it's present form. Madhva himself said that most of the Mahabharata of his time was interpolated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2002 Report Share Posted May 11, 2002 Originally posted by jijaji: I'm not sayig that being young is a disqualification. In jndas's case perhaps ha ha ha. perhaps not. any way let us focus on the discussion. [This message has been edited by ram (edited 05-11-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shvu Posted May 11, 2002 Report Share Posted May 11, 2002 There are interpolations in many texts, but most of these are minor things (a few verses here and there). I beg to differ. When the Mahabharata was first published in the 1800s, there were 2 editions, the Bombay edition and the Calcutta edition. Whole cantos (thousands of verses) were different between these 2 editions. The Bhandarkar foundation took up the big task of coming up out with a critical edition of the Mahabharata and I have no idea what they came up with. Not what one can dismiss as *minor things*. Not unless one is willing to believe that one of these editions was from a different Kalpa. It would be simpler not to go into details about interpolations in Puranas. That is even worse. Cheers [This message has been edited by shvu (edited 05-11-2002).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karthik_v Posted May 11, 2002 Report Share Posted May 11, 2002 Originally posted by Avinash: Dear Karthik, It is written in Gita that Bhisma blew his conchshell first. Then others blew their conch shells. It is written that all the five Pandavas and also Dhrstdyumna blew conch shells before Krsna commenced His teachings. Thanks for correcting me Avinashji. Then this brings up an interesting question. After the conch shells were blown by both sides, why didn't the war start? Why did the armies wait till Krishna finished speaking? Can anyone eloborate on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts