[Advaita-l] Modern science and Vedanta.
Siva Senani Nori
sivasenani at yahoo.com
Fri Jul 22 20:28:51 CDT 2011
I will definitely respond to your main points, once you publish your research. Why do I not react in your reasearch phase? I saw you sitting on judgement when others responded in good spirit to your questions and I thought it was not right that they help you in * your * research which will be published by you, and having received something from them, you give back judgements, usually caustic! All the while, your own views are not made known for them to be criticised.
To be fair, I think from the tone of your posts that you might be a Don (if that is the term the British use) or a Professor given to evaluating repsonses in daily life and you might have just carried that to the list. Some of your questions did bother, did challenge my limited understanding but whenever I thought of pursuing it further, the mean streak in your posts used to put me off. So, I will wait for the finished product and respond to it, not work in progress.
Now when I know that all these questions are by somebody who is not willing to accept that gotra and udara have no connection, well, that explains the curious unintelligibility in your earlier posts - and the futility of engaging with you regarding Sanskrit terms.
By the way, I was taught that when the base for any number is not mentioned, it is to be assumed as 10. Of course, you - who can count in base 16 - would be perfectly aware of that. It is only the urge to score a point, the combination of high IQ and low empathy, that leads to these kinds of paaNDitI-prakarsha.
The reason that I took this route is given in one of your earlier emails where you explained why you decided to make fun of Sri Subrahmanian, quite incorrectly as it turned out. If apparently imprecise use of words is fair game, somebody who talks big without having fundamentals in place also ought to be fair game.
N. Siva Senani
>RV: For my research, I rely on experts in the subjects required (grammar, logic, philosophy etc.) and do not claim scholarship though as I said making an attempt to build it. In my primary school, the teacher appreciated me when I wrote 128 + 128 = 256. In my high school, my teacher called me a number one fool for saying that. He asked me to first ask which system the sum is set in. So, 128 + 128 = 250 in hexadecimal. When I deal with higher mathematics or physics, I dont go with primary school thinking. If I did, I wont be able to understand how an electron can simultaneously exist in multiple places or quantum entanglement allows instant exchange of information across space! We need higher mathematics for deeper understanding.
>Having interacted with a few scholars who have spent decades in sanskrit, logic and philosophy, I am able to understand that the language is very intricate. I have learnt not to take any thing for granted on the face value because each letter is pregnant with multiple meanings. I have not done an analysis of the roots of sahodara and sagotra but have seen sagotra used in the context same family (gotra-jah). Tamil is no ordinary language and maruval or change of words is no accident there due to limitation in terms of texts. Hence I said, I wont be surprised if there is mutual relation between the words.
>It is interesting that my main point is not discussed. It defends the tradition in super-excellent terms. If my logic incorrect, no one has pointed it out. There is an urge to call me a fool with all these empty verbiage when I have directly stated that myself in my own post. I consider it my greatest achievement in this life to have understand that despite my member in High IQ Societies, I am highly ignorant. The only greater achievement is my fortune to come in contact with the works of great acharyas who I believe are sarvajna. I may be wrong but probably not.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list