[Advaita-l] Ramopakhyana of Mahabharata vs. the Uttara Kanda of Ramayana
dvnsarma at gmail.com
Wed May 4 02:05:06 CDT 2016
Sri Venkata Sriram,
You have said
>There were 3 culprits who raised this controversy namely
>1) Prof.Weber 2) Prof. Lasen 3) Prof.Keith
These people are world renowned sanskritists who have devoted their whole
sanskrit studies. One may disagree with them rightly or wrongly but it does
to show disrespect to them by calling them culprits.
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Venkata sriram P via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> There were 3 culprits who raised this controversy namely
> 1) Prof.Weber 2) Prof. Lasen 3) Prof.Keith
> Their argument is that the language of mahAbhArata is crude
> and the language of rAmAyaNa is polished. Hence, rAmAyaNa
> was composed much later than mahAbhArata. Moreover, the source of
> rAmAyaNa was MB's rAmOpAkhyAna. Hence, bAlakANDa & uttarakANDa
> are prakSipta.
> There are several ridiculous arguments for them to hold their views.
> Our traditional scholars like Karapatri Swamin, Sri.Gunturu Seshendra
> Sarma Garu
> have refuted them with valid points.
> Sri.Seshendra Sarma’s research work on rAmAyaNa called
> “shODashi” which is a bit tantric representation of rAmAyaNa is here:
> Shri.Karapatri Swamiji’s magnum opus called “rAmAyaNa mImAmsa”
> can be downloaded from here:
> With regards,
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list