Vijay.Sharma Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 When we talk about patriotism and all, I felt this particular item may actually give us an opportunity to demonstrate patriotism. I am referring to the bastardized translation of an integral word of our languages. The word has a Sanskrit origin and used in many Indian languages whereas it has been translated as the worst form of human behaviorism by the Indologists of the 18th/19th century. So here is a great opportunity for all of us, immaterial of religion, caste, and whatever other such bullsh!t, to do a patriotic act. The word is YAJNA (YAGNA). In English and other western languages it translates to "sacrifice". Now, if there truly was a sacrifice of any sort during a yajna then one can argue that the translation was correct. However, we know that the early Indologists had their own agendas and hence must have translated this word imagining ancient Indians to be some uncivilized tribals which they were not. The closest word, I believe, that can throw light on what a yajna means is "ceremony" or term "ritual ceremony". I have already thought about some of the proposed solutions that "oh u know sacrifice here means a metaphoric sacrifice". I am sorry that doesn't work. Because I want all of you to be extremely honest to yourselves and answer for yourselves whether you believed yajnas actually had sacrifices or not? Remember, all yajnas were done by Brahmins who supposedly were pukka vegetarians. So what kind of sacrifice of an animal would be acceptable to them? Reciting mantras and pouring ghee in a pyre of fire is not a sacrifice - it is a fu
flamy Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 I always thought Yagna meant a deep meditation, ceremony, ritual. Dunno anyone who uses the word though. This thread made me lol though. No offense. :)
nikred Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 Reciting mantras and pouring ghee in a pyre of fire is not a sacrifice - it is a fu I don't think yagna is a phucking ritual. :ohmy:
punjabi_khota Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 The amount of anger this guy has against all things english/US/white, you would think he would already be in Afghanistan sucking on mullah omar's c0ck.
Vijay.Sharma Posted September 16, 2011 Author Posted September 16, 2011 The amount of anger this guy has against all things english/US/white' date=' you would think he would already be in Afghanistan sucking on mullah omar's c0ck.[/quote']Brian. my anger is at misrepresentation of my own civilization's history. It just so happens that the Europeans were the people who dunnit. Oh but don't worry I ain't no religious fanatic. At the end of the day, no human being is greater or lesser than any other human being. So while some of us express passionately (like me) others choose subtle, dry humor (like you). Both of us are right in our own ways. However, you would do more to move the discussion by actually staying on the discussion rather than making attacks on the individual. You have demonstrated what is called the Logical fallacy of type ad-hominem attack. Please, let's cut the personal cr@p and get to the discussion. If you have anything to argue about the translation of the word, please do so but focusing on attacking me will only make others view you as a guy who sucks white dicks. You could just be in the Bohemian groove right now and fit right in.
punjabi_khota Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 I thought I was hidden from you :wall: :wall: :wall: what did I do to deserve you un-hiding me
Vijay.Sharma Posted September 16, 2011 Author Posted September 16, 2011 I thought I was hidden from you :wall: :wall: :wall: what did I do to deserve you un-hiding me You are still in the Ignore List but there is an option to "View Post" so sometimes I do view your post, and honestly, some of your posts are hilarious. How I wish you would learn to let go off personal attacks on me. But o well that has to come from within you. Anyway, enough of digression from the thread. So, do you believe the translation of the word yajna to mean sacrifice is correct?
Holysmoke Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 I thought I was hidden from you :wall: :wall: :wall: what did I do to deserve you un-hiding me :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:
Jersey #10 Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 meet me at the ganges and we can talk about this...
akshayxyz Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 Do you believe (not as in blind faith) in evolution? If yes, why stop at Brahmins of Ancient Indo Civilzation or whatever - why not go even further back, when every one was living in the caves eating everything. I am sure most of the rituals were carried forward from there (or even before), and I won't be surprised if 'earliest brahmins' were non-veg, and earliest 'brahmin-rituals' required some sort of animal sacrifice. There are evidences of such rituals in the few tribes that still exist.
Rajiv Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 http://indiancricketfans.com/search.php?searchid=674764 Vijay, can we lose the "polling" please
Vijay.Sharma Posted September 16, 2011 Author Posted September 16, 2011 Do you believe (not as in blind faith) in evolution? If yes, why stop at Brahmins of Ancient Indo Civilzation or whatever - why not go even further back, when every one was living in the caves eating everything. I am sure most of the rituals were carried forward from there (or even before), and I won't be surprised if 'earliest brahmins' were non-veg, and earliest 'brahmin-rituals' required some sort of animal sacrifice. There are evidences of such rituals in the few tribes that still exist.Actually that is a fallacious argument, Akshay. Allow me to demonstrate why These are the facts we know. a. The Vedas (which is where the mention of yajnas are first seen in Indian scriptures) are a written work passed on over generations for more than 10,000 years. (There is an argument that they were passed on orally until someone combined them together about a couple of millenniums ago. There is no serious reason to believe so) b. All the yajnas we are talking about have been mentioned in detail. For ex - how many grams/spoon fulls of ghee to be poured in the fire when this or that particular hymn was chanted, who lights the pyre, who performs the recitations, who does what, what food items are presented, etc, etc. These are recorded in great detail (very much necessary if people were to do them). c. We are clearly talking about a civilization and not an uncivilized society. While an uncivilized society might believe in sacrifices, the very nature of these yajnas was to preserve life. The yajans were not done to please some blood thirsty gods. d. Even in civilized societies an act of sacrifice is usually carried out and the sacrificed animal is consumed. For ex - Eid - the goat is consumed. e. The historical t,s,p,c of the 18th century Indologists - they had never encountered such a civilization before. Their whole world view was based on Abrahamic faiths. Therefore it is quite natural to expect them to have misunderstood what happens in a yajna to be a sacrifice since Abrahamic faiths have sacrifices. f. Many of the yajnas are performed even today. For ex - the yajnas of marriage, of child naming, of feeding people on death anniversaries, and other such stuff (yes those are also yajnas). Do we sacrifice any animals in them? g. I should have had this is as the first point but anyway - here is the definition of Hinduism - it is the adherence and belief in the "truth" of the Vedic Samhitas. Everything else: the puranas, vedantas, and other scriptures are addendums. g.i. The Vedic samhitas are the 4 vedas. And were finally put together by 7 men we know as the saptarishis. g.ii. The language of Sanskrit was already present at this time and the vedas were maintained from since about 13000 years ago (very conservative estimate) Therefore, the only reason why someone would have translated yajna to mean sacrifice could be because he or she was not able to imagine a civilization that was different from the way Abrahamic faiths grew. Add to this the fact that these people believed the Earth came into existence on October 21st at 9 AM 4004 BC. I mean once we know this, it should be the most straightforward reason to discard the concoctions otherwise we are just fooling ourselves no end. I can understand people may not be interested in the subject...no problem. But before we parrot something and hope that our belief is logical and based on truth we must be aware of some small little things?
Alchemist Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 You are still in the Ignore List but there is an option to "View Post" so sometimes I do view your post, and honestly, some of your posts are hilarious. How I wish you would learn to let go off personal attacks on me. But o well that has to come from within you. Anyway, enough of digression from the thread. So, do you believe the translation of the word yajna to mean sacrifice is correct? I think he needs to perform a Yagna for that. :giggle:
f.b.m Posted September 17, 2011 Posted September 17, 2011 In less than 100 words, how the feck does this demonstrate anyone's patriotism?
Vijay.Sharma Posted September 17, 2011 Author Posted September 17, 2011 In less than 100 words' date=' how the feck does this demonstrate anyone's patriotism?[/quote']For one, it allows you the opportunity to clear misunderstandings of the civilization you country. Secondly, it stops academicians and other relevant people from parroting what some idiots wrote in the 18th century about your country, and forces them to question those concocted tales. Third, it opens a wider debate on the current paradigm of human history which can only do good for us Fourth, and most importantly, your children will not learn the concocted history of their civilization like you have learned and possibly continue to believe in. Now, if those things ain't important for you, fair deal. But these are things that don't need you lay down your life like the people in the armed forces or change anything from your daily life existence. And yet you would've done some small little thing towards your country. O sure there are much better things you can do for your country. If you are already doing them then this should not take any resources so it's net productivity is very high. And if you are not doing anything already, again it is a very good thing to do because it is highly productive = output / input where your input (the resources you need to expend) is bare minimum. But then, to each his own. You don't become a non patriot if you don't do it :-)
b555 Posted September 17, 2011 Posted September 17, 2011 meet me at the ganges and we can talk about this... epic :hysterical:
Sachin=GOD Posted September 17, 2011 Posted September 17, 2011 I thought I was hidden from you :wall: :wall: :wall: what did I do to deserve you un-hiding me :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:
Mariyam Posted September 17, 2011 Posted September 17, 2011 In less than 100 words' date=' how the feck does this demonstrate anyone's patriotism?[/quote'] You mean you haven't figured it out already?:omg: I've finally worked out what Vijay Sharma is doing. It's a free-association, non-rhyming, non-alliterative, non-rhythmic poetry competition (Yo Mamma style) with himself. Often it is interrupted by a random question by a well intentioned, curious bystander like you. That, unfortunately results in Vijay replying with an even longer poem. Sometimes, he may use a different font colour and italicize phrases randomly, throw in some Freud talk and a few pictures. Many a times the threads title has nothing to do with the content whatsoever. To fully understand this art, you have to put away your pre-conceptions about posts making sense or being in a certain logical order. What looks like brainless mumbo-jumbo is in fact a work of literary abstract art. The guy is a genius. I've taken such a liking to his style that I might try it my self here. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [vijaymode=on] If you were to stand behind a donkey, and the donkey kicked you... who is the donkey? Poll1 : You, for being donkeyesque enough to stand behind the donkey Poll2: The donkey is a donkey obviously. When we talk about aliens and all, I felt this particular item may actually give us an opportunity to demonstrate our understanding of the pyramids. The word is Gadha. In English and other western languages it translates to "Donkey".But them early Indologists were total B#$%^%$ who translated our Gadha to donkey and gave it such a negative connotation that it has today, that even Nasser Hussain uses it as a barb against our cricketers. It was the Aliens after all, who built the pyramids, simple t,s,p,c, logic you see. And they used donkey for inter galactic travels.The very Donkeys that they purchased from the ancient Indians All 18th century Indologists were mean, lying scum. I urge you to find out more about this word and not take my belief as gospel truth. But, if you do come to the conclusion that it has nothing to do with beasts of burden, then actively correct everyone you come across when they use that word with such a translation. You have an opportunity to demonstrate your patriotism by righting the wrongs of the past, in a most peaceful manner. And I think the people who feel done in wrong translations will be the first ones to take up the challenge. [vijay mode = off]
nikred Posted September 17, 2011 Posted September 17, 2011 At first, I though Mariyam was some demented old woman but no I am warming up to her weird sense of humour. P.S. I do not think she is demented anymore. :icflove:
Recommended Posts