Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Let's keep to the topic

Expand Messages
  • nikhilgandhi85
    The purpose of my posting – and, I presume, this entire forum – is to discuss Shri Balagangadhara s book, and not to debate what specifically the Indian
    Message 1 of 64 , Oct 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      The purpose of my posting – and, I presume, this entire forum –
      is to discuss Shri Balagangadhara's book, and not to debate what
      specifically the Indian traditions try to do. For my intentions here, it
      does not matter to me whether anyone's own made-up speculations or
      hypotheses differ from what I have written in that regard. The point I
      am trying to make is simple: the `Conditions of Possibility'
      that Shri Balagangadhara claims do not exist in India are in fact
      present in some form and they do have specific roles.


      That said, if anyone would like to discuss these specifics, I would
      suggest that we do so outside of this forum, perhaps by email. But I
      would like to call attention to one fact which seems to be commonly
      overlooked, both here and in world at large. The Indian traditions
      teach. Only knowledge can be taught. Like any other field of knowledge,
      these traditions have very systematic pedagogy, terminology, and
      analyses. And like any other field of knowledge, only a teacher trained
      in that field can correctly use and discuss these systems. So before we
      go about hypothesizing about the traditions or agreeing on our own
      imagined definitions of words, it is imperative that we study in a
      tradition and not merely keep them as objects of our study. This does
      not mean that one has to subscribe to any belief (for, teaching can only
      be of verifiable knowledge), but one will realise that what the Indian
      traditions say is very clear, and there is no room for interpretation or
      hypothesis in the matter.



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • yyakadayaka
      Mayank     ... 1880 is quite a shift! Quite a shift from what? 1800-1899 is the 19th century. Polly.
      Message 64 of 64 , Oct 31, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Mayank
           
        > Even if you are not into research (academics), 19th century to 1770-
        1880 is quite a shift!

        Quite a shift from what? 1800-1899 is the 19th century.

        Polly.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.