Re: Ban all non academic discussions

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 57662
Date: 2008-04-19

----- Original Message -----
From: "kishore patnaik" <kishorepatnaik09@...>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Ban all non academic discussions

> Sanskrit Aryans have a long history of preserving the knowledge through
> oral traditions. Reciting the verses in the most perfect way is more
> important than the meaning or the purpose of the verse itself.
It means Rg Veda and Sanscrit are more or less consubstantial,
just as Old Greek and Homer.
When Sanscrit did not exist, Rg Veda could not exist,
at least not under that form.
> On the other hand, script, even if it is invented much before than it is
> accepted , is scarcely used for secular purpose of communication.
It is usually assumed that Script was invented for very ordinary means :
such as counting sheep and grain.

What does "much before" means ?
Egyptian is about -3300 BC
Cuneiform is Sargon -2600.
> Similarly, look at the pha(t)- this denotes a very ancient beejakshara,
> running from the Rg vedic times and you would notice that the devanagari
> way
> of writing pha(t) denotes a swastik, clearly amplifying the tantric
> origins
> of the script.
Does it mean you are rejecting the filiation from Phoenician to Devanagari ?
> > We can not say that sanskrit aryans did not know either fort building or
> script writing since Kosambi clearly says that the SA's are highly
> intellectual learning many cultural elements from the people they came
> into
> contact with.
Rg Veda clearly shows that the speakers who composed this document were
nomads living in a rather cold place and having no knowledge what a town
Cf. Witzel.

> Mitanni,
> who considered SA as a sociological reference group so far as warfare and
> chariotry is concerned, knew script.
I m not aware any Mittanni text says that.

And in fact, I think Mittani or whatever is only remotely relevant for
Sanscrit Veda.