From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 57461
Date: 2008-04-16
----- Original Message -----
From: "kishore patnaik" <kishorepatnaik09@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 6:48 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [tied] More by Bryant
>> You already know what you are ready to believe and to dismiss.
>> That's your problem.
>> Arnaud
>
> For eg., if you consider the 3102 bce dating of MBh, it is not something
> that is canvassed by liturgical sources but by living tradition, which is
> uniform all over India and a scientist like Aryabhat has attested this
> date
> in his celebrated work ' Aryabhattiya maha samhita' Do you and I know more
> than an astrogrpher?
=========
Witzel whom I 'm ready to believe more than any astrogrpher or astrographer
explains that this date of 3102BC is an invention of Va:ra:hamihira circa
500 AD,
on the basis of a back-calculation.
This datation is therefore worthless.
Arnaud
=========
>> This is a very prejudiced way of looking at Telugu.
>> Sanscrit is in the strong powerful diglottic position.
>> This has nothing to do with primitive or not.
>>Arnaud
===========
> I did not understand that. I am stating a factual position of the
> language.
> what is prejudiced in that? More over, what is this bilingual position of
> skt?
============
The use of the word <primitive> does not look like a fact but conveys very
heavy undertones.
Arnaud
=========
>> As a Telugu, don't you have an atavistic urging to
>> drive those pesky Indo-Europeans back over the Khyber
>> Pass?
>>
>> You have mistaken me for a Dravidian nationalist, right? well, I am not
> one :P
>
==============
I have not written that
and I would appreciate you don't invent quotations.
This will earn you a complain to the moderators.
Arnaud
===========