Don't want it to get lost too early.

Originally posted by VonDutch
Originally posted by Harte
However:
The passage above appears nowhere in the Mahabharata.
Ok, where does it come from then ? mistranslations?
May some Hindi (or Hindu? dont know the exact word) can explain the right translation.
Originally posted by Harte
Originally posted by VonDutch
Originally posted by Harte
However:
The passage above appears nowhere in the Mahabharata.
Ok, where does it come from then ? mistranslations?
May some Hindi (or Hindu? dont know the exact word) can explain the right translation.
David Hatcher Childress, I believe. Or one of them goofballs like him.
I first mentioned this in 2006 in THIS POST.
I'd known about it fior a while but the detective work was done by another poster, Donner, and he posted the information in THIS HERE POST in that same year.
Harte

Originally posted by Charismagic
According to Pratap Chandra Roy's 1889 Mahabharata translation, in the dhanur veda, in reference to Karna Parva, section 34, Drona Parva section 201, Mausala Parva, 2A.
Pratap Chandra Roy was born in the village of Shanko in the Burdwan district of Bengal on March 15, 1842. His father was Ramjai Roy; his mother Drabanai Devi dies when he was two and a half. He was brought up by a widow who worked for a Brahmin in Khulna district. As a boy he would pick up coconuts thrown as offerings in Ganga or left by the waterside, sell them, and with the money beg his foster mother to buy him books. Impressed, the Brahmin employer put him in a school.
When he grew up, he became a bookseller in Calcutta. By 1869 he had put by enough money to buy a small printing press and start a publishing concern. By the end of 1876 he had brought out a complete Bengali translation of the Mahabharata. Then a new idea fired him: the complete Mahabharata in English. His purpose was to unfold the richness of the Indian Heritage to the British rulers and to foreigners in general; as his widow innocently explained in her epilogue, attached to the last book in 1896, " If a knowledge of the mind of the people is of value to the administration of the country, who will deny the utility of an English translation of the Mahabharata to the British Goverment of India?"
He knew his own English was not good enough; and press work kept him too busy anyway. Luck brought him Babu Kisari Mohan Ganguli, a man with a brilliant academic record in English: Ganguli was entrusted with the work of translating the epic, while Roy went around collecting funds from "peasents and princes, Anglo-Indian officials and English and American sympathisers to warrant him in going forward" - for his ambition (in which he succeeded) was to distribute the translated volumes free...
...Babu Kisari Mohan Ganguli, "who like a literary Atlas bore the heavy burden of the tramslation", gets mentioned only in the last volume of the English translation. Though he had no hand at all in the translation, Roy put his own name on the title page of the first nine volumes. The ambiguity that transformed a publisher into a translator and left K.M. Ganguli's glory unsung has, to my knowlwdge, been spotted only by Ronald Inden and Maureen Patterson, compilers of the University of Chicago's Bibliography to South Asian Studies; by K.M. Knott in the Janus Press Edition of the first two books of the Mahabharata; and by A.C. Macdonnell in his History of Sanskrit Literature, where the transltion has been listed in the bibliography as having published at "the expense of P.C. Roy" (it was surely at K.M. Ganguly's expense!).
Originally posted by Charismagic
I could go on and on, but whats the point?![]()
To try and deny ignorance is one thing, but to remove stupidity overnight?? Naah!! I give up.
Originally posted by undo
i was watching a video series from national geographic called BALI: THE MASTERPIECE OF THE GODS. it dawned on me while watching it that these hindu people had historically been selected for their artistic abilities and encouraged to interbreed with each other in an isolated place, so that their skills would be concentrated amongst them and not diluted. watch this and see what i mean
tiny.cc...
now this begs the question: who knew, thousands of years ago, that such abilities were genetic ? no amount of training will give a person artistic ability. this is just odd!
Originally posted by undo
reply to post by serbsta
i'm not sure.
i developed a theory a year or so ago concerning pyramids and other graduated terrace buildings. it came about while studying documents and photos regarding experimental moon mining facilities, proposed for some near future date, to mine helium 3 from the lunar regolith (lunar dirt). anyway, after looking at the terraced walls of earth-based mines, the light bulb went on over ye olde noggin:
what if originally, the idea of a central mound of god-like significance, developed, not from volcanoes or the sudden emergence of new mountain ranges, but from mining operations in which a central mound was deliberately left unmined to be used as a central control hub, for overseeing the mining project? and these hubs, being the domain of the "gods", eventually were built on purpose.
the bali buildings remind of the same thing, even more elaborately.
Originally posted by missvicky
reply to post by Charismagic
There is no one in all three worlds with their moving and standing creatures who is invulnerable to it, and it can be launched with a thought, a glance, a word, or a bow.
_____________________________________________________________
Do you know of the three worlds? What or where they might be?
[edit on 13-11-2009 by missvicky]
