Rohinis Blog Answers

Reference : Answers against Blog  http://all-about-sanskrit.blogspot.de/2012/11/dharma-etymology-and-brief-account-of.html  by Rohini Bakshi

Vijay >> I answer all your comments , but Viswamitras position as a BrahmaRishi at the very least should be answered by you given the rigid stand of the Brahminical Caste System, not to mention any of the other comments/Questions. I request Your blog readers should be well aware of the different angles and they can make up their own mind given my questions against your article. Lets see the answers

Rohini >> Thank you for your comment, and for reproducing the author's abstract - which is about the texts rather than the definition of dharma. His translations are based ALWAYS on a text critical approach, philology, comparative linguistics, cross referencing with Buddhist texts, and archaeology.

Vijay >> Please dont reduce Vaidika dharma into classical western way Parsing.

Rohini >> As to the dharmasutra "you haven't heard of" - they are the early dharmasutras of Aashvalaayana,Gautama,Baudhaayana and Vasishtha - all of whom are bona fide masters of their Vedic schools and who have written shrauta, grihya and sulba sutras too.

Vijay>> please understand Dharma Sutra is different from DharmaShastra. Sutras are like "Yoga Sutra , kama Sutra etc." Of course I know about Vashista Gautama n other Rishis. please chk the picture.Vashista calls it DharmaShastra and Patrick Olevelle calls it DharmaSutras of Vashista and others? Please check the picture below for screen shot of the same.

Rohini >> Considering how thoughtful your other posts have been, I'm taken aback by the reductionism implicit in this comment.

Vijay >> I had done a small review of introductory section to understand how fundamentally misinformed they are. Reductionism is well researched, reviewing a whole book is beyond the scope of making blog comments. I had also seen other source of his where he defines the following

Glossary had

• "Brahman" - high caste person when Indeed it is Supreme Consciousness; 
• did not differentiate "Brahmin", "brahman"
• "Dharana" - concentration on Desired object for 12 matras. 
• The author means it as "Some weight measurement"
• Asvamedha Yaga - Horse is required to roam the country .....
• Vedas according to author is set of Rituals whereas it is Not. Vedas cannot be reduced to Grammatical parsing

The basic understanding of the author is so flawed and he references George Bühler (ManusLaw) who claims "Manu was the legendary first man, the Adam of the Hindus. This is a collection of laws attributed to him."

For example, on the Dvijan , Twice born means "birth from the womb of mother - first birth" , birth at hands of the Guru - second Birth; Initiation. But this initiation was to be had by everybody except Shudras. Even Brahmins Kshtriyas and Vaishyas were considered Shudras if they did not get initiation- Brahmopadesam. This practise is still prevalent where kshtriyas and Vaishyas wear holy thread. Author says it belongs to "Brahmincal Theology" There is deep bias from the Author on the Caste based system. Sanatan Dharma is more than 5000 years old. 500 year of degeneration is given so much weightage and tom-tommed as the entire culture and Dharma.


 Rohini >> 
 So as the legitimacy of the scholar increases with how 'non-foreign' he (or she) might be, where will we draw the line? Only an Indian/Hindu can comment without us questioning the validity of his (or her) work? Well I'm Shaiva, and by that logic I don't want to accept a work on Shaivism written by a Vaishnavite. Or an aghori could say a caste Brahmin has no knowledge of what his sect is about. Or an atheist mimaamsaka could well reject the validity of the writings of a Bhakti believer in a personal God.
Where you do draw the line? 

Vijay >> Hindhusim as Sanatana Dharma is fundamentally different from Christianity in it has "No founder" . People can comment on the work but it must have necessary substance. Substance comes only through  by deep self experience. My take on authors Foreignness is not just in place but also in substance. Comparison of "Shaivaite commenting on Vaishnavites work" with "Patrick Olevelle on dharma" is like "Sonia Gandhis Swadeshiness" with "Thackerays take on Biharis as Non-mumbaikars"

Am reminded of Adi Sankaras sloka who came to rescue the most degenerated period of Sanatana Vedic culture(Vaidika dharmam). Good luck for sanskrit work

bhaja govindam bhajagovindam govindam bhaja moodhamathe
samprapte  sannihite kaalenahi nahi rakshati dukrinkaranemeaning:

Translated Meaning
======================
seek or worship govinda, seek govinda, seek govinda,o $$$$. 
when the death comes at the appointed time, grammar rules will not save or rescue you

-duvijan

Print Screen shot of the Book