"Paid expert" who?
If Yudhiṣṭhira was a "2000-year-old fictional character" inspired by King Ashoka as Romila Thapar's & Devdutts of this world claim, how did Chanakya(320 BC)
the minister of Ashoka's grandfather,mention Yudhiṣṭhira in his Arthaśāstra?
Any ans devdutt Myth? https://t.co/iE5edIrks1
Paid gurus/experts of Hindutva are on a ROLL.... poor Kashmiri Pandits ... lost their homeland to invaders, now losing their philosophy to pseudoscience https://t.co/sImmn8vQ1u
— Devdutt Pattanaik (@devduttmyth) March 10, 2021
how did Pāṇini mention Yudhiṣṭhira in Aṣṭādhyāyī (8.3.95) dating back to atleast 2400 years?
How did Sātavāhanas mention him in inscriptions dating back to 2100 years?
Dropped ur brain somewhere?
Ashoka ruled 200 years after Buddha.
But this genius says Ashoka was born before Yudhiṣṭhira😂
Some of these manuscripts are still housed in Srinagar Museum.
These manuscripts were written on paper even before your Islam was born.
Written with ink on paper recording Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sutra.
The language is Sanskrit & the script is (Proto) Sharada. Dates back to the 6th century CE +
Ancient paper manuscripts were found in remote arid Gilgit but not in a cultural center like Varanasi.
All thanks to the climate!
Testimony of foreign travelers like Yijing(7th CE) confirms the widespread use of paper.
It was Gandhi himself who described Savarkar as Veer (brave)
This is what Gandhi said:
"I met Savarkar in London
He is brave,clever,patriot,revolutionary.
Saw evil of the British Govt much earlier than I did
He is in Andaman(jail) for having loved India"
@MisraNityanand , a Sanskrit scholar and well-known author has studied Devdutt Pattanaik’s book titled “My Gita”.
This is an extensive interview where he gives point by point analysis of Myth’s work.
He points out numerous blunders in the works.
1) does not know even the BASICS of Sanskrit;
2) is obsessed with looking for sexual meanings, and has praised Wendy Doniger in the past;
4) has an artificially inflated brand name that cannot be justified on merit.
& I think he never will.
And even in Social Media this myth @devduttmyth keeps comment section off for not taking risk to expose himself😂
https://t.co/thehx7FsNo
More from All
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
