 |
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|
<Irrelevant Tandy-blather deleted>
> Yet curiously,
> >such considerations never came in the way of their pronouncements
> >(denouncements, really) of the 'other` Gitas.
> I don't agree that this is curious. Given the superabundance of
> bogus gurus and their unauthorized ideologies and commentaries,
> it's neither difficult nor unreasonable for anyone to make this
> kind of postulation.
This is bizarre, but let's not push the point.
> This should set the context
> >for my last post.
> Frankly, the context of your last post has been set by other
> factors as well, and I suspect that you probably have no
> idea what they are. But perhaps that's irrelevent.
Irrelevant indeed.
> >For once we will have something concrete to go on than merely bland
> assertions.
>
> Oh, I don't know...I've seen many things claimed here that have been
> substantiated reasonably well.
Please provide pointers if you can. Speaking of substantiation,
Shrisha Rao, for example, has provided us with specific instances
where Prabhupada introduces his own ideas into his "BG As It Is."
That controverts your claim about Prabhupada's work being completely
faithful.
But if you're too busy to back up your claims, we'll understand hehehehehe.
> >As it stands, merely asserting again and again that Prabhupada's
> translation
> >is the best and the most accurate while the others fall short is just that
> -
> >an unsubstantiated opinion.
>
> Please speak for yourself.
I always do.
You need to get this right, Tandy: You made the claim of the dubiety
of other Geetas. When pressed for even a hint of evidence you turn
around do a verbose hula-hoo and say that the burden of proof is on me,
for an issue that is peripheral, viz., my comment about ISKCON-blather.
It'll take you a while (until your next post, I mean) to surpass your
current asininity.
Hari bol,
r
|
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|