Aryan_Invasion_Theory_&_Dating_the_VedasThis is a featured page

For an overview of ALL pages of this website, click SITEMAP.
Debugging Aryan Invasion Myth

I had read Mr Shrikant Talagheri earlier. I worked on this topic myself for more than 12 years, although I am now working in another field for 11 years. I want to highlight one fact which all others neglected so far.

Rgveda's mean date of 1200 BC as given by Maxmuller was not a figment of imagination. Maxmuller was not an idiot, and all European scholars were not his slaves. I searched for the rationale behind this date (1500-1000 BC) for years, and found that Maxmuller merely said that linguistics has proven it. Karl Brugmann is still regarded as the greatest Indo-Europeanist of all times. He cited a historian A. Kaegi for this date. Thus, historians cite linguists, and linguists cite historians. Where was the real proof, if any ? Nobody has provided any concrete evidence in favour of 1200 BC for the main body of RV. Why, then, this date was accepted ? There must be something behind it.

Searching through the rationale, I waded through various texts. At last I got the point, which was very simple, so simple that any European scholar cared not mention it clearly. But it was the real cause. Pastoral ancestors of Greeks were supposed to be those peoples who fought in the Battle of Troy around 1200 BC narrated in Homer's epic Iliad, which was the earliest known historical event of Europe. Rgvedic peoples were also believed to be pastoral. Similar economic level of development suggested that Rgvedic age ought to be put around 1200 BC. From an European point of view, why Rgveda should be accorded much earlier period ? Later discovery of Harappan Civilization was seen as a proof of the fact that there was no possibility of pushing Rgvedic dates much earlier than circa. 1500 BC. The issue was deemed to be resolved for ever.

Then came a bolt from the blue. In 1952, Michael Ventris deciphered Linear B tablets, which proved that another branch of Greeks (Mycenaeans) enjoyed an urban life around 1450 BC. If the pastoral ancestors of Dorians could be dated 6-7 centuries before there urbanized descendants, the pastoral ancestors of Mycenaean Greeks should be dated around 2100 BC , which should be taken as the mean date of Rgvedic culture, with 2-3 centuries on either side. But is exactly the date of the Harappans. How to fit pastoral Rgvedic peoples with the existence of "developed" Harappan Civilization in the same region ?

Many efforts have been made by European scholars to resolve this problem. The best overview of all such efforts has been presented by Oberlies, who puts Rgveda in 1700-1000 BC, instead of 1500-1000 BC. A simple manipulation of 200 years in upper limit allowed them to retain the rest of 19th century theories intact. Europeanists are happy with this solution and want no further discussion.

But is it logical ?? The basic premises of 19th century scholars were that earliest pastoral ancestors of Greeks were comparable in antiquity to Rgvedic peoples. How we can accept that Rgvedis peoples were pastoral around 1450 BC while Mycenaean Greeks were enjoying urban life at the same time. Is it not intellectual dishonesty, and an organized fraud ?? If we apply the logic of 19th century linguists and historians, Rgvedic date must be pushed back by at least 8-9 centuries, because urban life in Greece has been pushed back from 600 BC to 1450 BC. But we cannot put Rgvedic peoples in the Indus Valley during Harappan Age. Hence, Rgvedic Age must be pushed back further. By what amount ? Here lies the great problem which has not been solved by anyone to date.

If Vedic Age is placed before the Harappan Civilization, we must account for the Harappans during the long narrative of Vedic history. Where, during the history from Rgveda to later Vedic texts, should we put the Harappans ?

Here I want to present the summary of my studies of the Harappan Civilization in nutshell. It was ruled by the clan of Mahisaasura, which is suggested by the so-called Pashupati Seal, which is actually Mahishaasura Seal. Pashupati cannot be portrayed in naked. Secondly, Pashupati wearing the horns of buffalo is an oddity. The, Tantric (anti-Vedic or non-Vedic) texts of Durga Pooja invokes Lord Sadaashiva in Mahisaasura ( cf. Varsha-kritya published by Chowkhamba) even in modern day societies of eastern India. It is wrong to search for Vedic Civilisation in the urbanised Harappan civilisation which was Asuric, not Vedic. Incidentally, one Harappan site in Sind even bears the name Asurakota ! There are many places in India bearing the term Asura. In North Bihar, I found punch marked coins from Asurgarh and some neighbouring sites without the state emblem of Magadha, which suggest these sites were ruled by some non-Mauryan dynasty before Magadha annexed North Bihar in the beginning of 5th century BC. These coins have been found from top layers, which imply that lower levels of these Asuric sites in other regions of India must be contemporary to Harappan Civilisation ! But level of groundwater does not allow excavation of such sites. Moreover, existing conceptual biases in the mind of scholars does not allow them to excavate these ancient sites, which may throw ample light of the so-called dark period between the Buddha and the Harappans which is wrongly filled by the Vedic peoples and ought to be filled with the remnants of Vedic as well as Asuric cultures, and often mixure of both which gave rise to later day Hinduism. It is wrong to define terms like Vedic and Asuric through racist lenses.


Suryavamsha of Lord Rama is said to have rule over the Earth from the beginning of Satyuga to the end of Tretayuga, ie, for 3024000 years. Lord Rama was 42nd. He ruled for 11000 years. Dasharatha ruled for 60000 years. Average period of remaing 40 kings is (2953000 / 40 =) 73825 years per king !

There are two views on these figures. Secular view is that all Puranas and epics are mere gossips. Hindus believe that Suryavamsha was a divine dynasty, having originated from Lord Surya, generator of the Cosmos (it is the etymological meaning of SUrya).

Gita explicitly mentions that the secret yoga was given by Surya to Manu, then to Ikshvaku (and his descendants), but had vanished from the Earth (during entire Dvapara yuga) for a long time, after which Lord Krshna gave this secret yoga of "Rajarshis" (of Suryavamsha) to Arjuna. When this secret yoga was taken back, Arjuns could not uplift the Gandeeva Bow.

What was this secret yoga of Rajarshis, unknow even to the brahmarshis of entire Dvapara yuga ? It shows that ancient Indians believed that entire Suryavamsha had something special about it, something divine.



-Vinay Jha





http://www.ChangingLINKS.com


vinay_jha
vinay_jha 		Latest page update: made by vinay_jha , Jan 19 2009, 11:13 PM EST (about this update About This Update vinay_jha Edited by vinay_jha


view changes
- complete history)
Keyword tags: Aryan Invasion Theory Debugged
More Info: links to this page

Threads for this page

There are no threads for this page.  Be the first to start a new thread.