Showing posts with label Harappa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Harappa. Show all posts

Monday 27 February 2023

MANUSMRITI WAS NEVER A HINDU LAW

The Christian Agenda Exposed

The ancient Indian legal text Manusmriti was never the constitution of any of the Hindu kingdoms ever. Kings ruled - they were the supreme adjudicators in matters of law. Kings, who were running the show, made up their own laws. Brahmins were a tiny minority and never had any real power. They were kept as advisors and judges or as in the case of King Dhritarashtra - he kept a Sudra advisor who was the wisest man in the land, Vidura. It is proof that a Brahmin need not be the advisor to a King, always.

Manusmriti was selected and elevated to canonical status in Hinduism just like Quran and Bible, in Islam and Christianity, by vested British interests, when their power over information was absolute. They "found" castes in the text and these categories were institutionalised in the mid to late 19th century through the census. The fact is- Hinduism is an organic religion and not a revealed religion like Abrahamic religions. There is no single book, no single Prophet here, and Manusmriti was never administered as a binding legal text at any point in time in Hindu society. This was a colonial missionary interpretation. 

Manu was not a Brahmin, but a Kshatriya king who wrote a book of laws society and crime about a minimum of 2400 years ago. His set of laws called Manusmriti has been heavily interpolated over the centuries - the text we have today is not the original text.

Europeans "discovered" the Manusmriti about the same time as the United States was adopting a Constitution, in the 1790s, when a British judge sent to India, William Jones, learned the ancient Indian language of Sanskrit, translated the Manusmriti and published it. (I) (Other translations followed, by William Jones (1794), Manmath Nath Dutta (1895), George Buehler (1896), Gganganath Jha (1920), Wendy Doniger & Smith (1991), and Patrick Olivellee (2005).  

The modern caste system for which Ambedkarites blame Manu is a complete fraud; Caste, as we know it today, is a product of colonial racism. Darwin’s theory resulted in an academic field officially known as race science, which culminated in Lord Risley’s classification of Indian diversity into a hierarchy. This was enforced by the British. 

Part of the Harappan civilization

Manusmriti could be a product of the Indus/Harappa civilization because there seems to be a level of intellectual sophistication in the Rig Veda, Manusmrit and the remains of the civilization. Once that level of urbanization, international trade and standardization of the civilization ended, the next period of sophistication dawned in Indian history somewhere prior to the Buddhist King, Asoka, in 300 BCE.  


The majority of Indus/Harappan civilization's Archeological remains have been carbon-14 dated between 3000 to 2000 BCE, which starts with Mehrgarh (time-dated from about 8000-6000 BC) and ends in the "post-Indus/Harappa civilization" that commences with the date that the River Sarasvatii dried up, around 1900 BCE.

Manusmriti seems definitely to have been composed after Rig Veda. Manusmriti does mention the Rig Veda many times, but the Rig Veda does not mention the Manusmriti even once. But the Manusmriti mentions the Rig Veda as the cornerstone of its civilization's spiritual thought. Manusmriti, Chapter one, verse 23, says: "But from fire, wind, and the sun he (the Creator) drew forth the threefold eternal Veda, called Rik (Rig), Vagus (Yajur), and Saman, for the due performance of the sacrifice. (1)

Manusmriti mentions the River Sarasvatii as a "divine River", but does not "sing the praises" of the river as the Rig Veda does, treating the River Sarasvatii more as a geographical marker. Manusmriti in Chapter 2, verse 17, says, "That land, created by the gods, which lies between the two divine rivers Sarasvati and Drishadvati, the (sages) call Brahmavarta. (2) Manusmriti would not describe a thriving tract of land such as "Brahmavarta" if that tract was already abandoned. Since Sarasvsti then had not yet dried up, one could logically conclude that therefore, "Brahmavarta", must have been vibrant, during the time of the composition of Manusmriti.  

The Drishadvati River is also dried up and has not been located exactly. Some scholars believe that the Drishadvati River was located northeast of the Sarasvati, and actually flowed into the Sarasvati.  Some others believe that the Drishadvati was located just due east of the Sarasvati, and flowed almost parallel to the Sarasvati. These locations are also the Indus/Harappan civilization locations. A number of years ago, the ancient dried-up Sarasvati-Drishadvati river zone yielded the discovery of 1,200 sites, out of a total of more than 1,600 civilization sites in both India and Pakistan. (3)

In that civilization, those people with a talent for memorization and a willingness to dedicate their lives to preserving knowledge were called Brahmins. During the time of Manusmriti, these Brahmins could, with exact precision, recite any law, on any topic, especially since the Manusmriti prescribed a study period for those who studied to be either thirty-six years or eighteen years if it was required by the "king, sitting as a judge" to call on the other Brahmins, to sit as a judge. Manusmriti speaks about three Vedas. It doesn't mention the fourth, maybe because it was not composed or the fourth was not held in high esteem.

Some texts talk about Brahmins being spiritually-minded and "begging" for their food each day. We learn from Manusmriti and its commentaries that in addition to their spirituality, the Brahmins were actually at the top of society. The Brahmins did not have to do manual labour. When the Brahmins committed crimes, the punishments for their crimes were less harsh than for other members of society. Although in some parts of the Manusmriti, the Brahmins were not supposed to lend money, in other parts, the Brahmins were allowed to loan money and to charge the maximum amount of interest on a loan, more than any other class of society. Brahmins could charge interest rates of up to 60% per year, compared to royalty/warriors called Kshatriya ("Kshatriya") who could charge only up to 48% per year, cattlemen/merchants called Vaisyas ("vaisya") who could charge up to 36% in a  year, and even servants/Shudras who could charge up to 24% a year on a loan. (4)  

Giving food or other gifts to a Brahmin was considered to be a practice that would earn the other members of the  society a type of "spiritual merit."  Some modem translators of the Manusmriti have rendered the word for the Brahmins, to the English word, "priest". This is mostly incorrect. When Europeans began translating the Manusmriti and the Rig Veda, the translators were probably members of European Christian churches dressed in black robes, "interceding" between "God" and the non-priests or "lay" members of that church.

Even though the Brahmin class or caste was treated as the highest level of the society of ancient India, this was the price that the community found it had to "pay" in order to maintain its "human memorizing machines. Furthermore, the Brahmin had to daily perform their reciting functions more than their "priestly" functions.

 Manusmriti shows us that the Brahmin had to memorize and be able to "spit out" on a moment's notice more information on more other topics things than "prayers"; the ability to recite the law was very important to all of the citizens, and Manusmriti even contained such important non-spiritual topics as weights and measures. In ancient India, the idea of preserving knowledge by writing was rejected, because of the impermanency of writing on clay pots, clay seals or even carving on a stone that could be broken or on palm leaves, parchment or leather that could be lost or burned by an enemy. For anyone who wants to give up their entire lives to become a Brahmin as a memory machine, it was found to be necessary to elevate the social status of the Brahmins, so that children could aspire to devote their lives to becoming Brahmin. Food and shelter were provided by the society so that the Brahmins did not have to do other work in order to "earn their daily bread".

The main "work" that the Brahmins did was to remember their "book" by chanting it several times a day and by teaching it to the next generation. Manusmriti: 3.134 says: "Some Brahmanas are devoted to (the pursuit of) knowledge, and others to (the performance of) austerities; some to austerities and to the recitation of the Veda, and others to (the performance of) sacred rites. (5) 
This is not a "priest" performing a sacerdotal function. 

Manusmriti verse 3. 1 says: "The vow (of studying) the three Vedas under a teacher must be kept for thirty-six years, or for half that time, or for a quarter, or until the (student) has perfectly learnt them. (6) If one studies for thirty-six years, that is a long time, and is more of a path of knowledge.

The word '"Manu" has many different meanings depending on the context. '"Manu" can mean: '"thinking, wise or intelligent". "Manu" can also generally mean man or mankind, or '"the man par excellence" or the representative man and father of the human race. In the Rig Veda, '"Manu" is said to have been the first to have instituted sacrifices and religious ceremonies. "Manu" is also used to describe a divine being or a mythical progenitor of the earth. (7)

At the time of the composition of the Rig Veda, "Rishis" were "enlightened" beings or seers who were able to "see" or "hear" the songs of the Universe and sing or chant them out loud. "Manu" refers to a "Maha-rishi", or a family or school of Rishis.

In ancient India, at the time of the composition of the Manusmriti, there was a differentiation between the information that was considered "divine in origin" and that that was generated by man. The "divine in origin" compositions were called Shruti and the human-generated "books" were called Smriti. There were several written codes of Manu, Yajnavalkya and the 16 succeeding inspired lawgivers, viz. Atri, Vishnu Harita, Usanas or Sukra, Angiras, Yama, Apastamba, Samvarta, Katyayana, Brihas-pati, Parasara, Vyasa, Sankha, Likhita, Daksha and Gautama. (8) Smriti is 'sruthi' texts in a practical way...they are intended for ordinary people or less intelligent people... (9)

Rig Veda especially was the chief Shruti, which was chanted or sung every day and which was, the original "law book", the codification of everything that the average person of that time believed: for instance, that there was a god, or force of nature called "Agni", which was responsible simultaneously for hot "fire", for the "fire of digestion" and the "spark" in human brains. All of those "fires" could be made better or stronger by "chanting" hymns of praise to "Agni". A lack of singing "Agni" praises would result in all of those "fires" not being "stoked" or cared for and result in a weakening of those fires whether it was a real hot "fire", the "fire of digestion" or the "spark" in human brains. An example of Shruti is from Rig Veda, Chapter II (Second Mandala), Hymn 1, directed to Agni and others:

 "Thou, Agni, shining in thy glory through the days, art brought to life from out the waters, from the stone:
 From out the forest trees and herbs that grow on the ground, thou, Sovran Lord of men art generated pure.
Thine is the Herald's task and Cleanser's duly timed; Leader art thou, and Kindler for the pious man.
Thou art Director, thou the ministering Priest: thou art the Brahman, Lord and Master in our home.
Hero of Heroes, Agni! Thou art Indra, thou art Visnu of the Mighty Stride, adorable:
Thou, Brahmanaspati, the Brahman finding wealth: thou, 0 Sustainer, with thy wisdom tendest us.
Agni, thou art King Varuna whose laws stand fast; as Mitra, Wonder-Worker, thou must be implored  
Aryaman, heroes' Lord, art thou, enriching all, and liberal Amsa in the synod, thou God." (10)

One of the biggest differences between the Vedas and the Manusmriti is the notion that God will give out rewards or punishments to humans rather than kings or village chiefs, acting as judges, giving out punishments. These "divine rewards" came in the form of sufficient rain for watering crops. 

The "rewards and punishments" mentioned in the Vedas are immediate, whereas in Manusmriti much more time is devoted to heavenly rewards. The punishments were also not immediate; many were punishments after death, for instance, being sent to one of the eighteen hells, or the threat of being reincarnated as some very undesirable animal.


Within each phrase of Rig Veda, there exist many references packed with hidden meanings. For instance, "agni" is defined as: "fire, sacrificial fire (of three kinds); the god of fire, the fire of the stomach, digestive faculty, gastric fluid; bile; gold; (11)

The word Brahmin means growth, expansion, evolution, development, swelling of the spirit or soul, pious effusion or utterance, the outpouring of the heart in worshipping the gods; the sacred word, the Veda, a sacred text, a text or Mantra used as a spell; the sacred syllable Om; religious or spiritual knowledge; holy life; the Brahma or one self-existent impersonal Spirit, the one universal Soul (or one divine essence and source from which all created things emanate or with which they are identified and to which they return), the Self-existent, the Absolute, the Eternal (not generally an object of worship but rather of meditation and-knowledge; the class of men who are the repositories and communicators of sacred knowledge, the Brahmanical caste as a body, one versed in sacred knowledge; the Brahman was the most learned of them and was required to know the three Vedas, to supervise the sacrifice and to set right mistakes. (12)

Manusmriti is a "less divine" "Smriti"-"that which is remembered", not a "more divine" "Shruti"-"that which is heard" by a Rishi, like the Rig Veda, which contains much "hidden" information.

while the Rig Veda is a Hindu textManusmriti is not; but it seems to belong to the time of the same civilization. 

It is clear that there were strong trading ties (pre-Hammurabi Dynasty) between Mesopotamia and Meluhha, of the ancient Indian Harappa Civilization. The Manusmriti could have influenced the Code of Hammurabi. The Vedic people engaged in sea trade. Rig Veda IX.33.6: "From every side, 0 Soma, for our profit, pour thou forth four seas; Filled full of riches thousandfold. (13) This has led some scholars to conclude that the Indus/Harappa Civilization was the same as the Vedic civilization. Those scholars say that the Vedic-Harappans engaged in sea trade. (14)

Another Indus/Harappa Civilization site near the city of Lothal is Naeswar, in the modern-day Indian state of Gujarat and is located about 20 kilometres northeast of Dwarka. Naeswar was a major Indus/Harappa civilization period centre for shell works. (15) Some scholars say that the dockyard of Lothal is a holding tank for water. But the evidence points to it being a wharf. The Lothal dockyard measures 214 x 36 meters; a wharf served the purpose of handling cargo and lies along the western embankment wall; kiln-dried bricks were precious to the inhabitants of Lothal, therefore they would not have been used millions of them to make this structure if it was only an irrigation water holding tank. (16) The dockyard at Lothal is a man-made dock, more than four thousand years old, made with very high technical skill, and made with millions of baked bricks. The Indus/Harappa Civilization site of Dwarka has yielded more than fifty stone anchors, which have survived even if their wooden ships did not; Dwarka must have been an important port in the past for the local and international trading of the Indus/Harappa Civilization. (17)

King Sargon of Mesopotamia (about 1900 BC) was quoted as boasting that the boats of Dilmun, Magan and Meluha lay anchored at his docks at Agade, which was his capital. (18) Since Meluha is now widely accepted to mean the Indus/Harappa Civilization, this quote points to the international trade carried on by the Indus/Harappa Civilization from its ports such as Lothal. Many Indus seals have been found in Bahrain, adding to the theory that the merchants of the Indus/Harappa Civilization had colonies at Failaka, Ras-al-Aala and Failaka. Shells are not available in Gulf countries and were therefore traded by merchants from the Indus/Harappa Civilization city of Lothal to Bahrain and Mesopotamia; a special shell called Shangkha is very sacred today in Hindu temples and was also found to be important in the Indus/Harappa Civilization. (19)

The Rig Veda talks about sea trade (RV 9.33.6) and boats with one hundred oars (RV 1.116.5). (20) 

The Rigvedic village, grama, probably had a population of about one hundred people known as a Jana and had a king, raja ruling over it. (21) Monier-Williams defines raja as not only a king but also a sovereign, a chief or a best of its kind. (22)  The Vedic people had sabhaas and samitis whose functions seem to have been both legislative and to give advice to rulers. The rulers had a hierarchical status, raajan, raajaka, and the lowest, Samrat. (23)

The Manusmriti (I: 89) has an entire chapter devoted to laws and advice regarding rulers and kings. It is summed up in one verse in the first chapter, saying that the Creator commanded all members of the Kshatriya caste (the royal and warrior caste) to protect the people, etc: "The Kshatriya he commanded to protect the people, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study (the Veda), and to abstain from attaching himself sensual pleasures. (24) Abstinence from sensual pleasures was something that almost all kings of the time did.

Manusmriti verse 6.62 says: "Among them let him (the King, the Chief) employ the brave, the skilful, the high-born, and the honest in (offices for the collection of) revenue, (e.g.) in mines, manufactures, and storehouses, (but) the timid in the interior of his palace". (25) 

Manusmriti, 6.63: "Let him also appoint an ambassador who is versed in all sciences, who understands hints, expressions of the face and gestures, who is honest, skilful, and of(noble) family." verse 6.64: "(Such) an ambassador is commended to a king (who is) loyal, honest, skilful, possessing a good memory, who knows the (proper) place and time (for action, who is) handsome, fearless, and eloquent." (26) 

Manusmriti 6.65: "The army depends on the official (placed in charge of it), the due control (of the subjects) on the army, the treasury and the (government of) the realm on the king, peace and its opposite (war) on the ambassador. (27) Verse6.66: "For the ambassador alone makes (kings') allies and separates allies; the ambassador transacts that business by which (kings) are disunited or not." (28) 

Very complicated local and international governmental practices are described here, emphasizing another relationship between the Indus/Harappa Civilization and the Manusmriti society.

Manu: 6.67: "With respect to the affairs let the (ambassador) explore the expression of the countenance, the gestures and actions of the (foreign king) through the gestures and actions of his confidential (advisers), and (discover) his designs among his servants. (29)

Manu: 6.68: "Having learnt exactly (from his ambassador) the designs of the foreign king, let (the king) take such measures that he does not bring evil on himself. (30)

Manu: 7.115: "Let him appoint a lord over (each) village, as well as lords often villages, lords of twenty, lords of a hundred, and lords of a thousand. (31) 

This is evidence of the Indus/Harappa Civilization with its standardization of production. Within the Manusmriti, the amounts of taxes were described down to each level of society and means of production. These descriptions also give a glimpse into the lives of the people. 

The Indus/Harappa Civilization made progress towards "civilized life" by using the "technology" of harnessing the use of animal power and the "technology" of the division of labour, in addition to urban planning, jewellery making, sanitation and long-distance maritime trade. These "technologies" have been also mentioned in the Rig Veda and Manusmriti. Throughout the vast Indus/Harappa Civilization empire, standardization helped mass production. 

There was no caste system

Originally, there was no fixed caste system in India. In the ninth mandala of the Rig Veda, hymn CXII, individuals get to choose their work rather than being born into it.  The author of verse 3 calls himself/herself the singer or the poet. And his/her father is an Ayurvedic physician and his mother is doing the cooking (or perhaps works as a miller). The author of this verse has a different task in society than that of his mother or father, a certain reference to not being trapped into one course of action or profession or caste or class:

"A bard (poet/singer) am I, my dad's a leech (an AyurVedic physician),
mammy lays corn upon the stones (a miller)  
Striving for wealth, with varied plans, we follow our desires like kine.
Flow, Indu, flow for Indra's sake." (32)  

It does not appear from this verse that the stratification of society has yet happened. The people do not seem "locked in" to one of the castes just by their birth to a father and mother of a particular caste. The first verse says: 

"We all have various thoughts and plans, and diverse are the ways of men. 
The Brahman seeks the worshipper, the wright seeks the cracked wheel, 
and the leech (an AyurVedic physician), the maimed. 
Flow, Indu, flow for Indra's sake." (33)  

But in the first chapter of the Manusmriti, reference is made to the creation of human beings by the Creator and the division of human beings. Chapter 1, Verse 31: (34) 

"That the human race might be multiplied, he caused the Braahman, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya, and the Suudra (so named from the scripture, protection, wealth and labour) to proceed from his mouth, his arm, this thigh, and his foot. (35) 

There are many philosophers from India that read passages in the Rig Veda to mean that the gods actually "feed" on prayers and sacrifices made by human beings. And if such prayers and sacrifices are not made, the gods "starve", while longing for more human beings to "feed" them. Oldest commentator Medhaatithi shares this worldview. (36) Since "prayers" and the kind of "sacrifices" here are mostly verbal, it makes sense that this kind of philosophy would emphasize the human mouth as one of the most important organs of the human body. Not only that, but also, a kind of opposite is true: that the god of creation has a type of "body", similar in many ways to the human body, and that different human beings are formed from different parts of that body. Of course, it follows, under this theory, that human beings, whose human task it is to verbally pray would be born from the mouth of the god of creation. And that other classes or castes of human beings would be created from various other "parts" of that same god of creation.

William Jones

According to Manmatha Nath Dutt, who translated Manusmrithi in 1909, originally there was no caste. He says that there is something called "universal evolution and that people wanted to be born at the " ...beck and call of ideation (Brahmana), protectiveness (Kshatriya), and sustentative function (Vaisya). They respectively gave them the names of Kshatriya (soldier), Vaisya (merchant or farmer) and Sudra (artisan or servant). Sudratvam is held identical to Karmatvam, work, action, or service. Originally a Sudra meant an evangelist of service to mankind, although, by an unfortunate degeneration of its meaning, it subsequently came to be synonymous with something low. (37)

The Rig Veda society seems to be much more flexible with moving from one caste to another, based on one's actions in life, not based on one's parents. The Manusmriti seems much more inflexible. Dutt infers that the members of these different castes accepted the classification within their society and that it was much different than the divisions in modern society, which he considers arbitrary:

"These distinctions of castes have nothing of the hatred and the sense of inequality, which prompted many a civilized society of modern times to lay down an arbitrary barrier between man and man, to create an artificial gulf between the classes and the masses, only on the basis of money-qualification. The framers of the ancient Samhithas recognised the inevitable necessity of organising a division of labour among the several orders of the society." (38)  

Dutt, a disciple of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, records cooperation as the basis of the caste system: "The caste system had its origin in the principle of cooperation and reciprocal help, and not in contempt and spitefulness as it is now erroneously believed in certain quarters. A good Sudra (an artisan) was as much free and as much honourable as any Kshatriya, or any Vaisya or even any Brahmana in ancient India." (39)  Dutt claims that Sudras enjoyed all of the civic rights that every other member of society enjoyed. This was much different from the slaves that existed in most other societies throughout the world at that time.

The word Dvija denotes a Brahmin, and is defined as: "twice-born; a man of any one of the first three classes, any Aryan, (especially) a Brahman (re-born through investiture with the sacred thread (upanayana) ... (40) If the Manusmriti stated that the most sacred members of the society of that time were produced from the Creator's head, then perhaps it was easier to convince the general populace of that time of the "correctness" of this philosophical position. It was a position that anyone among the first three "castes" could achieve through scholarship, and the sacred thread was a symbol of attaining or joining the scholarship. The person became a Brahmana only after getting the sanction to wear the thread.

Movement from one class or caste to another was technically forbidden at the time of Manusmriti, as was intermarriage between the classes. Although in practice, it must have been quite common, because one part of Manusmriti has names for all of the children of the combinations. The belief in reincarnation was strong at the time, and it was said that the only means by which a person could hope to change their class or caste was by doing a "good job" for an entire lifetime and hoping that they would advance in class or caste during their next incarnation. Separate duties for each caste depending on their origin: The Law Code of Manu-Chapter 8, Verse 87: (41)

"For the sake of preserving this universe, the Being, supremely glorious, allotted separate duties to those who sprang respectively from his mouth, his arm, his thigh, and his foot." (42) This seems to be part of that extremely clever way of convincing people to "stay in their place" in society. 

Brahmin duties: The Law Code of Manu-Chapter 8, Verse 88: "To Brahmans, he has assigned the duties of reading the Veda, of teaching it, of sacrificing, of assisting others to sacrifice or giving alms, if they are rich, and, if indigent, of receiving gifts."(43)  

Kshatriya duties: The Law Code of Manu-Chapter 8, Verse 89: '"To defend the people, to give alms, to sacrifice, to read the Veda, to shun the allurements of sensual gratification, are, in a few words, the duties of a Kshatriya." (44)

Vaisya duties: The Law Code of Manu-Chapter 8, Verse 90: "To keep herds of cattle, to bestow largesses, to sacrifice, to read the scripture, to carry on trade, to lend at interest, and to cultivate land are prescribed or permitted to a Vaisya. (45)

Sudra: "One principal duty the supreme Ruler assigns to a sudra; namely, to serve the before-mentioned classes, without depreciating their worth." (46)

Not a Hindu codebook  

But, Manusmriti was considered a non-core Hindu book before the British invasion of India. When the British tried to decode Hindusim, they thought Manu is the first man, and he gave the first book Manusmriti and thus as rulers, poured down the idea that Manusmriti and the caste system are part of core Hinduism. Since it prevailed for the entire British era, a fringe concept became part of daily life and caste discrimination was the result.

Manu gave the first smriti and there are about 17 more, the most important being Atreyasmriti, which is irrelevant now. Manusmriti is not a textbook for Hinduism. There are 18 major Smritis including one lesser-known one written by a woman, Madalasa Smriti.

Madalasa was the daughter of Vishvasu, the Gandharva king. She was also a great inspiration to her sons. Ritdhvaj, the son of the powerful king Shatrujit, was her husband. When Shatrujit died, Ritdhvaj took the position of king and engaged in royal duties. In due course, Madalasa gave birth to a son, Vikrant. When Vikrant would cry, Madalasa would sing words of wisdom to keep him quiet. She would sing that he was a pure soul, that he has no real name and his body is merely a vehicle made of the five elements. He is not really of the body, so why does he cry?

Throughout the Vedic cultures, women have always been given the highest level of respect and freedom, but also protection and safety. There is a Vedic saying, "Where women are worshipped, there the gods dwell, Or where the women are happy, there will be prosperity." Here is a direct quote from the Manu-Smriti: 

"Women must be honoured and adorned by their fathers, brothers, husbands, and brothers‑in‑law, who desire their own welfare. Where women are honoured, there the gods are pleased; but where they are not honoured, no sacred rite yields rewards. Where the female relations live in grief, the family soon wholly perishes; but that family where they are not unhappy ever prospers. The houses on which female relations, not being duly honoured, pronounce a curse, perish completely as if destroyed by magic. Hence men who seek (their own) welfare, should always honour women on holidays and festivals with (gifts of) ornaments, clothes and (dainty) food." (47)


In a similar way that would foretell the future if women are no longer honoured, Grandfather Bhishma explained: "O ruler of the earth (Yuddhisthira), the lineage in which daughters and the daughters-in-law are saddened by ill-treatment, that lineage is destroyed. When out of their grief these women curse these households, such households lose their charm, prosperity and happiness." (48)


Furthermore, in the Vedas, when a woman is invited into the family through marriage, she enters "as a river enters the sea" and "to rule there along with her husband, as a queen, over the other members of the family." (49) This kind of equality is rarely found in any other religious scripture. Plus, a woman who is devoted to God is more highly regarded than a man who has no such devotion, as found in the Rig-Veda: "Yea, many a woman is firmer and better than the man who turns away from Gods and offers not." (50)

There were also women rishis who revealed the Vedic knowledge to others. For example, the 126th hymn of the first book of the Rig Veda was revealed by a Vedic woman, Romasha; the 179 hymn was by Lopamudra. There are a dozen names of women revealers of the Vedic wisdom, such as Visvavara, Shashvati, Gargi, Maitreyi, Apala, Ghosha, and Aditi who instructed Indra, one of the Gods, in the higher knowledge of Brahman. In early Vedic civilization women were always encouraged to pursue spiritual advancement without hindrance: "O bride! May the knowledge of the Vedas be in front of you and behind you, in your centre and at your ends. May you conduct your life after attaining the knowledge of the Vedas. May you be benevolent, the harbinger of good fortune and health, and live in great dignity and indeed be illumined in your husband's home." (51)

So, in the vast expanse of Hinduism, Manusmriti is a very rudimentary book. There is no evidence that Manusmriti was used as a core book to influence public policy by the kings. It contains the antiquated views of a King who was describing his vision of the “ideal” society over 2000 years ago.

Some of his views are very comparable to the (divine) laws of the “One and only True God”, given in the Bible - Leviticus and Deuteronomy. There are some horrific divine laws like stoning to death for almost every imagined and victimless crime, like picking up sticks for a fire on the Sabbath! (52). God in Leviticus 18 commands that homosexuals be stoned to death as people who have sex during menstruation. Nowhere does Manu mention witchcraft, but according to God’s law in the Bible, witches, male and female, must be killed by stoning. (53) Compared to the other “Sacred Laws” in circulation, Manu is not the worst.

The fundamental categorization of Hindu scriptures is in terms of shruti and smriti. The shruti texts are the Vedas, which are descriptive texts. So, they describe society and the different classes of people and their interactions as it really was. The smriti texts are prescriptive texts. It means these are various texts of individual authors who wrote their personal opinion of how things should be in their time. It is absurd to imagine that every single “law” written in these “law books” were actually implemented in practice without knowledge of how ancient Indian society was organized.

 Manusmriti is primarily meant for the members of the first three castes. It is “idealistic’ in that it was never a practical text, nor was it ever actually applied in any kingdom in ancient India. Laws in India were primarily caste-based - each and every caste was autonomous and created its own laws which governed them. It was only major disputes which were brought to the royal court. The Kings were primarily interested in collecting taxes and left the daily legalities to the caste panchayats and their self-governance.

The problem with the Dharmasasthras like Manusmriti started with their translation by European scholars like Julius Jolly, Hermann Oldenburg, and G. Buhler and edited by Max Muller. The translations were overall good but they entitled the collection The Sacred Laws of the Aryas. "Sacred” hints at being of divine origin and thus akin to the laws of the Bible or Quran. This is deceptive because they are neither divine nor even inspired by Divinity - they are the laws promulgated by human jurists according to time, place and circumstance and were by and large idealist and not pragmatic.

There is no authentic version of Manusmriti available. The most popular is the Calcutta manuscript containing the commentary of Kulluka which was translated by William Jones. 
There are about 50 manuscripts of Manusmriti and each differs from the others, suggesting extensive interpolations:

1) Manu, 2) Umā-Maheśvara, 3) Nandi, 4) Brahmā, 5) Kumāra, 6) Dhūmrāyaṇa,
7) Kaṇva, 8) Vaiśvānara, 9) Bhṛgu, 10) Yājñavalkya, 11) Mārkaṇḍeya, 12) Kuśika,
13) Bharadvāja, 14) Bṛhaspati, 15) Kuni, 16) Kuṇibāhu, 17) Viśvāmitra, 18) Sumantu, 19) Jaimini, 20) Śakuni, 21) Pulastya, 22) Pulaha, 23) Pāvaka, 24) Agastya, 25) Mudgala, 26) Śāṇḍilya, 27) Solabhāyana, 28) Bālakhilya, 29) Saptarṣi, 30) Vyāghra, 31) Vyāsa, 32) Vibhāṇḍaka, 33) Vidura, 34) Bhṛgu, 35) Aṅgiras, 36) Vaiśampāyana.


It was the British who were confused by the proliferation and complexity of the local laws which made ruling the Hindus as a nation virtually impossible, so they decided to revive the Code of Manu under the wrongful guidance of their pet pandits. At the same time, they instituted Sharia’ for their Muslim subjects - a much easier task because the courts were already operating and each madhhab (school of jurisprudence) had an extensive legal library of jurisprudence with precedence and highly trained qāzis (judges).

But in the Hindu legal system, no Hindu kingdom followed Manusmriti or the other dharma shastras. Every king would ask his court pundits to make a new vyavahara text, which would be consistent with his family traditions and the culture of his subjects, keeping in mind their time. People complaining about Manusmriti are ignorant about Hindu kingdoms. Hindu kings prided themselves on how there are no thieves and no troubles in their kingdom, not on what harsh punishments they have. Indologists cannot accept that because, in Europe, they generally had horrible kings. They cannot accept that Indians were far more civilized than them.
 They also get a perverse pleasure in breaking Hinduism.

Hindu kingdoms had a multi-layered judicial system, which allowed the aggrieved party to go to a higher court. And the higher courts had the authority to give equivalent judgements, which did not physically harm them. If Smriti proposes molten lead into the ear canal of a criminal, it need not be taken as the rule prevailed. Lead was not an abundant cheap metal. There were people called jalladas whose job was to decapitate criminals, but there is not a single professional molten lead pourer in history. The law stipulated a harsh rule so that there will be no crime.

There were many Dharmashastras and Smritis written by different scholars in different languages who resided in different parts of India: Aśvalayana, Kauṣitaki, Śankhāyana, Baudhāyana, Āpastamba, Hiraṇyakeśin, Bhāradvāja, Satyasadha, Vaikhānasa, Arāśkara, Gobhila, Khadira, Jaimini, Kauśika, Yajnavalkya, Narada, and Manu, Vatsa, Marīci, Devala, Pāraskara, Pulastya, Pulaha, Kratu, Ṛṣyaśṛṅga, Likhita and Chāgaleva.

There are about 46 smritis and 13 upa-smritis. The key Upa Smritis are:
1) Logākṣi, 2) Kāśyapa, 3) Vyāsa, 4) Sanatkumāra, 5) Śāntanu, 6) Janaka,
7) Vyāghra, 8) Kātyāyana, 9) Jātūkarṇa, 10) Kapiñjala, 11) Baudhāyana,
12) Kaṇāda and Viśvāmitra.

Patrick Olivelle, an Indologist, who has been a Professor of Sanskrit and Indian Religions in the Department of Asian Studies at the University of Texas, Austin since 1991, translated the Manusmriti (2005) and has stated his concerns about the fairness of the postmodern scholarship and the presumed authenticity and reliability of Manusmriti manuscripts:

"The Manusmriti was the first Indian legal text introduced to the western world through the translation of Sir William Jones in 1794. All the editions of the Manusmriti, except for Jolly's, reproduce the text as found in the [Calcutta] manuscript containing the commentary of Kulluka. I have called this the "vulgate version". It was Kulluka's version that has been translated repeatedly: by Jones (1794), Burnell (1884), Buhler (1886) and Doniger (1991)...The belief in the authenticity of Kulluka's text was openly articulated by Burnell (1884, xxix): "There is then no doubt that the textus receptus, viz., that of Kulluka Bhatta, as adopted in India and by European scholars, is very near on the whole to the original text."  This is far from the truth. Only a few of the over fifty manuscripts actually follow the vulgate in key readings." (54)

He is not the only scholar to voice such concerns. One of the most fierce counters was made by James Henry Nelson, a Madras High Court Judge in 1887, who, in a legal brief before the Madras High Court of British India, had raised questions about the nature of caste in India and the status of Brahmins in being the key interlocutors in interpreting and upholding the Code of Manu.

In his letter to Justice Innes (1882), he states that the Brahmins of South India have developed their own peculiar customs and practices and therefore one should not apply the law applicable to Brahmins in the North to them. Nelson also remarks that the groups considered to be Shudra may have their own scriptures propounded by their own Gurus and priests and may not avail of Brahmanic assistance in performing ceremonies and religious services. (55) 

He arrives at the conclusion that:

There are various contradictions and inconsistencies in the Manusmriti itself, and these contradictions would lead one to conclude that such a commentary did not lay down legal principles to be followed but was merely recommendatory in nature. (56) 

In fact, Nelson was scathing in his attack on the British and claimed they were deliberately manufacturing concepts which never existed. He criticised the functionalism present in the legal scholars of the colonial period claiming that they sought “to discover the existence of analogies between Sanskrit concepts and those of ancient Rome and modern Germany”. (57)

There is no historical evidence that Manusmriti was used in ancient India. In fact, a huge amount of evidence exists that society was extremely flexible, and Varna was more horizontal than vertical, where people changed their varnas according to their professions and conduct.

The life of a Brahmin was harder and he could lose his Brahmin status very easily due to all the rules. A Shudra’s life was much less strictly regulated and controlled, so he actually had more freedom. The Smritis can say a whole lot of things, but people are failing to understand that “saying things” is not the same as “doing things”.  There are countless examples where nobody cared what the Dharmashastras said, and did what their caste tradition was. For example, all the Dharmashastras prohibit cousin marriage, but there are many communities throughout India that practice cousin marriage. The Shastras prescribe seven levels of separation of sanguinity between the bride and groom, but even Buddha’s Shakya tribe, who called themselves Suryavamshi Kshatriyas and descendants of Rama, strictly had cousin marriage, completely disregarding the rules in the Dharmashastras. Similarly, many Brahmin communities in south India also do cousin marriage. 

Patrick Olivelle

It has become a common theme in modern times to selectively read through different kinds of traditional scriptures, and come to grossly erroneous and ill-informed conclusions about alleged atrocities or discrimination or denigration such as the question frame it. Most folks today see the ancient world retroactively through the lens of their current situation instead of doing a mental time-travel and putting themselves back in time. Life spans were short in those days (40 - 50 years was very old) and the imperative for most people was to learn a trade and get to work, get married at puberty - have as many kids as possible because one-third of them would die before their first birthday. The only way to get an education was to learn the trade of your father and your community. To study one Veda it took a full-time study of twelve years ending at age 21. Most commoners were parents of numerous children by then.

Thus, in reality, on the ground, it is unfair to say that “Brahmins used Manusmriti as a tool against Dalits”. The rules for Brahmins in Manusmriti are a hundred times more strict and severe than those for Shudras. For example, there is no punishment if a Shudra gets drunk, but if a Brahmin gets drunk, his punishment is to insert a heated sword down his throat as far as the liquor has gone down.

And, Manusmriti itself says that Vedas can be taught to everyone. Birth is no restriction. Verses 2:109-115: "All vidya (including Veda vidya) can be taught to all castes if they are capable of learning it." The only ones to whom it is forbidden to teach are, a) the traitors b) those who misuse/abuse the knowledge c) the jealous d) the incapable. Upanayana was an initiation rite for those who want to study Vedas. If a guru is found who will teach Vedas, birth was no bar for any who was born to sudras to learn any Vedas. 

Manusmriti does not define Hinduism in the same sense as Bible/Quran define those respective religions: it becomes clear that Manusmriti cannot be called “Hindu Law” – a term given to it by the British in the 18th century. It was only one of many dozens of smritis. No Hindu household keeps a copy of Manusmriti in their house and read it in the morning to get guidance on how to live their day. Instead, Hindu households use texts like Gita, Ramayana, Upanishads, etc. to guide them. Each Hindu kingdom had its own code of laws, its Vyavahara text.

The Katyayana Samhita says: “Vyavahara is that which removes various doubts on the law.”  It means the Smriti texts are the source of the confusion, which makes writing the Vyavahara text necessary. Yajnavalkya Samhita says: “When a person complains about somebody flouting the provisions of laws given in the Smriti texts and the prevalent customs and goes to the king, that comes under the purview of Vyavahara.” This is an admission that the Vyavahara text supersedes the Smriti text.

Brihaspati Samhita says: “Vyavahara is two-fold, about Dhana and about Himsa.” That is, civil and criminal. We still have two kinds of laws only, civil and criminal. The difference is, in ancient times, the same court decided on both civil and criminal cases. 

Yajnavalkya mentioned that vyavahara laws will be initiated “when Smriti is flouted.” About the judges, sage Narada says: “There were five levels of judges. Kula (Family elders), Shreni (Business council), Gana (Traveling groups of legal scholars), Adhikrita (a Vedic scholar of Nyaya and Mimamsa) and Nripa (King)." This sequence of judges supersedes the previous judges. That makes the king the final authority.

The family elders are not experts on Smriti texts. If the two contesting sides are unhappy with their judgment, they go to the next level of judges: members of the Business Council. They too are not experts on Smriti texts. They will insist on enforcing peace through compromise. If the contesting sides are unhappy, they go to the travelling judges. These judges were enforcers of the Vyavahara text of their kingdom. If the contestants do not like the judgments of the travelling judges, they go to the Adhikrita judge. The title Adhikrita means that they are scholars, who can be trusted with properly interpreting the laws of the kingdom. Adhikrita judges frequently gave equivalent judgments, that did not physically harm anyone. If the contestants still do not like his judgment, they get to go to the king’s court.

The Smriti texts provided scary punishments, primarily to keep frivolous cases from taking up too much valuable time of the higher courts.  In Ramayana, Sri Rama treated dhobi's case as if this were a threat to Ayodhya society, resulting in turbulence in his own life. It was just one person, and other people of Ayodhya were quite happy with Rama and Sita. The situation could have been treated as an isolated case. A lesson was learned by Hindu kings. They did not want any more minor cases to reach the court of the king and disrupt the kingdom. These are some of the reasons why they developed the five-tier judicial system.

So, burning a Smriti text serves no purpose other than to the enemies of Hinduism. Manusmriti thus is the favourite tool of Hindu-phobic and break-India anti-nationalist forces who use it to divide the Hindu society and further their Eurocentric malicious agenda. But Hinduism will prevail, with its innate depth that will remain always a mystery to the ignoramus.

______________________________

1. Buehler, G., Laws Of Manu, n. 3
2. ibid
3. Sharma, IK, The Sarasvatii-Sindhu Civilization and Vedic Co-relations, n. 14, p. 149
4. Law Code of Manu, 8: 142. "Just two in the hundred, three, four, and five (and not more), he may take as monthly interest according to the order of the castes (varna)
5. Buehler, n.3
6. ibid
7. Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, n. 7
8. ibid, n. 8
9. Kutty, ET Sankaran, A Glimpse on SMRITI, (2006) p. 22-23
10. Ralph T.H. Griffith, The Rig Veda (1896)
11. Monier-Williams, n. 3
12. ibid, n. 8
13. Ralph T.H. Griffith, The Rig Veda (1896)
14. Lal, BB, Search for Vedic-Harappan Relationship, n. 14, p. 5
15. Gaur, Aniruddh, Harappan Maritime Legacies of Gujarat, n. 99, n. 99, p. 7
16. ibid, n 99, p 45
17. ibid, p 83
18. ibid, p 97
19. ibid, p 110
20. Lal, BB, The Sarasvati flows On, n. 16, p. 71
21. Dhavalikar, MK, The Aryans Myth and Archaeology, n.33, p. 53
22. Monier-Williams, n. 8
23. Lal, BB, Search for Vedic-Harappan Relationship, n. 14, p. 5
24. Buehler, G., Laws oF Manu, n. 3
25. ibid
26. ibid
27. ibid
28. ibid
29. ibid
30. ibid
31. ibid
32. Monier-Williams, n. 8
33. Griffith, Ralph, Hymns of the Rig Veda (1889, reprinted 1999)
34. William Jones's Translation (1794)
35. Jones, n.l, at Vol.3, 69; Manmatha Nath Durt's Translation (1895): "For the furtherance of the (good of the) world, he created Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaiya, and Siidra from his mouth, arms, thighs, and legs."
36. Jha, n.5, at 75: 'With a view to the development of the regions,' terrestrial and the rest;-'development' stands for Nourishment and expansion; it is only when the four castes, Braahmana and the rest, are there that there is the development of the three regions; for the Gods live upon offerings made by these castes,--these castes alone are entitled to the performance of sacrifices; so that the action done by these nourishes the two regions (celestial and subterranean); then again, the Gods also are prompted by men's action to act; from the SunGod comes the rain; and thus the said creation (of the Braahmana) tends to the nourishment of this (terrestrial) region also."
37. Dutt, MN, n. 3, p. 11
38. ibid
39. ibid
40. Monier-Williams, n. 8
41. William Jones's Translation (1794)
42. Jones, n.l, p. Yol.3, 77
43. Jha, n.5, at I
44. Jones, n.l, p. Vol.3, 77
45. ibid
46. ibid
47. Manu Smriti III.55-59
48. Mahabharata, Anushashanparva, 12.14
49. Atharva Veda 14.1.43-44
50.  Rig Veda, 5.61.6
51. Atharva Veda, 14.1.64
52.  Num. 15;32-35
53. Ex. 22. 18. Lev. 20:27
54. Olivelle, Patrick,  Manu's Code of Law (2005), Oxford University Press, pages 353-354, 356-382
55. Srikantan G (2014), Entanglements in Legal History (Editor: Thomas Duve), Max Planck Institute: Germany, p 121–22
56. ibid, p 123
57. ibid



© Ramachandran 
























 





Sunday 26 February 2023

ARYAN INVASION IS A CONCOCTED MYTH

A Civilization Around River Sarasvati

The great sage Vyasa dictated the Mahabharata to Ganesha, on the banks of the River Sarasvati. While dictating, the sage asked the river goddess to flow more gently. She didn't listen and that is when Ganesha cursed her that she will one day completely vanish. Thus, the disappearance of the river is also there in Hindu scriptures. 

Sarasvati originated amid the Aravalli mountain range in Rajasthan, as a tributary of the Alaknanda River, which has an origination point near Badrinath in Uttarakhand. The river passed through Patan and Sidhpur before merging with the Rann of Kutch. The remains of the river are there in the Mana village, the last village on the Ind0-Tibetan border in the Chameli district, located around 4.4km from Badrinath. The river Sarasvati is mentioned in both the Rig Veda and Manusmriti, and it is important for India to prove the Aryan invasion theory is just humbug.

In the year 1886, Moniere Williams made the process of translating Sanskrit to English easier by the publication of Sanskrit to English and English to Sanskrit dictionaries. Earlier, William Jones had "discovered" that Sanskrit was similar to many other European languages and almost "founded" comparative linguistics. In 1786, in his address to the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Jones said: "The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is a wonderful structure, more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin and more exquisitely refined than either: yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in roots of verbs and in the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident". Thus, a diabolic design to invent the "Aryan invasion and civilization" was born. (1) 

In 1794, after the Manusmriti  (Law Code of Manu) was "discovered" and translated by Jones, the Rig Veda, the most ancient work of Indian philosophy that predated Manusmriti, was translated by Max Muller in 1856. (2) Both texts open the doors to ancient India.  

Both the Rig Veda nor Manusmriti had not been written down when they were composed. The people of ancient India did not use a writing system to preserve the texts or ancient compositions. They never wrote on paper or wood or another medium, in the heat of tropical India. Though many wooden boats were constructed by the people living in ancient India, none has survived until today or yet been found by archaeologists excavating the remains of the cities of ancient India. (3)

Maybe they wanted to control the flow of information for political or religious reasons. A different method of preserving knowledge was invented- memorization. Certain individuals dedicated their life to memorising long passages of information: a type of poetry or hymn was easy to memorise if chanted to a particular rhythm. There are individuals in India today who memorise many of these hymns, especially Rig Veda, recite them every day and teach them.  

Geography of Rig Veda

Whether for ignorance or because of the colonial psyche, the British rulers created a theory that the native people of India did not invent the sophisticated language of Sanskrit and the Manusmriti, and did not compose the spiritual Rig Veda, but all of it came from civilizations outside of India. They ruled that the uncivilised native population of India was forced to submit to these sophisticated invaders, inter-marry and be overtaken by the invading army's agenda.

The Europeans found some support for their theories, in the Rig Veda itself: In the Rig Veda, there are many references to battles between forces, especially the "Arya versus the Dasyu." But, several scholars of today point out that it was not a battle between the white and the black, but a reference to a never-ending fight between good and evil, since the Veda is a spiritual text.

The Aryan invasion theory, developed by many European scholars said that powerful warriors called "Aryans" from outside of the northwest of India, perhaps southern Russia, invaded India in about 1500 BCE, developed the Sanskrit language and compiled the Rig-Veda in 1200 BCE. Though the sophistication of Sanskrit shows that it took many years to develop, the  '"Aryan invasion theory" said that no other type of modernism was developed in ancient India until Alexander came with his army in about 326 BCE. Now, in light of scientific discoveries, we are certain that the Aryan invasion theory is a myth.

It is difficult to believe that mighty warriors who had travelled thousands of miles and conquered India would suddenly tum their swords into ploughshares and switch from war to spirituality. It is also difficult to believe that these "linguistically sophisticated warriors" would never mention in their (?) compositions like the Rig Veda their nativity or native language prior to their supposed invasion of India. There is no mention of how they easily developed the complicated Sanskrit. There is no mention of how they pressurised the native population to learn complicated Sanskrit, giving up their native one, recruiting large numbers of uncivilised native people to dedicate their lives to learning, memorizing, reciting and teaching the difficult foreign language.  

Though the Rig Veda doesn't contain the word Aryan, (it has only Arya), the European evangelists called the invaders '"Aryan" and their native enemies "Dasa" or '"Dasyu".  The enemies of the Vedic king, Sudas, are described in the Rig-Veda as being both Aryas and Dasas. Why not the Aryan Invasion theorists found this confusing? Dasyus are sometimes described as dark-skinned, and this came in handy for the  Aryan invasion theorists. They were quick to reason that if the enemies were "dark", that could refer to the native population of India. Conversely, the Europeans in India claimed to be more directly related to the white "Aryan civilised invaders".

It is evident that the Rig Veda never meant skin colour. The darkness of Dasyus and the lightness of Arya in the Rig Veda speak of a symbolic battle between light and darkness, good and bad. (4) 

The word, Arya is defined by Monier-Williams in his Sanskrit to English dictionary as: "a respectable or honourable or faithful man, an inhabitant of Aryavarta; one who is faithful to the religion of his country; Name of the race which immigrated from Central Asia into Aryavarta (opposed to {anArya}, {dasyu}, {dAsa} .. a man highly esteemed, a respectable, honourable man... a master, an owner; a friend...of a good family; excellent; wise... [see Old German {era}; Mod(ern) Germ(an) {Ehre}; Irish {Erin}.]  (5)

Thus, Williams invented a meaning for Arya, a "politically-correct" invention, designed to drive a wedge between the people of India, the upper and lower rungs of society, to divide and rule, or divide and destroy. So, what does Arya really mean?

Each Sanskrit letter actually is a root sound (dathu) that makes up simple words and the roots of more complicated words. In the case of Arya, it comes from the following Sanskrit letters (there are two possibilities for spellings using one of two different "R" sounds): (6)
A-a ... prefix of verbs, near, near to, towards 
R-...in heaven, to go, move, rise, tend upwards (or) 
ra- acquiring...giving...fire, heat, love, brightness, splendour
ya- joining, restraining... attaining  

Taken together, the roots indicate: "one who is near towards acquiring and joining splendour or is rising upwards to attain heaven", which could mean spiritual or special or "heaven-oriented" people. It will never mean white foreign warriors. 

 The composers of Rig Veda often referred to themselves as "Arya". The Westerners took it as "Aryan" and translated the word as being "white-skinned",  just because in Rig Veda, the enemies of the Aryas were sometimes described as "dark". As we have seen, the names of the "dark" enemies of the "Aryas" were "Daasas" or "Dasyus". After World War II, Western scholars found scholars from India, like Sri Aurobindo, more credible- he believed that Daasas were not human beings at all, but "dark" spirits versus spirits of light; even the British Indologists Arthur MacDonnell and Arthur Keith said that the word "Dasyu" is applied to "superhuman enemies" and that the word "Daasa sometimes denotes enemies of a demoniac character in the Rig Veda". (7)  In Rig Veda, the god of fire, "Agni", is often portrayed as a bringer of the Light, one who killed the Dasyus, the dark (spirits). (8) Rig Veda, Book V, Chapter 14, Verse 4, says: "Agni (the god of fire) shone brightly when born, with light killing the Dasyus and the dark. (9)

Vedic Rivers

Max Muller in 1881 suggested that the term "Arya" may have evolved from the term "iraa", earth; in historical times it was being used in the sense of "sir" in English. (10) For instance, a character in the Rig Veda, Trasadasyu, was dark-skinned or syaava ("zyAva"), even though he was an Arya. (11) Monier-Williams also defines the word in the Rig Vedasyaava ("zyAva"), to be "brown, dark-coloured, dark". (12) 

In Rig Veda 1.96.3, the term "aria" is used, not "Arya", it is "viza ArIrAhutam", even though it is translated in English as "Aryan": "Praise him, ye Aryan folk"; the correct word should be "aindra", which means "belonging to or sacred to (the Vedic god) Indra, coming or proceeding from Indra. (13) Monier Williams defines "ari" as "attached to faithful; a faithful or devoted or pious man" and "ArI" as "to pour, let drop, to trickle or flow upon; to flow over." This is very different from "light-skinned" or "white-skinned" invaders called Aryans.  

In 1919-1920, two extremely old archaeological sites were found by R D Banerji of the Archaeological Survey of India and excavated by a team led by K N Dikshit during 1924-1925, and John Marshal during 1925-1926, in northwest India, the ancient cities of Mohenjodaro and Harappa near the Indus River. The civilization was called the Indus or Harappa Civilization or (14) Indus/Harappa Civilization and was dated to about 2500 BCE or about 4500 years ago. This was a setback for the Aryan invasion theorists. They no longer could claim that the native population of India was uncivilised in 2500 BCE. There was conclusive proof of carefully planned out cities with streets that ran according to directions, North-South and East-West, with bathrooms in every house and advanced waterways and drainage systems. Such drainage systems did not come again for another 2000 years until the time of Roman urban planners.

After the cities of Mohenjodaro and Harappa were '"discovered", the Aryan invasion theory was changed: these cities were constructed by some other prior invaders who built the cities, and then either left or were defeated by outsiders!  

Now, after careful study for a century, there is no evidence of the Aryan invasion or any other such invasion. The Indus/Harappa Civilization died out from over-use of the land, earthquakes which dried up the large river next to the Indus River, the River Sarasvati, and a drop in foreign trade. (15 )

The duties of Aryas are described in Manusmriti. They are not worldly but spiritually-oriented individuals. They are not foreign fighters:  

Manusmriti, Chapter 2, verse 108: "Let an Arya who has been initiated, (daily) offer fuel in the sacred fire, beg food, sleep on the ground and do what is beneficial to this teacher, until (he performs the ceremony of) Samavartana (on returning home).   Chapter 2, verse 165: An Arya must study the whole Veda together with the Rahasyas, performing at the same time various kinds of austerities and the vows prescribed by the rules (of the Veda). (16)  

River Sarasvati

Both the Rigveda and Manusmriti hint at a cradle of civilization, on the banks of the River Saraswati.

The term "Cradle of civilization" means the first location and time in human history where nomadic hunter-gatherers switched to farming and produced sufficient crops to allow some members of the society to work on developing a civilization. The hunter-gatherers noticed wild grains growing without human help, usually on the fertile land of a large river that regularly overflowed, depositing soil rich in nutrients for wild grains, near the river. The seeds of wild grains were deposited on this rich and fertile soil by birds picking up the seeds in their beaks, flying to the fertile ground and dropping the seeds to be planted without human intervention to grow "naturally". The wind also performed this task, thus enabling the wild grains to sprout in the fertile land and grow.  

At several places throughout the world, at different times, the switch to farming came next, when the people gradually stopped hunting-gathering to picking wild grains and planting them in the fertile soil. After some period of time, there were sufficient excess food crops to allow some of the members of the farming community to tum their attention to other pursuits, such as trading excess food crops. This was followed by the development of towns and cities, the division of labour and the beginning of "civilization".

The phrase "fertile crescent" means the crescent-moon-shaped area in the Middle East that incorporated ancient Mesopotamia (mostly modern-day Iraq), the Levant, and in some cases, ancient Egypt. But, there existed other large rivers in the world that regularly overflowed and had a type of crescent shape, a "fertile crescent" or a "past fertile crescent". These were the sites of ancient farming communities, some of which later became towns, cities and later civilizations, in China and India, two areas other than what Westerners called the "cradle of civilization" in the Middle East. The one pre-1900 BCE surrounding the Sarasvati River in northwest India, the Indus/Harappa civilization is a fertile crescent.  

The route of Sarasvati

The River "Sarasvati" in India is also a historical marker. Both the Rig Veda and Manusmriti refer to the Sarasvati River as a "great and mighty river" in the present tense. Rig Veda says, it "flowed from the mountains to the sea". It is evident that both the Rig Veda and Manusmriti were composed before the Sarasvati River dried up in 1900 BC; So, Manusmriti was composed prior to 1900 BC and therefore is the oldest law code in the world.  

The Nadistuti hymn in the Rig Veda (10.75) mentions the Sarasvati between the Yamuna in the east and the Sutlej in the west, while hymn 7.95.1-2, describes the Sarasvati as flowing to the Samudra, a word now usually translated as 'ocean', but which could also mean "lake." (17) Later Vedic texts such as the Tandya Brahmana and the Jaiminiya Brahmana, as well as the Mahabharata, mention that the Sarasvati dried up in a desert.

In the seventh "mandala" (chapter), of Rig Veda, Hymn 95, verses 1 and 2, the River Sarasvati is spoken of as "surpassing...all other waters...pure in her course from mountains to the ocean...(18) 

The Sarasvati river was revered and considered important for Hindus because it is said that it was on this river's banks, along with its tributary Drishadwati, in the Vedic state of Brahmavarta, that Vedic Sanskrit had its genesis, (19) and important Vedic scriptures like initial part of Rig Veda and several Upanishads were supposed to have been composed by Vedic seers. In the Manusmriti, Brahmavarta is portrayed as the "pure" centre of Vedic culture.

In the 1970s, space satellite pictures of the earth showed the dried-up path of the River Sarasvati, which flowed in ancient India from the "mountains to the sea". Sarasvati, due to earthquakes, got completely dried up by about 1900 BCE.  The river was structurally controlled by en echelon faults; hence, even minor tectonic movements caused big changes in the configuration of the palaeo-channels. (20) The term 'en echelon' in Geology refers to closely-spaced, parallel or subparallel, overlapping or step-like minor structural features in rock (faults, tension fractures), which lie oblique to the overall structural trend. Extensional stresses create fractures that can infill with calcite. When rocks deform in a brittle manner, the fracture pore can subsequently infill with some form of cement, such as calcite. Typically, crystals will nucleate on the fracture wall and grow into the opening.

Mehrgarh, the cradle of civilization

The change in perception that was brought out by the excavations of Mohenjodaro and Harappa, was made more pronounced by the discovery and excavation of the even-more-ancient city of Mehrgarh. Mehrgarh was located in ancient India not too far from the Indus/Harappa Civilization city of Mohenjodaro (present-day Pakistan), and archaeologists dated Mehrgarh to about 8500 BCE. Merhgarh changed the idea of the grand and exquisite civilization that existed in the Indian subcontinent. Mehrgarh is now called the "Cradle of Civilization". According to Asko Parpola, the culture migrated into the Indus Valley and became the Indus Valley Civilization of the Bronze Age. (21)

Mehrgarh is a Neolithic archaeological site situated on the Kacchi Plain of Balochistan in Pakistan. It is located near the Bolan Pass, to the west of the Indus River and between the modern-day Pakistani cities of Quetta, Kalat and Sibi. The site was discovered in 1974 by a team led by the French archaeologist Jean-François Jarrige and his wife, Catherine Jarrige. Mehrgarh was excavated continuously between 1974 and 1986, and again from 1997 to 2000. Archaeological material has been found in six mounds, and about 32,000 artefacts have been collected from the site. The earliest settlement at Mehrgarh—located in the northeast corner of the 495-acre site—was a small farming village dated between 7000 BCE and 5500 BCE.

Evidence of the world's first dental drilling of tooth decay, approximately 7,000 to 9,000 years ago, has been found in Mehrgarh (22), as well as the first use of cotton fibre (6th millennium BC). (23) 

It was in 2001, archaeologists studying the remains of nine men from Mehrgarh discovered that the people of this civilization knew proto-dentistry. In April 2006, it was announced in the scientific journal Nature that the oldest (and first early Neolithic) evidence for the drilling of human teeth in a living person was found in Mehrgarh. According to the authors, their discoveries point to a tradition of proto-dentistry in the early farming cultures of that region. "Here we describe eleven drilled molar crowns from nine adults discovered in a Neolithic graveyard in Pakistan that dates from 7,500 to 9,000 years ago. These findings provide evidence for a long tradition of a type of proto-dentistry in early farming culture." (24)

The oldest known example of the lost-wax technique comes from a 6,000-year-old wheel-shaped copper amulet found at Mehrgarh. The amulet was made from unalloyed copper, an unusual innovation that was later abandoned. (25) The oldest ceramic figurines in South Asia were found at Mehrgarh. Many of the female figurines are holding babies, and were interpreted as depictions of the "mother goddess". However, due to some difficulties in conclusively identifying these figurines with the "mother goddess", some scholars prefer using the term "female figurines with likely cultic significance". (26)

Merhgarh was found to have sophisticated artefacts that were sophisticated, and there is enough evidence of long-distance trading. 

Mehgarh painted pottery, 3000-2500 BCE

International trade and investment began in India thousands of years ago because of foreign objects found in India and Pakistan and Indus/ Harappa Civilization remains found in Egypt and Iraq. Mehrgarh shows evidence of being a large city of about 30,000 people. Foreign objects found in Mehrgarh are dated even prior to that of the Indus/Harappa Civilization of 4300 - 3200 BCE in the Indus/Harappa chalcolithic period (Copper Age). There exist ceramic similarities (clay pots and other vessels) in Mehrgarh and the Indus/Harappa Civilization with southern Turkmenistan and northern Iran, which suggest considerable mobility and trade. River Sarasvati was an often-used transportation route for shipping Indus/Harappa Civilization goods internationally to Egypt and Mesopotamia.  

Archaeologists have found the remains of stone anchors from shipwrecks that relate to ancient India (Indus/Harappa Civilization) in the Gulf States, such as in Bahrain. One type is the "ring-stone" anchor, which is a large stone shaped like a doughnut. These anchors have also been found off the coast of India and in the sister city of Harappa, Mohenjo-daro.

Ancient India (Indus/Harappa Civilization) was famous for its boats and international trade. One boat was called the Dhow, a popular boat in ancient India. The Dhow was originally built in India, with the wood used for the making of the boat cultivated and grown in India. (27) Later on, some of the wood grown in India was exported to Mesopotamia and Egypt and the boats were made there. The Dhow is actually a "sewn boat", that is, the planks of wood are actually sewn or lashed together, not nailed, even though nails were available at that time. After the River Sarasvatii dried up in 1900 BCE, international trade originating in India also fell off for more than 1500 years. The Dhow then became associated with Arab traders. (28)

Procopius, a Greek historian writing in the sixth century CE, recorded that ships used in the Indian Seas are not covered with pitch or any substance, and the planks are fastened together, not with nails but with cords.  

Other indications of international trade by Ancient India (Indus/Harappa Civilization) involve "weights and measures". Weights and measures of ancient India were either derived from other parts of the then-known world or given to other parts, and were a direct product of the international trade of India. Two different sets of weights have been found at some Indus/Harappa Civilization sites, one set for trade within the Indus/Harappa Civilization and one set for international trade, outside the Civilization. It appears that the weights from the Manusmriti were similar.

It is in the southern part of the Indus/Harappa Civilization, in the current Indian state of Gujarat, that the now dried-up Sarasvatii River ran into the sea. One of the ancient places where an important port city of the Indus/Harappa Civilization was found in Gujarat, is now called Lothal. In the Indus/Harappa museum in Lothal, there are ancient stone cubes of standard weights. Lothal was one of the Indus/Harappa Civilization sites that had another series of weights conforming to the heavy Assyrian standard for international trade.

Mother goddess, Mehrgarh, 3000-2500 BCE

This is evidence that the Indus/Harappa Civilization conducted international trade. William Jones was of the view that the Hindus must have been navigators in the age of composing Manusmriti because it mentions bottomry, the lending of money for marine insurance.

When Alexander invaded India in 326 BCE, he took along historians who documented in writing his campaigns. Since the Westerners relied on those writings, it is no surprise that they believed that India had no civilization prior to the campaign of Alexander. (29)  But now, scholars realize that the "Indus/Harappa Civilization" made substantial contributions to the progress of man in the material and perhaps, spiritual fields.  

The sparsely written script of that civilization is not yet completely deciphered. When William Jones translated Manusmriti,   followed by the translation of the older work, the Rig Veda, the Western scholars coined a term, Vedic Culture, to describe the Rig Vedic civilization. At first, the Vedic Culture was praised by many Europeans who postulated that India was the original cradle of civilization; then, colonial interests advanced the Aryan invasion theory, which now has become discredited. (30)

Max Muller, who translated Rig Veda first, made a guess that the age of Rig Veda was 1200 BCE. This was partly based on the discovery by Western scholars that the Buddha was born in approximately 600 BCE. Soon after, many people in India took up Buddhism and therefore, Rig Veda must have been written before. Muller died in 1900. Near the end of his life, he admitted that no one knew if the Rig Veda or other Vedic hymns were composed in 1000, 2000 or 3000 BCE! (31)

Less than 25 years later, the Indus/Harappa Civilization would be "discovered" and it would shatter the colonial mindset. Soon after the Indus/ Harappa civilization cities of Mohenjodaro and Harappa were "discovered", a slightly different  Aryan invasion theory was crafted and made popular by Westerners in Germany prior to World War II. But the theory of "Aryan superiority" lost credibility, after Germany lost the War. Now, most scholars agree that probably the Indus/ Harappa Civilization died out from over-use of the land, the earthquakes which dried up the River Sarasvati and a corresponding drop in foreign trade. (32)  

Thus, there is no direct evidence of an Aryan invasion of India. The "Aryan invasion theory" is not recorded in any written document and is archaeologically invalid. (33)  


______________________

1. Handa, Devendra, Vedic vis-a-vis Harappan Culture: Some Thoughts, n. 14, p. 75.8, in In Search of Vedic-Harappan Relationship, ed. Ashvini Agrawal, Aryan Books, 2005
2. Griffith, Ralph TH, Hymns of the Rigveda, (1889) Munishiram Manoharlal (1999)
3. Naegele, Charles J, History and Influence of Law Code of Manu, Golden Gate University of Law, California, 2008, p 6
4. Sethna, KD, The Problem of Aryan Origins, S&S Publishers (1980) p. 104, Aditya Prakashan Delhi
5. Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, n. 7
6. Naegele, Charles J,  p 11
7. Sethna, KD, The Problem of Aryan Origins, p.104
8. ibid, p 109
9. Buehler, G., Laws of Manu, p 3
10. Singh, Bhagwan, The Vedic Harappans, Aditya Prakashan (1996) p. 27-29
11. Dhavalikar, MK, The Aryans Myth and Archaeology, Munshiram Manoharlal (2007) p. 46
12. Monier-Williams, n. 8
13. Shendge, Malati, The Aryas: Facts Without Fancy and Fiction, Abhinav Publications (1996) p. 26
14. Griffith, Ralph TH, Hymns of the Rigveda, (1889) Munishiram Manoharlal (1999)
15. Lal, BB, in Agrawal (editor), In Search of Vedic-Harappan Relationship, Aryan Books International (2005) p. 3
16. Buehler, G., n. 3
17. Bhargava, M.L. (1964). The Geography of Rigvedic India. Lucknow. p. 5.
18. (1) This stream Sarasvati with fostering current comes forth, our sure defence, our fort of iron. As on a car, the flood flows on, surpassing in majesty and might all other waters. 
(2) Pure in her course from mountains to the ocean, alone of streams Sarasvati hath listened.
19. Olivelle, Patrick, ed. The Law Code of Manu.2004. Oxford University Press. p. 24
20. Lal, BB, The Sarasvati Flows On,  Aryan, (2002), p. 14
21. Parpola, Asko, The Roots of Hinduism, Oxford University Press, 2015, p. 17
22. Possehl GL (1999) Indus Age: The Beginnings. Philadelphia: Univ. Pennsylvania Press
23. Jarrige JF (2008) Mehrgarh Neolithic. Pragdhara 18: 136–154
24. Coppa, A. et al. 2006. "Early Neolithic tradition of dentistry: Flint tips were surprisingly effective for drilling tooth enamel in a prehistoric population." Nature. Volume 440. 6 April 2006.
25. Thoury, M.; et al. (2016). "High spatial dynamics-photoluminescence imaging reveals the metallurgy of the earliest lost-wax cast object"Nature Communications7: 13356.
26. Upinder Singh (2008). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Dorling Kindersley, 2008, pp. 130
27. Naegele, Charles J, p 19-20
28. Himanshu Prabha, The Archaeology of Seafaring in Ancient South Asia, p. 80-81, Cambridge University Press (2003)
29. Lal, BB, The Sarasvati Flows On, n. 16, p. 25
30. Singh, Shivaji, Vedic Culture and its Continuity Paradigm and Dimensions, in Dube, Sita Ram, Editor, Vedic Culture and Its Continuity, Pratibha Prakashan (2006) p. 22-23
31. Lal, BB, Search for Vedic-Harappan Relationship, n. 14, p. 1
32. Sethna, KD, Karpasa in Prehistoric India, n. 26, p. 7
33. ibid.




© Ramachandran 















 








 

FEATURED POST

BAMBOO AND BUTTERFLY: A MALABAR WOMAN FOR BRITISH RESIDENT

The Amazing Life of a Thiyya Woman S he shared three males,among them a British Resident and a British Doctor.The Resident's British ...