American Arrogance Rooted in Christian Beliefs

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove

What determined Aryavarta? The Aryans arrived in northwestern India around 1500-1200 B.C.E. Over the next 1000 years they spread over the entire subcontinent, which by the way was already inhabited. Was the entire subcontinet Aryvarta the moment the Aryans crossed the mountains? Who set the limits? Did the inhabitants of non-Aryan areas consent to being included into Aryavarta? What happened to the ones who refused. Do you have proof outside of vague religious texts?

Let me show you the flaw in this argument . The idea that the "Aryas" as a separate race arrived in the subcontinent , and took the land by force of arms , has been derived from the use of the word Arya in the Vedas to refer to any noble or pure person . It was assumed , by Max Muller , that the Aryans were the original Indo-Europeans , who migrated to India , and , wanting to maintain a separate identity , called themselves Aryans . This assumption later got converted into a theory , and is now accepted as fact , even though the only evidence for it is circular linguistic reasoning .

Aryavarta means "The land of the Noble" , or the "Land of the Pure" , not "The land the aryans conquered" .

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by aneeshm



So you are , in effect , saying that even within the religion , one of the defining characteristics of each sect and cult is the rejection of every other sect/cult ( along with , of course , the rejection of everything and everyone not belonging to the same religion ) ?

no

we are both just saying that a lot of different, non catholic groups, would disagree very strongly with your assumption that the catholics speak for Christianity

the defining characteristic is that there are a lot of different groups in Christianity, and it is very hard to paint them all with the same brush

Jon Miller

[Barnabas]

Only Indians dont agree with that theory, all the scholars who for example disagree with the ancient Harappans being Dravidians, are Indians.

[aneeshm]

Firstly - the separation between "Aryan" and "Dravidian" is , IMO , an artificial one . Arya was simply a term of honour .

Secondly - how does the fact that most scholars who hold such a view are Indians affect the validity of these scholars' objections ?

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
Methinks someone is a Gnostic Heretic.

Gnosticism

Unitarians

Quakers

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Firstly - the separation between "Aryan" and "Dravidian" is , IMO , an artificial one . Arya was simply a term of honour .

Secondly - how does the fact that most scholars who hold such a view are Indians affect the validity of these scholars' objections ?

Funny, other non-Indian scholars (and some Indian scholars too) take the separation between Aryan and Dravidian to mean that a horse riding civilization from somewhere in Asia north of India invaded and overthrew the already declining Indus valley cultures.

It's a relatively recent and controversial notion that the Aryans are 'out of India'- and its chauvinist implications are obvious.

[aneeshm]

The original theory of Aryan invasion was propounded by Max Muller - a man out to convert India . One of his more famous statements include

Originally said by Max Muller

This edition of mine and the translation of the Veda will hereafter tell to a great extent... the fate of India, and on the growth of millions of souls in that country. It is the root of their religion, and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last 3000 years.

A truly unbaised source , we all agree , is Dr. Max Muller .






As for the evidence for the theory that there was no Aryan invasion :

Originally written by N.S. Rajaram

ARYAN INVASION



From, The Hindustan Times, By N.S. Rajaram

Until quite recently, the famous Harappan civilization of the Indus
valley has been an enigma. Many questions still remain about the
identity of the people who created this great ancient civilization.
Stretching over a million and a half square kilometers, from the
borders of Iran to east UP and with some sites as far south as the
Godavari valley, it was larger than ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia
combined. What is perhaps most puzzling about it is the fact that all
major sites spread over this immense belt went into sudden decline and
disappeared more or less simultaneously. The renowned archeologist,
S.R. Rao, probably the foremost authority on Harappan archeology
recently wrote:

"In circa 1900 B.C., most of the mature Harappan sites were wiped out
forcing the inhabitants to seek new lands for settlement. They seem to
have left in a great hurry and in small groups, seeking shelter
initially on the eastern flank of the Ghaggar and gradually moving
towards the Yamuna. The refugees from Mohen-jo-daro and southern sites
in Sind fled to Saurashtra and later occupied the interior of the
peninsula."

From this it is apparent that the Harappans, though inhabiting a vast
area, fell victim to a sudden calamity which forced them to seek
shelter in other parts of ancient India. The usual explanation found
in history books is that the inhabitants of the Harappan cities were
driven out by the invading Aryans. However it is now recignised by
scholars that the Aryan invasion theory of India is a myth that owes
more to European politics than anything in Indian records or
archaeology. (The politics of History, The Hindustan Times, Nov. 28
1993). The evidence against any such invasion is now far too strong to
be taken seriously. To begin with, sites spread over such a vast
stretch, measuring well over a thousand miles across would not have
been all abandoned simultaneously due to the incursion of nomadic
bands at one extremity. Further, there is profuse archaeological
evidence including the presence of sacrificial altars that go to show
that the Harappans were part of the Vedic aryan fold. As a result, it
can safely by said that the Vedic age also ended with the Harappan
civilisation.

From all this it is clear that the loss of these sites must have been
associated with some natural catastrophe. A few scholars have pointed
to evidence of frequent floods to account for the abandonement. But,
floods are invariably local in nature and do not cause the collapse of
a civilisation over a vast belt. People adapt. Floods bring death but
they also sustain life. Some of the most flood prone areas of the
world - like the Nile valley, Bengal and the Yangtse valley, in
China,- area also among the most densely populated. It is the loss of
water or dessication that causes massive disruptions on the scale
witnessed at the end of the Harappan civilization. Thanks to the
latest data from two major archaeological and satellite based studies,
we now know that this is exactly what happened. It was ecological
change that ended the great civilization not only in India but over a
vast belt that included Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Aegean.

On the basis of extensive explorations carried out in Northern
Mesopotamia, a joint French-American team led by H. Weiss of Yale
University has determined that most of the old world civilization were
severely affected by a prolonged drought that began about 2200 B.C.
and persisted for about 300 years. The most drastically hit region
seems to have been the Akkadian civilization neighbouring India. The
drought may have been triggered by massive volcanic eruptions.
According to the findings of this historic study concluded only
recently:

"At approximately 2200 B.C., occupations of Tell Leilan and Tell Brak
(in Northern Mesopotamia) were suddenly abandoned...a marked increase
in aridity and wind circulation, subsequent to a volcanic eruption,
induced considerable degradation in land use conditions.... this
abrupt climatic change caused abandonement of Tell Leilan, regional
desertion, and collapse of the Akkadian empire based in southern
Mesopotamia. Synchronous collapse in adjacent regions suggests the
impact of abrupt climatic change was excessive.

An end uncannily like that of the Harappans. The authors of this
momentous study note that the collapse of the Akkdians more or less
coincided with similar climate change, land degradation and collapse
noted in the Aegean, Palestine, Egypt, and India. The date of 1900 BC
given by S.R. Rao for the collapse of the Harappans should be seen as
approximate. More accurate methods are now available that show this
date to have been sometime before 2000 BC, and they are well within
the calibration error of radiocation and other scientific dating
techniques. The basic point is: as a result of several independent
explorations conducted over a vast belt from southern Europe to India,
it is now clear that civilizations over a large part of the ancient
world were brought to a calamitous end by an abrupt climate change on
a global scale. To attribute a global calamity of such colossal
magnitude to nomadic 'Aryan' tribes is simplistic in the extreme.

These discoveries should help put an end to all speculation regarding
the Aryan invasion as the cause of breakup of the Harappan
civilisation. On the other hand we now know that the Vedic
civilization far from coming into existance after the Harappan, in
fact ended with it; the mature Harappan civilization was the last glow
of the Vedic age. This recognition has brought about a fundamental
change in perpective in the history and chronology of not only ancient
India, but also nearly all ancient civilizations. It helps answer
several fundamental questions about the source of the Harappans - they
should now be called the Vedic Harappans - and the age of the Rig
Veda. Thanks to recent discoveries about the mathematics and geography
of Vedic India, we are now in a position to answer both questions.

This shift in perspective,that the Harappan civilization came at the
end of the Vedic age also helps explain a major puzzle; the
technological basis for this great civilisation. Even a superficial
study of Harappan sites suggests that its builders were extremely
capable town planners and engineers. And this requires a sophisticated
knowledge of mathematics especially geometry. Elaborate structures
like the Great Bath of Mohen-jo-daro, the Lothal harbour or the
citadel at Harappa are inconcievable without a detailed knowldge of
geometry. The world had to wait 2000 years more, till the rise of the
Roman civilisation for sanitation and town planning to reach a
comparable level. The question is: where did the Harappans get the
necessary mathematical and engineering knowledge? History books tell
us that Indians borrowed their geometry from the Greeks. This is
absurd. The Harappans must have had the neccessary technical knowledge
at least 2000 years before the Greeks. Without it the civilization
would never have seen the light of day. It is as simple as that.

But once we recognise that Harappan archaeology belongs to the closing
centuries of the Vedic age, the mystery vanishes. The late Vedic
literature includes mathematical texts known as the Sulba-sutras which
contain detailed instruction for the building of sacrificial altars.
After a monumental study spanning more than 20 years, the
distinguished American mathematician and historian of science, A.
Seidenberg showed that the Sulba-sutras are the source of both
Egyptian and old Babylonian mathematics. The Egyptian texts based on
the Sulba-sutras go back to before 2000 BC. This provides independent
cofirmation that Indian mathematical knowledge existed long before
that date, ie, during the height of the Harappan era.

The sulba-sutras are part of the vedic religious literature known as
the Kalpasutras. They were created originally to serve as technical
manuals for the design and construction of Vedic altars. As previously
noted, Harappan sites contain many such altars, a fact that supplies a
link between Vedic literature and Harappan archaeology. It serves also
to show that the vedic literature could not have been brought in by
any invaders - they were needed for building the altars that are very
much part of the Harappan archaeology! The sulba-sutra are the oldest
mathematical texts known. A careful comparison of the sulba-sutras
with the mathematics of Egypt and old Babylonia led Seidenberg to
conclude:

"... the elements of ancient geometry found in Egypt and old Babylonia
stem from a ritual system of the kind found in the Sulba-sutras."

What is interesting is that the origins of ancient mathematics are to
be found in religion and ritual. So the great engineering feats of the
Harappans can be seen as secular off-shoots of the religious
mathemtics found in vedic literature. This can in a way be compared to
the history of books and publishing, The first books printed were
Bibles, like the Gutenberg bible; but the technique of printing soon
transcended its original niche adn led to an explosion of knowledge
that made possible the European renaissance. similarly, the 'ritual
mathematics' in the sulba-sutras led eventually to the purely secular
achievements of the Harappans like city planning and the design of
harbours.

So the vedic civilisaion ended well before 2000 BC, with the ending of
the Harappans following the Great Drought. The next question is, when
did it actually begin. Here we cannot be certain although some experts
on Vedic astronomy claim to be able to find statements in the Rig Veda
that point to dates like 6500 BC and beyond. I feel it safer at this
time to be consevative and stick to reliable archaeological evidence.
Although some sites dating to almost 7000 BC have been found, I
believe that a lot more supporting data must be found before such
dates can be accepted. But thanks to new data made available by the
French SPOT satellite and the Indo-French field study, we can
definitely conclude that the Rig-Veda describes the geography of North
India as it was long before 3000 BC. The clinching evidence is
provided by the fate of the Saraswati river.

It is well known that in the Rig Veda, the greatest and the holiest of
rivers was not the Ganga, but the now dry Saraswati. The Ganga is
mentioned only once while the Saraswati is mentioned some 50 tomes.
There is a whole hymn devoted to her. Extensive research by the late
Dr. Wakankar has shown that the Saraswati changed her course several
times, going completely dry around 1900 BC. This date may now have to
be moved back by a few centuries in light of what we now know about
the disappearence of the neighbouring Akkadians. In any event we know
now ehich Dr. Wakankar did not, that the Saraswati described in the
Rig Veda belongs to a date long before 3000 BC. The Rig Veda calls the
Saraswati the greatest of rivers (Naditame) that flowed from "the
mountain to the sea". The latest satellite data combined with field
archaeological studies have shown that the Rig Vedic Saraswati had
stopped being a perrenial river long before 3000 BC.

As Paul-Henri Francfort of CNRS, Paris recently observed, "...we now
know, thanks to the field work of the Indo-French expedition that when
the protohistoric people settled in this area, no large river had
flowed there for a long time."

The protohistoric people he refers to are the early Harappans of 3000
BC. But satellite 'photos show that a great prehistoric river that was
over 7 kilometers wide did indeed flow through the area at one time.
This was the Saraswati described in the Rig Veda. Numerous
archaeological sites have also been located along the course of this
great prehistoric river thereby confirming Vedic accounts. The great
Saraswati that flowed "from the mountain to the sea" is now seen to
belong to a date long anterior to 3000 BC. This means that the Rig
Veda describes the geography of North India long before 3000 BC. This
is further supported by the fact that the Drishadvati river, also
described in the Rig Veda, had itself gone dry long before 3000 BC.
All this shows that the Rig Veda must have been in existece no later
than 3500 BC. There is other evidence from metallurgy and astronomy
that lend further support for this date.

What does this all mean? In our book, Vedic Aryans and the Origins of
Civilisation, David Frawley and I have shown that the Rig Veda belongs
to an earlier layer of civilisation before the rise of the
civilisation of Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Indus Valley (Harappa).
This calls for a fundamental change in our idea of Mesopotamia as the
cradle of civilisation. In the same book, on the basis of ecology and
ancient literature, it is also suggested that the Rig Vedic aryans
were the beneficiary of an age of abundance in north India, brought
about by the melting of the ice caps at the end of the last Ice Age.
The last Ice age ended in about 8000 BC. For the next several thousand
years, many areas that are now arid, like Rajasthan, Sind, Baluchistan
- were fertile and supported agriculture. This of course was due to
the discharge of waters in the form of numerous streams from melting
ice caps. This is apparent from the French satellite study. In the
course of time, the ice caps accumulated during the long ice age came
to be depleted and aridity began to dpread across the sub continent.
This ofcourse culminated in the great drought of 2200 BC that wrought
havoc with the civilisations of the ancient world.

In summary, all this new evidence, when examined in the light of
science, gives a totally different picture of the ancient world. The
rise and fall of the Vedic civilisation of which the Harappan was a
part can be seen to have resulted from the vagaries of nature,
inseparably bound to the boom and bust ecological cycle that followed
the last ice age. The vedic age and more specifically the Rig Veda
were the beneficiaries of nature's bounties - a unique age in water
abundance in the wake of the last ice age. Its end was also brought
about by nature in the form of a killing drought. The Harappan
civilisation was its twilight. And this is the verdict of science -
what nature giveth, nature also taketh away.

In fact , even other scholars who accepted the Aryan invasion theory now mostly reject it .













Also - the opinion that a theory may have chauvinist implication does not invalidate the facts upon which it rests .

[Mr. Harley]

Very nice post Aneeshm. I cannot remember where I read about it, indicatations of a barbarian invasion in one of the ancient Indian cites - I believe it was Harappan, with numerous slaughtered skeletons found. However, this makes sense as a highly evolved civiliztion being stressed by natural disasters can be much weaker, and the same drought would explain why the less civilized people were both invading, and in part why there were successful. For such groups it is either success, or extinction. Wonderful motivator that, and if they hava a tradition of tribal warfare that can give them advantage in a conflict where technology is not too different.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by aneeshm

In fact , even other scholars who accepted the Aryan invasion theory now mostly reject it .

Really ? Which scholars, for instance ?

Also - the opinion that a theory may have chauvinist implication does not invalidate the facts upon which it rests .

It affects the way those 'facts' (if indeed they are facts) are interpreted- or chosen, for that matter.

After all, northern invaders attacking civilizations in the sub-continent is by now a familiar story- and it's understandable that some scholars would seek to relocate the Vedic Aryans in the sub-continent, rather than having them originate from anywhere else in Central Asia.

[Mr. Harley]

Molly - it's still a very intriguing post. I am withholding judgment, I realize that just like any historian the ones quoted by Aneeshm are probably biased. However, given the huge level of bias from Euro-centric history, I am going to reserve judgement until I do more research, which I doubt will be until several years from now. I plan to watch the newest research on the Harappan's with interest, they were a very advanced civilization prior to the collapse. Drought, combined with irrigation and salinification plus a barbarian invasion thrown in is a typical reason for pre-engine civilizations to fall. Now to just get some solid ID's on all the actors.

The comment on the Mathematics is interesting, especially because Mayan Mathematics were also very advanced, and organized around ritual and religion (astronomy largely in their case). It will be interesting to see what kind of excavations occur in the "lost cities" along the dried up rivers.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
Molly - it's still a very intriguing post. I am withholding judgment, I realize that just like any historian the ones quoted by Aneeshm are probably biased. However, given the huge level of bias from Euro-centric history, I am going to reserve judgement until I do more research, which I doubt will be until several years from now. I plan to watch the newest research on the Harappan's with interest, they were a very advanced civilization prior to the collapse.

The first mention of Aryan gods occurs (as far as I can recall) in a treaty from Boghazkoi, which was then the capital of the Hittites- in Western Asia. Mitra, Indra, and Varuna are called upon to witness as deities, the document.

Vedic hymns praise Indra as the 'purandara', the one who destroys forts, the forts, moreover, of the Dasas.

Agni the firegod also assisted in weakening the walls of the forts of the 'dark-skinned' races- who scattered abroad, deserting their former strongholds and leaving their possessions behind.

With literature like that, what is emphasized or deserves particular mention, is usually a clue as to what is new, or foreign- why mention the dark skins, if you are already familiar with them, or if you are of similar complexion ?

In Christian Europe, for instance, Jews were made to wear distinguishing clothing or yellow patches, not presumably because they physically appeared notably different from non-Jews, but precisely because they didn't.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by aneeshm

Correction - it is percieved that the caste system is a part of Hinduism . I have a small passage from the book Satyarth Prakash quoted below about this topic :

Here it is clearly shown that the caste system as practised today has no place in Hinduism .

All that quote clearly shows is that one man believes that. I could drown you in quotes from various christian thinkers which repudiate all sorts of things you would ascribe to christianity, but who is to say that they "own" christianity and it is for them to define it? Ultimately a religion in the aggregate is the sum of its best, worst and more mundane parts and adherents. Just because you repudiate the more corrupt and materialistic Brahmans or I repudiate the Inquisition doesn't make those who we disagree with less christian or hindu in any universal sense.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by aneeshm

You say they were destroyed by invaders . I say we don't know ( which we don't ) . I'd rather stick with not knowing instead of using it as dubious evidence in a debate which is tangential to the real one anyway .

Prudent.

Originally posted by aneeshm

Firstly - it may have been extinct , but as I said before , Buddhism as preached by the Buddha did not allow the devotee any support during the first steps . The remains of Buddhism ( what , in the Hindu tradition , could have been the seeds of revival ) were concentrated in the Viharas , and those were destroyed by Islam .

Secondly - the existence of idols in Buddhist shrines is a corruption of the Buddha's teachings . He taught his disciples not to worship any symbol on Earth , or in mind ( not even himself ) .

Corruption or evolution? Could it be that as Bhuddism advanced from a Hindu Sect's reaction to corruption and an overemphasis on the material to a full-fledged religion of its own that it by necessity began to take up the duties once performed by Hinduism, just as Hinduism itself evolved (or rediscovered the value of its earlier state, whichever you prefer) into a more intellectually complex and more morally stringent religion in many ways as it was confronted by Bhuddism. The differences between the two religions became less as they contested for adherents throughout the Indian cultural sphere, certainly to the benefit of Hinduism.

Originally posted by aneeshm

Also - before the coming of Islam , Afghanistan was Hindu , and had been so since time immemorial ( the descriptions date back to the time of the Mahabharata ) .

Yes and no, parts of present day Afghanistan were well within the Persian / Zoroastrian sphere.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Firstly - the separation between "Aryan" and "Dravidian" is , IMO , an artificial one . Arya was simply a term of honour

To avoid confusion let's do away with the terms Aryan and Dravidian. Do you deny that there are two different large language families in India, one covering the bulk of the subcontinent (particularly the north) and related to the Iranian languages and one now mostly concentrated in the south but which in historic times was much more widespread with a branch as far away as Elam?

[Dr Strangelove]

IIRC the writing found in the Harrupa cities was dramatically different from Sanskrit. In fact I believe that it has never been translated. How then could the Aryan culture be the direct descendent of the Harrupan? There would have to be some transitional writings demonstrating the evolution of the written language.

Your argument doesn't even cover the Dravidians, a southern Indian race with a language completely different from the Aryans or the Harrupans.

The claim that "protohistoric" Harrupans are the fathers of Egyptian civilization is nothing but crazy, there.s no evidence other than some vague circumstantial junk that's about as scientific as the claim that aliens built the pyramids and other ancient artifacts.