Ancient Indian history is very much intertwined with religion, mysticism, mythology and spirituality. It is difficult separating them from each other. Thus, what tends to happen, the contributions made by the ancient Indians tend to be dismissed as religious - Hindu.
For example, many don't want to believe in the Indian historical events, such as the Mahabharata. There is perhaps good reason, as the Mahabharata does mention a sophisticated urban society, underwater kingdoms, human cloning, weapons that yeild the power of modern day nuclear weapons and flying vehicles. Although this is recorded as Indian history, few are prepared to accept it in it's entirety.
While most rationalists just consider it a fiction, some make a compromise, and accept it as a fictionalized historical event.
We are quite selective when it comes to accepting parts of Indian history. For instance, we might accept that Indians manufactured steel, but will stop short of accepting Indians manufactured aeroplanes. We might accept that the Indians devised the theory of atoms, but will stop short of accepting that they had contributed quantum theory and relativity. We might accept that the Indians did have scientific thought, but will stop short of accepting that they were technological.
For some, even the notion that Indians manufactured steel, devised the thoery of atoms, and had scientiftic thought is dubious.
So what we know of ancient Indian history becomes a matter of belief; a subjective matter. This dearth of objectivity is why ancient Indian history is not treated seriously by academics.
Better question may be: What are the standards/benchmarks for truth n reality, and objectivity when dealing with such issues you raise; not what we believe - no?
<!--QuoteBegin-Surya+May 7 2006, 05:45 PM-->QUOTE(Surya @ May 7 2006, 05:45 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->This dearth of objectivity is why ancient Indian history is not treated seriously by academics.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
this "Dearth of objectivity" comes from the fact that we as a people hae little or no sense of history and never felt any need to record our history in a clearcut way (perhaps something to do with the fact that we believe in cyclical time and not linear time). its for this reason that even if we did ion fact have aeroplanes/vimans, they are not recorded explicitly but only find mention in mythology and epic. same with almost everything else, save perhaps ayurveda and yoga. where as the greeks recorded every theorem, every invention and every smart arguement even (by cicero, socrates, plato etc), we more often than not chose to mention underwater cities without recording in the slightest how the hell we developed/manufactured them (assuming we did). even the aryan invasion theory was successfully concocted because we never explicitly mentioned where we came from or where we (or part of our peoples) emigrated or when. had we specified everything objectively and explicitly, the canard of AIT could never have been constructed in the first place.
Ben Ami, it is true that we do not have any clear cut historical records; and it is also true that we do have historical records, our very own calender and very detailed texts. In fact we have recorded much more than the Greeks, and in greater detail.
However, our records are often a part of our religious texts. For instance, the Puranas record an entire geneology of kings, the durations of their reign and other events, at the same time they are full of symbolism and mythology.
The Vedas are interspersed with many scientific facts, but at the same time they are texts of worship of god(s)
The most secular and rationalist of the knowledge systems, such as the philosophical schools, like Yoga and Ayurveda, too are very much rooted in Hindu spirituality and again are not taken seriously by rationalists.
This is the main problem. Ancient Indian society, was firmly rooted in spirituality and the dharma tradition. It was a society that recognised eternal laws(santana dharma) and lived in harmony with them. There was no field, that did not have a component of spirituality.
So all of the vast body of knowledge that the ancient Indians have left, is dismissed or ignored, because it is so intertwined with Hinduism. It is really because of scientific dogma.
This is the real reason why AIT was forced onto us; according to the dogma of the west, all our records were not credible enough. Moreover, our records were in Sanskrit, a language that was understood by few, those few being sages, yogis. It left everything open to distortion.
Yet, if we do look at our records. Not only do we find advanced scientific theories throughout our literature, we find very detailed arguments and expositions and entire models of space, mind and time. We do not just find epics discussing flying machines, we even find manuels on how to construct them, based on scientific principles(Vyamanika Shastra)
We find documents discussing the science of cloud and rain formation, different kinds of yantras(machines) including a whole text(Ansu Bodhini) on the spectroscopy of light. We find ancient Sanskrit texts on neuropsychology.
In fact a lot of what we call modern ideas, are found in age-old Sanskrit texts, and some more.
A lot of these texts have undergone scientific scrutiny, albeit, from Indian academics. But still, they're not enough. It is still a matter of belief or subjectivity to accept them.
K_Ram, you bring up a good point, this really is about the standards of truth and reality, and as such, true objectiity cannot exist, because there is relativity of standards. Each of us have a different idea about what we accept reality and truth to be, and call for extraordinary evidence to change our model of reality, called a null hypothesis.
If we accept that progress is linear, we cannot accept that the ancients could have been more advanced than us. Therefore, despite how much evidence is produced to the contrary, it will always fall short of our limits.
This is why discussing ancient Indian history is difficult. There are just so many variations of what it could have been, depending on how much of it you accept. Hence, why I asked what do others believe.
i think you are largely correct - specifically in 2 aspects
1) almost everything in india is dressed up in religious/spiritual terms. from purans- supposed to be a history text to kama sutra - on an entirely different subject, everything has some or the other religious/spiritual twist or connotation.
2) we did have records and texts explaining scientific achievements - but what was a scientific text of that day, cant be considered scientific enough today. in the west the scientific progress and thought has been a continuous process - but with us it all stopped circa 1000 AD thanks to the arrival of camel jockeys. so suddenly looking back from todays standards - whcih we have learn from the west, to our own ancient scientific standards, neither we nor westerners consider those to be scientific enough. exceptions being sutras and shastras in math.
05-07-2006, 09:57 PM (This post was last modified: 05-07-2006, 10:01 PM by agnivayu.)
I think a lot of it is presentation. A good comparison is with China. In the west, ancient Chinese civilization is always shown as great and powerful, while Indian civilization which is infact older is not.
This is because the Chinese government is nationalistic and always promotes their civilization and culture, plus they didn't have an Islamic invasion or colonialism to the extent that India did. Infact British rule is largely responsible for the poor portrayl of ancient India, the British had a very good reason to show Indians as savages and primitive to justify their rule. Those 19th century theories like the AIT have continued.
But the British left 60 years ago, so they are not completely responsible for their continuation. Indian leftist's took over that job. The BJP was trying very hard to fix these mistakes. But, I think Hindus in the US and outside India will be pioneers in showing India as it truly was. In the last 5 years alone I have seen great progress in the way India and Hinduism is portrayed.
I think India's economic success will be the single most beneficial thing for our race and religion.
I believe that India was the earliest civilization in the world. I also think that India has had more influence in human culture than any other land. I also believe that there was a migration of people from India into the Middle East and Europe, and the so-called Indo-European languages are derived from that.
<!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+May 7 2006, 09:45 PM-->QUOTE(ben_ami @ May 7 2006, 09:45 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->i think you are largely correct - specifically in 2 aspects
1) almost everything in india is dressed up in religious/spiritual terms. from purans- supposed to be a history text to kama sutra - on an entirely different subject, everything has some or the other religious/spiritual twist or connotation.
2) we did have records and texts explaining scientific achievements - but what was a scientific text of that day, cant be considered scientific enough today. in the west the scientific progress and thought has been a continuous process - but with us it all stopped circa 1000 AD thanks to the arrival of camel jockeys. so suddenly looking back from todays standards - whcih we have learn from the west, to our own ancient scientific standards, neither we nor westerners consider those t be scientific enough. exceptions being sutras and shastras in math
[right][snapback]50790[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+May 7 2006, 07:46 PM-->QUOTE(ben_ami @ May 7 2006, 07:46 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Surya+May 7 2006, 05:45 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Surya @ May 7 2006, 05:45 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->This dearth of objectivity is why ancient Indian history is not treated seriously by academics.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
even the aryan invasion theory was successfully concocted because we never explicitly mentioned where we came from or where we (or part of our peoples) emigrated or when. had we specified everything objectively and explicitly, the canard of AIT could never have been constructed in the first place.
[right][snapback]50787[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ben you may have noticed that even then Jews do not have a proper sense of history. They believe in mythological tales of the "exodus" which is completely unscientific to say the least, and of delusional ideas as god talking to a messenger to wipe out egypt etc. This has been promoted and believed in as 'history' itself. The whole of old testament is mythology. Where is the sense of history in the Jews, or even christians for that matter? Each gospel gives you a different 'version' of this so-called 'history'.
What the Indians had was quite a clear cut idea of documenting the 'what' part rather than the 'when' part. But if you look closer at the Ramayana or the Mahabharatha, you will still find that time and location was clearly documented. Valmiki time and again mentions which constellation or phase of the moon it was at every onset of an important event.
Also, Indians had meticulously documented the arguments and counter-arguments between a purvapakshi and siddhanthi when it came to Buddhist/Vaidika schools. The Upanishads were such documentations of the 'conferences' such as in the Brihadaranyaka upanishad. There is no dating of these events with respect to Jesus' birth. But it definitely can be found out when an event happened if there are astrological/astronomical references in the text.
Sunder.
PS: Sri Rama's horoscope should be mentioned in the Ramayana. Does anyone have a software to map a Christian date to the given horoscope? I will see if I can post the Jathakam (appa knows it by heart.)
05-07-2006, 10:38 PM (This post was last modified: 05-07-2006, 10:39 PM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-agnivayu+May 7 2006, 09:57 PM-->QUOTE(agnivayu @ May 7 2006, 09:57 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I think a lot of it is presentation. A good comparison is with China. In the west, ancient Chinese civilization is always shown as great and powerful, while Indian civilization which is infact older is not.
[right][snapback]50791[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Likewise, the entire dynastic history of Egypt-ME has been resurrected from the dust.
agnivayu... the other reason for the preferntial treatment for the chinese civilization that the west has, is because it can. i mean the greater indian civilization is shown as in the west - the less their own civilization becomes. so they will never say that buddhayana was great - lest pythagoras come out as a lesser person. the west doesnt risk itself by extolling the chinese - and so it does.
Science and philosophy cannot be separated. The reductionist approach does not work any more to gain knowledge. We do not acquire knowledge by a conscious, intellectual process of perception alone; unconscious processes are in fact more important.
The idea of reality (causality and of the objects/matter) or the development of it rather seems linear as its development is parallel to the emotional or mental evolution that human beings undergo in infancy and adolescence. The unconscious mechanisms that underlie our thought processes -- of abstraction, generalization, etc. -- are manifested. That is the limiting factor, which our rishis did not have and so hard for mere mortals to understand it, as they cannot reproduce it without sadhana and shraddha.
In the area of truth - logic, mathematics, philosophy etc, there is no dearth of it in hindu philosophy, nor is it contested by anyone - sure, our own people do not even make an attempt to study it.
Now speaking to couple of points of "matter of belief" about our achievements in the field of science (as understood by most of us). It is up to us, in how we go about making the case. Nothing is given to us by colonialists or commies. Said that, some homework has to be done.
Four areas that come to mind in verifying the accuracy of information (subjectivity to objective transformation) to separate facts from fiction and feel-good history (marxist type).
1. Authority; (source of information) [Avoid Indologists, commies, nazis like plague]
2. Independent corroboration (Sunder's point of astronomical data our seers present for example- but our commies do not need such data);
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe that India was the earliest civilization in the world. I also think that India has had more influence in human culture than any other land. I also believe that there was a migration of people from India into the Middle East and Europe, and the so-called Indo-European languages are derived from that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is also what I believe. Now, how do we transform this into an objective fact.
I think there already too much evidence, the most significant is the fact that Sanskrit is a common language of Indo-Europeans and Sanskrit being the language of the Arya people of India, shows the directionality. The other evidence comes from the Greek and Egyptian records.
I think there has been considerable evidence produced from credible sources and amply presented. Only, that it has not penetrated into the mainstream domain, it's the privilege of those who choose to study it.
I think we are continuely having to fight the null hypothesis i.e., there is enough evidence and the means to present it, but the scholarly community is not about to accept it, because it is too extraordinary.
This is not just exclusive to Hinduism, the same is happening with parapsychologists. If an idea is too separated from what is considered acceptable according to our understanding of reality, it is often just dismissed.
I find it very hard to talk about Ancient Indian history and Hinduism with my peers, because the ideas are so largely alien to them and it contradicts everything they have learnt. For example, if I tell them it was not Newton who first proposed the theory of gravity and motion, but it was Aryabhatta and before him the Vaiseshika school, I am often just greeted with disinterest. I thus have to become selective in who I share my knowledge with.
I think there is definite proof of the advanced level of science. For instance, the Hindu physiology, mapping the human body as an intriciate energy system, with energetic centres(chakras), pathways(nadis) and of a Kundalini mechanism at the base of the spine, almost like a potential spiritu-eletrical energy. It is based on this model of the human body, that Yoga is based, and there is no contention that Yoga does not significantly promote health and well being.
This model of the human body, is today gathering a lot of scientific backing, with mainstream science discovering others centres in the body(as a network of many nerves merging at a single point) and parallels drawn to the central nervous and endrocine glands.
Another recent discovery, is the existence of the nasal cycles, which in Yoga, known as the Ida and Pingla Nadis, are considered of great importance in causing the Kundalini energy to rise and are known as the pathways to the brain. So slowly, but surely, a lot of these yogic theories are being proven by science(rediscovered)
Yoga has been the most succesful tradition carried into the West, and through Yoga, many westerners have made contact with India and Hinduism. Now, it seems like it is the turn of Ayurveda to become the next big Indian system to flourish in the west. I think we need to promote these more, and naturally the rest will follow.
I agree, China is totally disconnected from the west. Although I have heard from some White Nationalists (who seem to be in high proportion in archaeology in the West) claiming European origins for Chinese civilization as well, but the connection is weak unlike India.
<!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+May 7 2006, 11:24 PM-->QUOTE(ben_ami @ May 7 2006, 11:24 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->agnivayu... the other reason for the preferntial treatment for the chinese civilization that the west has, is because it can. i mean the greater indian civilization is shown as in the west - the less their own civilization becomes. so they will never say that buddhayana was great - lest pythagoras come out as a lesser person. the west doesnt risk itself by extolling the chinese - and so it does.
[right][snapback]50794[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think one of the big things that will break the barrier is India's economic growth. In order to explain the growth of the high tech industry in India, I have heard loose explanations like India's '5000 year old tradition of mathematics'. Because this type of growth is unlikely to happen in other developing countries, some Western analysts might accept the idea of an advanced ancient Indian education system and technology.
Unfortunately many Indian historians (excepting the Nationalists) don't seem like independent thinkers and will only regurgitate whatever Western historians tell them, so correcting Indian history in the West especially the U.S. is important.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->That is also what I believe. Now, how do we transform this into an objective fact.
Yoga has been the most succesful tradition carried into the West, and through Yoga, many westerners have made contact with India and Hinduism. Now, it seems like it is the turn of Ayurveda to become the next big Indian system to flourish in the west. I think we need to promote these more, and naturally the rest will follow.
[right][snapback]50801[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think therefore I am, averred Rene Descartes. I wll go further,,that i am (present ) is a great achievement and testament to our past.There is simply no other civilization that has withstood the onslaughts of time, natural disasters, invasions and holocausts to the degree the indics have and have survived to live and tell the tale while retaining their ancient traditions.
At the same time, we have never claimed we are the greatest ,or that we have invented everyhting .
In any event,nobody should accept anything as valid unless it meets the test of reason and logic .But such tests should be uniformly applied.For example if one said i believe English Historians when they write about India but i will not believe the ancients,that is not a credible stance. Neither is it very credible if one says i find Homers Illiad very engrossing but i find the mahabharata fulll of superstition and myth and not believable.
Pythagoras was a mystic and he believed in the secret mystical world of numbers but the west has no hesitation giving him credit for Pythagoras theorem - wrongly i might add, but are dismissive when Hindus talk about Baudhayanas theorem or the mystical code of numbers that is hidden away in the structure of the Veda. For example the special place that 108 (and 18 and 9 and 27 and 360 and 432000 plays in the sacred texts.
It also happens to be a number that pops up in astronomy and = distance of the sun/diameter of the sun = 93000000/865400=108 ( with less than 1% error).
Let us calculate the same number for the moon 238860/2160 = 110,6 well not quite 108, but remarkably close. But it explains why the moon looks like it is the same size as the sun.
The point is all this was known to the ancients . They had no sophisticated instruments but they were keen observers. aryabhattas values for the astronomical constants( i will be presenting this in Part III , which is mostly a Astronomy 101 ) are correct to several decimal places. . The indic approach to gaining knowledge is extremely rational and could in fact be taught in a class in an engineering lab and would make perfect sense.
as for being selective in what i believe, i take that as a compliment. we better be selective and exercise viveka, because the world is full of charlatans and who knows which ancient book was tampered with
you may have noticed that even then Jews do not have a proper sense of history.
<b>they in fact do.
</b>
They believe in mythological tales of the "exodus" which is completely unscientific to say the least,
<b>
well its a fact that the jews were indeed in egypt. egyptian records can verify that. but the real story may not have unfolded like the spiced up story of the exodus i agree. but then most ancient stories and legends are spiced up and inflated versions of the real events.</b>
and of delusional ideas as god talking to a messenger to wipe out egypt etc.
<b>
well moses claimed that god spoke to him. the claim may be fake, but the time when the said claim took place is clearly recorded.</b>
This has been promoted and believed in as 'history' itself.
<b>well the myth of the burning bush was considered a fact - and its date recorded. so where as their history may be half fiction, the dates of those fictious events are nevertheless well recorded.</b>
The whole of old testament is mythology.
<b>nope. its tribal history if anything. passed off in places as delivered by god/yahweh, and does have its fair share of mythology (even the flood myth - of which just about every civilization has its own version, is plagiarised from the Gilgamesh), but it records the exact time of various tribes and the order of its progenitors. you just cant say the Ot isn historical - they have even furnished the date when, they believe, the world was created. so its historical out and out. true or not is another question.</b>
Where is the sense of history in the Jews,
<b>
there ^^^</b>
or even christians for that matter?
<b>
most of the events post christ are well recorded and in order.</b>
Each gospel gives you a different 'version' of this so-called 'history'.
<b>cos each gospel was written by a different person. and because most of the stories attributed to jesus arnt true at all but arbitally attributed to jesus by one or the other gospel. we should not even expect a chronologically correct account of what never actually happened, (ie. since most of the jesus based legeneds are fake), but in so far as the events that indeed took place, they are quite accurate (for eg, the arrival of the 3 magi is clearly marked in time by the allusion to the star).</b>
What the Indians had was quite a clear cut idea of documenting the 'what' part rather than the 'when' part.
<b>
history demands a correct assignment to the "whens" for every "what" that took place.</b>
But if you look closer at the Ramayana or the Mahabharatha, you will still find that time and location was clearly documented.
<b>yes. we lack correct, uncluttered (by religion or spirituality) history of the vedic and pre vedic times. the only accurate markers the vedas have are astronomical, which too have often used in a "symbolism" kind of way (read koenraad elst's "astronomical interpretation of Rg ved", where he mentions allusions to a "swiftly moving hunter [ie. moon] moving through its prey [ie. constellations]. now thats hardly clearcut, if moon is described as a hunter and constellations as prey. such descriptions are left open to intrepretations and thats whats happened)</b>
Valmiki time and again mentions which constellation or phase of the moon it was at every onset of an important event.
<b>yes. but ramayan is not pre-vedic.</b>
Also, Indians had meticulously documented the arguments and counter-arguments between a purvapakshi and siddhanthi when it came to Buddhist/Vaidika schools.
<b>
same. post vedic.</b>
The Upanishads were such documentations of the 'conferences' such as in the Brihadaranyaka upanishad. There is no dating of these events with respect to Jesus' birth. But it definitely can be found out when an event happened if there are astrological/astronomical references in the text.
<b>yes true. the problem is not that there werent astronomical references. even the Rg Ved had lots of them. the problem is that those references are often riddled with strange legends of (for ex) hunters and prey. notice how the star that appeared when the 3 magi came to palestine was described as a star and not some "plant that bore a fruit" or in some other allegorical way. the OP was right about our habit of surrounding everything in religious mythology and spirituality.</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+May 8 2006, 12:44 PM-->QUOTE(ben_ami @ May 8 2006, 12:44 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>you just cant say the Ot isn historical - they have even furnished the date when, they believe, the world was created. so its historical out and out. true or not is another question.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am totally confused now. So lack of accuracy can still be historical as long as a date is provided? So, where in the OT can I find the date of creation, and the date of exodus 3:14?
As I do not want to hijack the thread into a jewish thread I will just suffice to ask the above question and will be content to be answered just that. The date references as given in the OT, about Creation of firmament; Abraham, Issac, and David's birthday; The day (or atleast the year) of exodus.
<!--QuoteBegin-Sunder+May 8 2006, 12:57 PM-->QUOTE(Sunder @ May 8 2006, 12:57 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+May 8 2006, 12:44 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ben_ami @ May 8 2006, 12:44 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>you just cant say the Ot isn historical - they have even furnished the date when, they believe, the world was created. so its historical out and out. true or not is another question.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am totally confused now. So lack of accuracy can still be historical as long as a date is provided? So, where in the OT can I find the date of creation, and the date of exodus 3:14?
As I do not want to hijack the thread into a jewish thread I will just suffice to ask the above question and will be content to be answered just that. The date references as given in the OT, about Creation of firmament; Abraham, Issac, and David's birthday; The day (or atleast the year) of exodus.
[right][snapback]50818[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
date of creation is given in the Genesis, which itself was plagiarised from the sumerian Enuma Elish and its about 5 thousand and so many hundred years old (clearly spelled out).
the exodus - moses leading the jews out of egypt happened during the reign of king Ahamos. thats what i know, but i am sure the exact year is also given in OT. i quick gogle later i could give u all the dates.
abraham's time is clearly marked, issac was born to abraham when he was 100 years old. david's time is clearly written (not just in OT, cos david was the most historically recorded of abraham, moses and david, and the founder of jerusalem)
the OT is tribal history every bit. and less or religion and theology.
When did the Jewish Calendar start? I know half the answer: 5763 years ago. But what was going on at that time? Is it the beginning of Creation? Abraham? Mount Sinai, ...?
Answer:
The first day of the calendar marks the creation of Adam and Eve, on the sixth day of Creation.
Many of us Kashmiri Muslims are in pain due to the events in the Valley of Kashmir and due to the stupid behaviour of the terrorists. There will be peace in Kashmir and I wish that you all in the mean while maintain your identity.
Most of us Kashmiri Muslims are converts to Islam from Hindus and many of us were of Brahmin descent. The Valley of Kashmir is sacred land of Rishis and also the home of the Aryan Race. The several thousand year skeletons found in the valley are proof of this as they resemble the present day Kashmiri.
People like Michael Witzel (Harvard University) though they are good scholars for political reasons are mentioning that the present day Kashmiris came from outside. While Henny Sender mentions that only the Brahmins came from outside. This is to create a mess in our culture and also cause a Hindu-Muslim divide. So let not the naive people in your community push outside views in the community. Sadaf Munshis etc., are foreign plants.
The true history of Kashmir is mentioned by Dr. Bimla Munshi below:
Vivekananda Kendra, Kanyakumari
June, 1984
Kashmir's Contribution to Indian Culture
by Dr. ( Mrs. ) Bimla K. Munshi
Some scholars in the Centre of Central Asian Studies of Kashmir University are probing in the direction of establishing the thesis that First man appeared in the Kashmir Valley. This has reference also to the Burzahom excavation and the remains of the so called pit-dwellers found there. All scientists agree that the earliest Homo Erectus named as Ramapithecus Panjabicus appeared in the Northern parts of India situated just south of Kashmir. In my opinion, all these facts point to the inescapable conclusion that Kashmir is the original home of the Aryans and that Aryan and Vedic Culture spread out to other parts of the country from Kashmir Valley itself. We should not forget that there was a time when Gandhar Pradesh ( present Afganistan and N. W. F. P. of Pakistan ) included Kashmir also. There are certain symbols and sacred things of Hinduism which were and are, found in Kashmir only. I mean to say that Kashmir Valley is the only place where all of them are found. Some of them are: Srichakra Fish ( Sacred as Matsyavatora and worshipped here even now ) Lotus ( connected with Brahma, Vishnu and Lakshmi ) Bhoorjva ( Bhoj-Patra on which ancient scriptures were etched ), Devadaru Tree, Kesar, Kustoori, Snow, The Snow white God Shiv ( Him-Rund-Endu-Karpur-Varna ), Mountains, Water, Nag and Sarp, (not only in Humun form ), Som ( it is being proved now that it was found in the mountains of Kashmir towards Sharada teerth ), Kesar Dhatura ( Used in Shiv Worship) and Kasturi these all have an essential place in our ancient traditions and also in present religious rituals.
The boat of Manu, when it was floundering in the floods of the Khand-Pralaya had found its final resting ground at a place called Manoravsarpan, which is situated in the Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Manu was the Adi Purush from whom sprang the modern human race and Kashmir was the place where the first human of the present civilisation originated.
The seals of the Sindh-Valley Civilisation have been deciphered and it has now been proved that they contain the picture of the Aryan God Shiv in Makhanasan Mudra. Foreign scholars have been trying to squeeze the Vedic, Ramayan and Mahabharat periods between 1500 B.C., (when Sindh Valley Civilisation was destroyed) to 600 B. C., to prove that the movement of Aryans had been from the west to the east, the time of Buddha ( 600 B. C. ) a historically confirmed fact. If the Sindh Valley civilisation is a vedic civilisation and/or it was destroyed earlier than 1500 B. C. then the movement of Aryans will be proved to have been from the East (from India ) to the west ( to Iran and other parts of Europe ). The creation of Vedas, their reduction into writing and the spread of their oral tradition, the spread of Aryan Culture to the eastern parts of India, the time-lag between the Vedic and Ramayana period, the Ramayan and Mahabharat periods, the Mahabharat and Buddha periods and the gradual evolution (or degeneration) of the Vedic language into Sanskrit, and of Sanskrit into Pali could not have taken place during only 900 years ( between 1500 B. C. to 600 B. C. ). Thus, when it has been proved that the Sindh Valley Civilisation is post Vedic ( not pre-vedic as some foreign scholars have been trying to project ), the movement of the Aryans had surely been from the east to the west and their original home was Kashmir. It is a different matter that more than 80% of the people of the Aryan stock in Asia are now muslims and they inhabit the areas of Kashmir, Pakistan, Afganistan and Iran.
There is another point of importance. The Jews who migrated from the city of Or to their present country of Israel in about 4000 B. C. have a mention of this movement in their scriptures but nowhere in the Vedas is a mention that the Aryan had come from anywhere outside India.
The Kashmiri language which is the only Apabhransha ( degenerate form ) of the Vedic language ( not of Sanskrit ) also proves that the original home of the Aryans was this sacred valley of Kashmir of noble traditions.
This is a very big subject to discuss, hence I am only listing below the other factors which prove that Kashmir has contributed to Indian culture more than any other ' Pradesh ' of the Country:
1) There is a tradition that Bhagwan Ramchandra had come to Kashmir in search of Devi Sita.
2) Lord Krishna himself had come to Kashmir to put on throne the widow ( Yashomati ) of the Kashmiri King defeated by him. There are hints in the Mahabharata that the forces of the King of Kashmir had taken part in great Indian war though they were on the side of the Kauravas, and that Takshak (Nag), who belonged to Kashmir later killed Raja Parikshit.
3 ) During the Buddhist period, Kashmir was a great centre of Buddhism and it was from Kashmir that this faith spread ( through Khotan) to China, Mangolia, Japan and Turkey (from where it was eliminated later). The last Buddhist Congress during the times of Kanishka was held in Kashmir.
4 ) Pantni the great grammarian of Sanskrit was also from Kashmir. Gandharadesh ( present Afganistan) and Kashmir were part of the same region in olden times.
5 ) It is a well known fact that even today the old Vedic rituals of marriages and Yajnas are followed only by the Brahmans of Kerala, Kashmir and Karnatak.
6) When Jagatguru Shankaracharya eliminated the impossible religion of Buddhism from India he came to Kashmir also. The Shankaracharya temple still stands as a monument of his visit.
7) After Takshila and Nalanda, the Centre of Sanskrit studies shifted to the Sanskrit University Brajbihara in Kashmir, which was, along with its huge library, later destroyed by Sikander Butshikhan.
8 ) A majority of the major poets and scholars of Sanskrit of India were Kashmiris: - Kalidas, Kshirswamin, Kalhan, Bilhan, Mammat, Anand Vardhan, Vaman, Kshemendra, Abhinav Gupta, Rojanak Shitianth and others. The first historically viable book of history in Sanskrit is Rajtarangini.
9) The Kashmiri Shaivism and Tantra Schools are also distinct contributions to the ethos of India. Even Vamachar is sort of a contribution of Kashmir to Indian rituals.
Thus Kashmir has been the home of Vedic Culture and religion, Buddhist faith, Sanskrit scholarship, Shaivism, Islam, Sufism ( Kashmiri Sufism is a little different from the Sufism which developed in other parts of the country ) and Sikhism.
Amir Khusro has often been touted as the sufi in the vanguard of the so called hindu islamic cultural assimilation. Recently i came across two passages from his work which seemingly put such speculation to rest.
Happy Hindustan, the splendour of Religion, where the Law finds perfect honour and security. The whole country, by means of the sword of our holy warriors, has become like a forest denuded of its thorns by fire⦠Islam is triumphant, idolatry is subdued. Had not the Law granted exemption from death by the payment of poll-tax, the very name of Hind, root and branch, would have been extinguished."
Ashiqa, trs. E and D, III, pp.545-46.
He further writes in his Tarikh-i-Alai:
"Here he (Malik Kafur) heard that in Bramastpuri (Chidambaram) there was a golden idol- He then determined on razing the temple to the ground- It was the holy place of the Hindus which the Malik dug up from its foundations with the greatest care, and the heads of brahmans and idolaters danced from their necks and fell to the ground at their feet, and blood flowed in torrents. The stone idols called Ling Mahadeo, which had been established a long time at the place and on which the women of the infidels rubbed their vaginas for (sexual) satisfaction, these, up to this time, the kick of the horse of Islam"
Now, can someone quote him to prove his catholicity of ideas if any, and also any other which further shed light on his fanatical sectarian aspect.
