Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

[shiv]

On the topic being discussed here
http://indrus.in/articles/2012/06/06/eu ... 15923.html

[RajeshA]

perhaps our nuke subs can take up dual job.. earth penetrating radars mounted to scan sub-surface structures could be taken up along the lines of our ocean shelves. also renders operational readiness for triad preparations.

Sounds like the Next Generation series.

[brihaspati]

Arnold actually is more or less a proponent of "later==east", and "earlier == west ==== Caspian/Steppes/at least outside the subcontinent" school, so it is surprising as to why Witzelian camp is relatively silent about him. Arnold also places Oldenburg high on his "regards" list - so there also it is surprising that he is not mentioned much by Witzelians. Perhaps the reasons are that Arnold - inadvertently makes it clear on what assumptions or methodological twists - this entire edifice of internal structural "proof" is based on.

I will try to quote a sequence from his paper and show the problems with the very method.

First, Arnold summarizes the previous authors on "structuralism".

(1) [the first two from his list]

3. H. Grassmann ( Uebersetzung, 1876) noticed that the six mandalas, ii.-vii., were arranged according to one principle, and that in each the hymns to Agni stand first, those to Indra next, and then others according to certain mechanical rules. This arrangement is only broken occasionally by hymns or fragments which clearly betray a late character. So far we have (i.) six parallel family collections of hymns, (ii.) later additions to them at a period subsequent not only to the composition of the hymns, but also to their formal arrangement. With these "family books" Grassmann contrasted the "collective books," i., ix., x., to which he assigned a later date on account of their miscellaneous character. In viii. he found a principle of arrangement wanting, and so assigned viii. a place mid- way between ii.-vii. and the remaining three books.

Grassmann's theory is sound as regards the books ii.-vii., where he found positive evidence; but as regards the remaining books it has long been obsolete. The series of family collections has been shewn to extend to mandala i. 51-191, which includes nine collections duly arranged and rightly placed before book ii.' As to the remaining collections i. 1-50, viii., ix., x., it is sufficient here to notice that no positive link is shewn to connect them.

Individual hymns and parts of hymns, believed by Grassmann to be later in date than the collections in which they occur, were placed by him in his Appendix. In many cases Grassmann also alleges the vocabulary as an indication of late date: but in others a hymn is relegated to the Appendix only because it is difficult or prosaic, and therefore not suitable for metrical translation.

4. C. R. Lanman (Noun-Inflection in the Veda,JAOS. x., 1880) compared the date of the respective mandalas by a statistical investigation of the occurrences of the respective noun-endings -a -au (dual), -Jsah -ah (nom. masc. pl.), -& -ani (neut. pl.), -ebhih -aih (instr. m. n. p1.). Of these pairs of forms only the latter in each case is in use in classical Sanskrit. The statistics shew very clearly that the Atharvaveda stands very much nearer to classical Sanskrit in its use of these forms than does the Rig- veda. The later date of the Atharvaveda has been universally accepted by Sanskrit scholars on various grounds, but the credit of demonstrating this date by statistics belongs to Lanman.


Lanman proceeds to apply the same tests to the respective mandalas of the Rigveda, but without the necessary precaution of separating from each book those hymns which are later additions. He confirms Grassmann's view that the collections ii.-vii. are of much the same date, but he ranks viii. and ix. as earlier, x. as later. As he does not fail to point out, his results may be explained in two ways. Either the books as a whole belong to the order of time suggested, or certain books appear to be later because they contain a larger proportion of later hymns.

It is immediately clear what the underlying axioms have been
(1) similarities of ordering, taken on the superficial numerical counts and hierarchies based on chosen words or features - indicate "same period" construction.

No consideration given to the possibility that people could have adopted an earlier style out of parampara/identification, or recast older material into a later style out of similar obligations.

Since these authors are working within the imperial flavour of European scholarship of the time, the prevalent notions of "quantifiability", numerical patterns and consistency could have influenced them in placing an overt importance on count/numerical-ranking based conjectures?

If so much mathematical consciousness is being attributed to the earlier constructors of RV [the so-called family tracts] - is number-theory/number obsession allowed at this high level for early RV creators [when no maths happens in the much closer to steppen-home derivatives like the proto-Greeks (in early Bronze age) and proto-Italic (no Roman/Latin yet) - even in the scholarly dates of 1400-1500 BCE!]?

Further, in losing that numerical/mathematical consistency - is it being claimed that RV-ians lost their maths abilities as they evolved more? Showing much greater numerical consciousness in the rigours of "classical" Sanskrit while losing that very mathematical obsession shown in early RV?

(2) What did not fit the hypothesis was rejected as an "outlier". This is in fact counter to modern statistical thinking. From the modern experimentalist's view - more than one outliers, typically represent a challenge or potential falsification of the model assumed. Something to be looked into - not discarded.

(3) The axiom of AV comes later than RV is crucial for Lanmanian confirmation of the essential ordering argument. The linguistic basis is taken to argue for this. The portions of the RV dubbed "later" are dubbed so on the assumption that "classical Sanskrit" represents a successor form to the RV - and for this the "later date" of AV is needed.

Note that any problematization of the linguistic assumption - say in the form that "classical S." and RV represent two different developmental paths of a proto-Sanskrit, which could be contemporaneous [RV being a camp version with influences from the hinterland of the subcontinent and deviating from the strict "numerically" consistent grammatics of S.]- and that the core of AV need not be later than the "family tracts" - jeopardizes Lanmanian arguments.

More to follow. [In fact Arnold himself points to the problems in assuming styles/word usage to be indicative of time - later on, to defend himself].

[member_22872]

I think Sai ji asked for the origin of the term Hindu/HIndusim, From the book Key to the Vedas, Rajesh ji posted:

It is known, that the term `India' as well as the word `Hinduism' go back to an old Persian word `Hidu' (later `Hindu', `inhabitant of Sindh and India', Indian) found in inscriptions in Naksh-Ї-Rustam and Persepolis of the kings Darius I (522-486 B.C.E.), and Xerxes I (519?–465 B.C.), king of Persia (486?-465) and son of Darius I. Hence, the term `Hinduism' has a geographical origin (meaning nothing else than `Indianism') and is not met in the Sanskrit sacred books. As a religious term, `Hinduism' had been introduced by Europeans as late as in the XIX century for a designation, in general, of any `beliefs, creeds and faiths', which had originated in India. Therefore, it is as abstract and vague as the concept of a `European culture'.

[Lalmohan]

some european cultures still refer to all indians as hindus

[ramana]

some european cultures still refer to all indians as hindus

Despite sixty years of p-secularism to change the image.

[SaiK]

I see a weakness here. Our acceptance with others calling us whatever they want us to be called after.

So, Q: which came first? the not yet banned word hindu or the to be banned word aryan?

[member_22872]

It is my guess that both are words of ignorance, the Europeans wanted to know India, so clubbed all Indians with the term Hindus and then wanted to what the deal is with Rg Veda, through that they now heard of a new term 'Arya' which they meant a race, hence the term Aryan was born. In both the cases, it's the fascination of the European with the Indian led to Hindu and Aryan terms. Even defining Hinduism belongs to that category, for there is no religion by that name, It's lot more than religion, philosophy, science, way of living etc. In both the cases the reasons were geographical for them to begin with, my take obviously.

[RajeshA]

One can ban the word 'Aryan' completely, or one can recognize that possibly the term 'Arya' was indeed used initially in an ethnic sense to refer to the Lunar Dynasty, though they too may have defined it according to a 'value system' and as they considered themselves as the first to comply with this 'value system' and worldview, the word 'Arya' was initially limited to only the Lunar Dynasty.

So what do we get:

In order to be called 'Arya' either one has to show adherence to Vedic/Dharmic worldview or to an ancestry from the Lunar Dynasty, but preferably to the first criteria.

Well Indians are Aryas! Iranians and Afghans are at least ex-Aryas! But one can understand why they would still retain the tradition of defining themselves as Arya, and thus one can show understanding for this posture.

So 'Aryan' can be recognized as a racial based claim on ancestry from Lunar Dynasty, but still as a weak claim for the status 'Arya' or 'Aryan'. They can make the claim, we don't need to entertain it completely. 'Aryan' as a racial status is to be considered as an inferior status already having been deprecated in favor of 'value-based' semantics, and secondly it is hardly a claim one can prove convincingly. We don't really know what the DNA of Budha and Ila, really looked like.

Beyond that, all we know is that Europeans share linguistic connections to Sanskrit and Old Iranian. Does that make them Arya, even in the racial sense?

This they need to prove first! As long as the Europeans have not shown how they are related to the Lunar Dynasty originating in India, they cannot claim any 'Arya' status on racial basis, and we should not accept their 'Aryan' credentials.

They may be white, they may have blond hair, they may have blue eyes, they may have earlier ridden horses, they may have earlier driven chariots, but their claim of being 'Arya' or 'Aryan' should not be recognized by us!

All those criteria (white skin, blond hair, blue eyes, horses, chariots) neither strengthen nor weaken their claims, because time, climate and mixing with other ethnic groups, and discoveries in the mean time could have all influenced those factors. They can claim all that, but if they wish to claim 'Arya' status they have to make a case, that they are somehow related to the Lunar Dynasty, or .... they are Vedic/Dharmic of high calibre.

[member_22872]

I think one way to do that is the way of black Americans. Every time someone uses N word, there is a huge uproar, riots follow, make it a big deal when someone uses the word as if aryan word as if it has racial connotations, every time someone uses the word, act as if they made a big mistake. One can also take a page from our inbreed brothers across the border , burn flags...just kidding.

[ramana]

It is my guess that both are words of ignorance, the Europeans wanted to know India, so clubbed all Indians with the term Hindus and then wanted to what the deal is with Rg Veda, through that they now heard of a new term 'Arya' which they meant a race, hence the term Aryan was born. In both the cases, it's the fascination of the European with the Indian led to Hindu and Aryan terms. Even defining Hinduism belongs to that category, for there is no religion by that name, It's lot more than religion, philosophy, science, way of living etc. In both the cases the reasons were geographical for them to begin with, my take obviously.

Hemachandhra Ray Chaudhri notes in his book "Political History of India from Parikshit to later Guptas" notes that the the land was called Hindukadesha in ~ 58BC inscription.

Pp 383

Discussing the Sakas,

Quote�
The Kalakcharya- kathnaka states that their kings were known as �Sahi�. Some of these �Sahis� were said to have been induced by a Jain teacher to proceed to Suratta ( Surastra) Vishaya ( Country) and Ujjain in the HINDUKADESHA ( India) where they overthrew some local chiefs, and ruled for four years until they were themselves ousted in 58 BC.�

Source: Political History of India� Hemchandra Raychaudhuri, 1996 Oxford University press, New Delhi. ISBN 0 19 5643763

So the antiquity of the name was from that time atleast. Way before Islam took over Persia!


X-post from India Forum ~2005

The Invention of the Aryan race

The Europeans invented the notion of an Aryan race to counter the Jewish mystic tradition known as the Kabbalah or (Quabbalah) which scholars believe is in turn a rehash of older Babylonian, Persian , Indian Greek and Celtic stories. The Kabbalah holds that just before the Great Flood secret wisdom was taught by the Sons of God who descended from the heavens and intermarried the descendents of Cain. The Kabbalah subscribes to the notion of a superior or a root race which received this divine wisdom. In the prevalent anti-Semitic environment, the European occultist thought this to be a great embarrassment that this superior race was not them but the Jewish people. William Jones' (1783) pronouncement of the relationship between languages of Europe and India came at the most opportune time. If there was a proto language then there must be a proto race who spoke this proto language, the "Aryans." The Aryan race was offered as the European answer for Kabbalah.

According to Robert Drews (1988)

"It is an unfortunate coincidence that studies of the Indo European language community flourished at a time when nationalism, and a tendency to see history in racial terms, was on the rise in Europe. There was no blinking the fact , in the nineteenth century, that most of the world was dominated by Europeans or people of European descent. The easiest explanation for this was that Europeans, or at least most members of the European family, were genetically superior to people's of darker complexion. It was thus a welcome discovery that the ancient Greeks and the Persians were linguistically, and therefore one could assume biologically, "related" to the modern Europeans. The same racial stock, it appeared had been in control of the world since Cyrus conquered Babylon. This stock was obviously the white race. INDIA, IT IS TRUE, PRESENTED A PROBLEM, AND REQUIRED A SEPARATE EXPLANATION. ARYANS HAD INVADED INDIA NO LATER THATN THE SECOND MILINNUM BC, AND SUCCEFULLY IMPOSED THEIR LANGUAGE ON THE ABORIGINAL POPULATION, BUT THE ARYAN RACE HAD EVIDENTLY BECOME STERILE IN THAT SOUTHERN CLIME AND WAS EVENTUALLY SUBNMERGED BY THE ABORIGINAL AND INFERUIR STIOCK OF THE SUBCONTINENT (emphasis added, Drews 1988 in Livingston 2003, p. ."

"Nevertheless fueled by an obstinate nationalism , Europeans denied their essential absence from history , and by grossly misrepresenting the facts, artistically created an ancient past, placing themselves far back in time, as far back as the beginning of human history and in the ranks of the great civilizations (Livingston 2002, p. xi). Such ideas are commonplace even today even though the rhetoric is much milder. After quoting two very contemporary mainstream scholars McNeil (1986) and Roberts (1995) as examples, Livingston (2002) concludes, " it is difficult to fathom that, in a society that considers itself as liberal and as morally progressive as our own, modern scholars present ideas as blatantly offensive as these. These theories are not the rabid ravings of neo-Nazi fanatics. These are the purported sober theories of mainstream intellectuals. However, their claims are no different than the lunacies formerly upheld by Hitler(p. 16)." The concept of an IE language family originating in Europe is absolutely critical to the very existence of the West.

Livingston, David (2002), "the Dying God: The Hidden History of the Western Civilization," New York: Writers Club Press.

M. Kelkar

[RajeshA]

Books @openlibrary.org, one can read online




Published 1905
Author: Edward Vernon Arnold
Vedic metre in its historical development

[ramana]

And from dhu

Taligeri in Google Groups:

To give just a glimpse: in climate, we have the hottest place in the
world, Jacobabad (in present-day Pakistan), but also, as per the
Encyclopaedia Britannica, we have, outside the Polar regions, �the
largest area under permanent ice and snow�. We have dry arid regions in the west, which receive no rainfall at all, and at the same time the
area, around Cherapunji in the east, with the highest rainfall in the
world. And we have, in different parts of the land, a wide range of
shades of climatic conditions between these extremes. The topography of
India, from the most intriguing and diverse mountain system in the
world, the Himalayas, in the north, through the plains, plateaus,
mountains and valleys of the peninsula down to the Andaman-Nicobar and
Lakshadweep island clusters in the south, also seems to leave no
topographical feature unrepresented. India�s forests and vegetation
also cover every range and variety from the coniferous and deciduous
types to the monsoon and tropical types to the desert and scrubland
types. And India has been one of the primary contributors to the world
in every kind of plant and forest product. To name only some of the most
prominent ones: rice, a variety of beans, a wide range of vegetables
including eggplants and a number of different types of gourds, fruits
like bananas, mangoes and a range of citrus fruits, oilseeds like
sesame, important woods including teak, ebony and sandalwood, spices
like black pepper, cardamom, cinnamon, ginger and turmeric, dyes like
madder and indigo, important materials like cotton, jute, shellac and
India-rubber, a wide range of medicinal herbs, etc., etc. Moreover,
being strategically situated between, and sharing in, three different
ecological areas, India shares countless other important plants and
products with northern and western Asia on the one hand and Southeast
Asia on the other. And, as a detailed study will show, it has indigenous
equivalents, or potential equivalents, for a wide range of other
non-Indian plants and products.

India�s fauna is the richest in the world. Robert Wolff, in the
introduction to his book Animals of Asia, tells us that �India has more
animal species than any other region of equal area in the world�. But
the richness is not only in comparison with regions of equal area. For
example, India is the only area in the world which has all seven
families of carnivora native to it. The whole of Africa has five (no
bears or procyonids), the whole of North and South America together have
five (no hyaenas or viverrids), the whole of Europe has five (no hyaenas
or procyonids), and, in Asia, the areas to the east and north have six
(no hyaenas) and the areas to the west have six (no procyonids). Within
the carnivora family of cats, India is the only area to have all six
genera. The whole of Africa has four (no uncia or neofelis), North and
South America together, and Europe, have four (no acinonyx, uncia or
neofelis), and, in Asia, the areas to the east and north have five (no
acinonyx) and the areas to the west have four (no uncia or neofelis).

In respect of snakes, India is the only area in the world to have all
twelve of the recognized families, while the whole of Africa has eight,
and both North and South America together have nine. Extra significant
is that one of the twelve families (Uropeltidae or shield-tailed snakes)
is found only in South India and Sri Lanka, so that India alone has
twelve families, while the whole rest of the world put together has
eleven. Of the three families of crocodilians, two (crocodiles and
gavials) are found in India, one of them (gavials) exclusively in India.
India is the richest area in the world in the variety of bovine species,
second only to Africa in variety of antelope species, and second only to
China in variety of deer species. The list is a long one. And India is
not only a primary wildlife destination, it is also one of the important
centres of domestication of animals. The most important of these being
the domestic buffalo, the domesticated elephant, one of the two races of
domestic cattle and the commercially most important bird in the world,
the domestic fowl. The most ornamental bird in the world, the peacock,
is also Indian.

There are three recognized races in the world (Caucasoid, Mongoloid and
Negroid), and India is the only area in the world which has all three
native to it: the Andaman islanders are the only true Negroids outside
Africa. Sometimes, a fourth race, Australoid, is postulated (otherwise
included among Caucasoids), and we have it among the Veddas of Sri
Lanka. As to languages, six of the nineteen language families in the
world are found in India, three of them only in India: Dravidian,
Andamanese and Burushaski. The numerically and politically most
important family of languages in the world, Indo-European, originated
(as I have argued in my books) in India.

[RajeshA]

I think one way to do that is the way of black Americans. Every time someone uses N word, there is a huge uproar, riots follow, make it a big deal when someone uses the word as if aryan word as if it has racial connotations, every time someone uses the word, act as if they made a big mistake. One can also take a page from our inbreed brothers across the border , burn flags...just kidding.

If the case were that only Europeans were intent on using the word Aryan for themselves, it would have been possible to disallow the abuse of the word "Arya" for racial or linguistic purposes. I was also of the view earlier, that that is the approach we must adopt.

But there is a problem. "Arya" or some other similar is also used by Iranians and Afghans. That gives a door, an opening to the Europeans to use that word in several contexts - racial, linguistic, etc.

Iranian and Afghan use of "Aryan" breaks our strategy to define its use on our own terms!

That is the bad news!

[member_22872]

People also fear being called ignorant. Play on that fear, tell them there is no such things as aryan race, only ignorant those who have no clue of the word only claims to be aryan and oh also BTW to find real 'aryans' you have to go to Indian subcontinent. Bluntly call them ignorant, the word gets around.

[SaiK]

My point was, if the word hindu was coined later than aryan, then one could theorize on the AIT. But that is not the case here. The persians have already defined people across the saraswati plains as hindus. So, AIT takes a direct hit there.. and with persians one could just trash AIT.

I think we are not fighting for thrashing or trashing AIT.. we are struggling to get this message across those 99.99% AIT fellowships who lives as honest citizens of desh... how do we tell them, and make them understand?

The same ways.. stories. stories can help send the message across. so, this thread should lead towards telling a nice story... not just the links alone to be successful.

[member_22872]

Telling present crop of desh AIT scholars that their cherished research topic, which they have been toiling for decades is nothing but bum kum will not go easy, in fact you can expect almost a fight on to death to save their work, in fact I would do the same if I were the person who spent even 10 years of my work on AIT. I think the blow has to be dealt gradually, by say cutting research funds to AIT scholars, make it difficult to research and take more students, it will have a natural death. But on the international front, unleash the fury .

[RajeshA]

Books @archive.org, one can read online




Published 1876
Author: Hermann Grassmann
Rig-Veda: Part 1 Translated and Commented on by Hermann Grassmann (in German)




Published 1876
Author: Hermann Grassmann
Rig-Veda: Part 2 Translated and Commented on by Hermann Grassmann (in German)

Sorry, I am putting up books here in German, but much of the early work was really done by Germans and there are no English translations available or not available as online books.

[A_Gupta]

RajeshA, thanks for finding all these books, underlines the magnitude of the citation jungle we have to clear out.

I was thinking about how one would do a new scholarship on the Vedas; and it occurred to me that the language of discourse that would do the least damage because of language-translation mismatches, is classical Sanskrit. I'm also wondering if there is a case to be made that the best language within which to discuss comparative linguistics is classical Sanskrit. (Pie-in-the-sky thoughts, but no harm in thinking them, I hope).

[RajeshA]

Publication 1996
Author: Jost Gippert
Universität Frankfurt
Laryngeals and Vedic metre

[RajeshA]

Here is one of the new platforms/lairs/ratholes of the Anglo-German AIT-Nazi Project

Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies

Editor-in-chief
Michael Witzel
(Harvard University)

Managing Editor
Enrica Garzilli
(University of Perugia)

Assistant Editor
Makoto Fushimi
(Harvard University)

Editorial Board

Madhav Deshpande
(University of Michigan, Ann Arbor)

Harry Falk
(Freie Universität Berlin)

Yasuke Ikari
(Kyoto University)

Boris Oguibénine
(University of Strasbourg)

Asko Parpola
(University of Helsinki)

[SaiK]

Another aspect to linguistic fanatics of the eye-rope-peeans is to portray India's multiple languages and diversity.. so diverse, and yet we still maintain our indic SDRE nature... and religion is in tact and reasonably doing better than other fading religions. Christianity is dying on the facts from Science and discoveries. Islam on the very fact of violence and terrorism. Dharmic religions err ways of life keeps religion out of politics and living. All good stuff.

Apparently, the Eus gave all the sins, and took the dharmic approach to associate with Aryanic verses... and gets the benefit of cherished history. May be it is an approach to say, western fundamentals are inherited based on dharmic principles.

Despite of serious flaws in Indian governance, and corruptions, our dharmic philosophies stands tall.. unfortunately the MATAs (More Aryans Than Aryans themselves) of desh only inherits the sinful characteristics of the western world, and tries to cherish those acquaintances.

These MATAs are the AIT member clans. They are the ones who are swindling the nation and dividing further. We have to fight it back, and ensure our ways of living is strong and unified. It did not come from anywhere but here. We are so good to be proud of our real past full of history. We revisit text books, and cleans the setup.

Remove diversity in terms of splitting the nation.. and come to a common invasion theory to invade the corrupt minds.

[RajeshA]

RajeshA, thanks for finding all these books, underlines the magnitude of the citation jungle we have to clear out.

A_Gupta ji,

There are often citations from the AIT-Nazis which often point to obscure journals, which are not openly available, which one has to buy. Of course the AIT-Nazis among themselves get free access to them, as academic network.

Later on when they want to criticize the works of others, read Indians, they use a few expletives like "weekend amusement" etc. and refer to their non-public publications in these pay-per-view copyrighted journals.

But when Indians write some paper or some book, usually they all say, they haven't yet read because they still haven't received it. They want everything for free, but force Indians to pay.

And then of course there is all the bibliography incestuous spaghetti salad. All Pir-Reviewed!

[RajeshA]

I was thinking about how one would do a new scholarship on the Vedas; and it occurred to me that the language of discourse that would do the least damage because of language-translation mismatches, is classical Sanskrit. I'm also wondering if there is a case to be made that the best language within which to discuss comparative linguistics is classical Sanskrit. (Pie-in-the-sky thoughts, but no harm in thinking them, I hope).

A_Gupta ji,

this is a good idea... but we should also make our nation Sanskrit-literate 'again' or at least intend to.

We can start making Sanskrit again the standard medium of scientific research, starting from the field of linguistics, where Sanskrit's advantages are uncontested. We need to recapture the field of linguistics and all related fields with such a force, that English loses its primacy in that field.

Basically if linguistics in India becomes Sanskrit-heavy, then all Indo-European Sanskritists and Linguists would have to converse with Indian linguists in Sanskrit and the latter would be using the language, not simply as the object of study but as a medium of research as well and thus would be far more conversant in Sanskrit.

If the AIT-linguists hesitate to conduct their interactions with Indian-linguists in Sanskrit and to publish their papers in Sanskrit as well, they will be ridiculed as amateurs, so they will have to make an effort.

Once that gets established, and Sanskrit becomes a medium of study in India, at least in linguistics, AIT would lose even more ground, for they will have even a harder time convincing Indians that Sanskrit is not Indian or it has a foreign origin.

[RajeshA]

Books @openlibrary.org, one can read online

The book: "On Noun-Inflection in the Veda (1880)" is not available online. If somebody has a digital version, perhaps one can link it.



Published 1884
Charles Rockwell Lanman
A Sanskrit Reader with Vocabulary and Notes




Published 1905
Charles Rockwell Lanman
Atharva-Veda Saṁhitā Part I




Published 1905
Charles Rockwell Lanman
Atharva-Veda Saṁhitā Part II

[RajeshA]

Great Argument by Talageri

Published 2000
By Shrikant Talageri
SaramA and the PaNis: A Mythological Theme in the Rigveda

part of "The Rigveda - A Historical Analysis"

[RajeshA]

Published ~2001
By Dr. Nicholas D. Kazanas: Athens, Greece
The RV Date = a Postscript

In this Region of the Seven Rivers, then, we have an archaeologically well attested culture that seems to
have no literature at all (other than the briefest inscriptions: no code of laws, no religious hymns or secular
songs, no fables and tales), and then in immediate succession, an illiterate people that is not archaeologically
attested yet produces, all the kinds of literature that the previous culture lacked. It is a most amazing paradox,
an astonishing coincidence of space, time and people.

All this is, of course, possible - just as it is possible to be struck by lightning in one’s bed, or to fall from
the 10th floor on the lawn below and live with only a few concussions. Many wondrous things are possible in
life, but the question is - do they really happen? … The Mycenaeans did not expunge the Minoan culture on
Crete. The Hittites were conquerors who formed an Empire but, instead of imposing their IE language and
culture on their subjects, they were absorbed within the Near Eastern cultures retaining only scanty elements
of their own one. The Kassites and Mitanni who came from the East and ruled Mesopotamia retained even
fewer elements of IE provenance as they got engulfed by the local culture. The Anglo-Saxons in Britain
managed to drive the Celts westward and confined the Picts to the north, but they did so because they had
large numbers. When the Slavs (illiterate barbarians) made their incursions into Byzantine Greece in the 8th
century CE and penetrated with small numbers as far south as the central Peloponnese they were soon
afterwards absorbed completely by the natives. I know of no parallel elsewhere in the world to the paradox
provided by the Aryan immigration theory.

Good question. Everywhere else, unless the Indo-Europeans moved in overwhelming numbers, they were absorbed by the local population. Except in India!!! The Harappan SDREs just rolled over and accepted the invading Aryans without a murmur and started speaking their language. The best part of the Harappan language was that through the power of meditation, which the pastoralist Aryans brought in, it became easy to forget one's language in one day.

Everywhere else the Aryans fall in line, but in the Indian Subcontinent, with one of the largest concentrations of populations, the natives gave up and that too without a fight.

But for the overwhelming numbers, for an invasion there is no evidence. For the low numbers, there is no other precedent.

And then they say, that the Aryans were so few that they failed to change the population mix sufficiently, and that is why their presence doesn't register in all the genetic testing!

[RajeshA]

Published in Sep 1999
By Subhash Kak
'Edmund Leach on Racism & Indology'

The above paper refers to a chapter in the following book

Published 1990
Compiled By Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney
Culture through time : anthropological approaches
By Edmund Leach
Chapter 8
Aryan Invasions Over Four Millennia

[RajeshA]

Copying an email I wrote in Rajiv Malhotra's Discussion Group

One of the striking points I found relevant to BD was by Dr R Ganesh on why there has been no Sanskrit poetry by western intellectuals. Indians have learnt English and produced great literature and poetry in it. He goes on to say Aurobindu even composed poems in Greek/Latin. But interestingly there has been no westerner, in spite of studying Sanskrit for all this time has not been able to come up with a decent work of poetry or literature in Sanskrit.

I would also like to broaden the question and ask - Has any westerner composed any literary work or poetry of standard in any of the Indian languages?

If no, is this because of lack of Integral unity in western framework? Because Sanskrit as a language provides the framework of Indian Integral unity and westerners coming from a background of synthetic unity fail to understand it.

Or is there an element of u-turn here? To compose something in Sanskrit is to leave behind the restrictions of the English mother tongue and hence difficult to let go?

I am not sure how many Westerners have really fallen in love with Sanskrit. But my suspicion is that they learned Sanskrit not to write in it, but to study the language itself for a very specific reason

1) Deconstruct Dharmic scriptures using all sorts of methodologies - post-modern, Freudian analysis, etc. and then to use their dominating position in world media and education to tell Indics what their scriptures tell them and to show how nonsensical they are by twisting the meanings and context.

2) Fully own Indo-European migration studies. Westerners study linguistics especially Sanskrit, Avestan, etc. to have full ownership of the academic field and thus to formulate theories like Aryan Invasion Theory/Aryan Migration Theory, which say, Aryans came from Central Asia into India and they brought proto-Sanskrit to India, which eventually became the mother of most Indian languages, etc. etc. etc. Using these theories they have also managed to create divisions among North Indians and Tamils, or among Upper Castes (supposedly Aryan people) and Dalits.

Why would they write poetry in Sanskrit?

[RajeshA]

Published in July 2005
By Dr. Nicholas D. Kazanas
Anatolian bull and Vedic horse in the Indo-European diffusion

Argument. In this paper I examine the presence of bull and horse in the various IE branches. It is notheworthy that the IE stem for ‘horse’ is absent in Hittite while all other major branches have it. The horse has no place at all in the religion, ritual or mythology; the horse’s function is taken over by the bull. This alone suffices to show that the Hittites are not indigenous in Anatolia as some scholars claim and that therefore, Anatolia is not the original PIE homeland. Other types of evidence are used from mythology and linguistics to support this conclusion. The myth of the Weather god killing the dragon, which is a common IE theme (India, Greece, Scandinavia etc), is quite swamped by Near-eastern material. The Hittite language itself has some IE relics but is otherwise flooded with Mesopotamian, Hurrian and Assyrian elements.

[brihaspati]

continuing from Arnold's paper and my critique:

5. H. Zimmer (Altindisches Leben, p. 355, 1879) deems ii.- viii. to be the oldest part of the RV.; and i., x. later. In the latter books he finds an astronomical terminology which he holds to be derived from Babylon. His argument however only applies to the hymns in which these terms are found, viz. i. 162, x. 55, 85: but it is no doubt confirmed in his own mind by the general impression that books i., x. have made upon it.

Note that the original correspondence for identifying the so-called "Babylonian" term in RV is based on 19th century linguistics and assumptions of how and where astronomical knowledge originated, developed and spread from or into.

Here Arnold is actually pointing out the key argument he himself does not always apply - even if he later on in the paper explicitly states it : the mere appearance or semblance of a word or phrase in common with supposedly later or earlier texts does not necessarily fix the time of the first composition of the hymn or even other parts of the hymn to the period of these other texts.

? 6. H. Brunnhofer (KZ. xxv., 1881) made a statistical investigation of the infinitive forms in the Rigveda, which he divided according to the families to which the hymns are attributed. This division has advantages over the division into mandalas, but is in general agreement with it. As indications of early date he takes the infinitives in -dhai (2) and -dhyai (61): of late date, those in -taye (214), -tyai (5), -turn (4), as notes of the Brahmana period. Accordingly he places the family collections in the following order: Gautama (iv.), Bhdradvdja (vi.), Vasistha (vii.), Atreya (v.), Vaigvdmitra (iii.), Bhargava (ii.), Aligirasa (i., viii.), Kdnva (i., viii.).

Again - linguistic identification is the basis by which words/usage forms in common with texts already declared to be "later" [based in turn on their apparent proximity to "classical" Sanskrit, which is declared to be the latest in the chain.] - are used to base the internal ordering. Note that doing so "statistically" [in fact the actual work assumes what amounts to random occurrence as default as well as independence+identical distributions] results in the ordering from earliest to latest - of (4->6->7->5->3->2->1+8).

Significantly - internal "arrangements" inferred from linguistic identifications, even "patterns" within RV and not "linguistically introduced from outside" - messes up the correlation of formal numbered orders and "dates of composition". Here later in number sequence - could actually mean earlier in composition.

Brunnhofer's work is carried out in a critical spirit, and with care in detail: and it is to be regretted that the author himself in his later writings minimizes the value of its method. But it must be noted, first that the whole number of infinitives distinguished as old and late is not large, and forms an insecure basis for so detailed an arrangement; secondly, that the statement that the infinitives in -taye, -tyai are notes of the Brahmanic period seems destitute of foundation, whilst a form in -dhai cannot be assumed on the strength of the single word vayodhai; and also that the forms -tyai, -turm hardly occur in RV. Brunnhofer has therefore only shewn us that no one of the family collections approximates to later literature in the use of infinitives: but that the "family books" use more often -d/4yai, and the collections in i., viii., the form -taye. The relative date of these forms respectively remains for further investigation; see below, ? 27, 354, 355, 358.

Note again that - more often - these "internal orderings" are based by fixating on certain words, syllables, or usage or even a short phrase - and the sample is not too large. The words are chosen by their commonality in appearing in other texts deemed to be "later" - in turn dated on the basis of linguistic assumptions.

? 7. 1-1.Oldenberg (Die IZqmnen des Rigveda: Prolegontena, Berlin, 1888) greatly advanced our knowledge. He was the first after Grassmann to make a list of those hymns which he believed to be later additions to the respective collections. In this he relied largely upon the arrangement, but he found still more distinct evidence in the prevalence in the latest hymns of a particular rhythm, which he names "the later Anustubh." Further he traced in i. 1-50 and in viii. a common principle of arrangement, in so far as each consists of a number of small collections in which no prece- dence is given to the Agni hymns ; in most of them the Indra hymns, which are most in number, precede. Thus the "family books" i. 51.-vii. are preceded and followed by the collections i. 1-50 and viii., which are connected by arrangement as well as by the metres prevalent in them, namely those in which the verses of eight syllables preponderate. This resemblance in metre is obvious, and yet has been neglected by the preceding writers in their arrangement: we may conveniently describe it by naming books i. 1-50 and viii. collections of Saman or "song," in contrast to i. 51-vii., which are in the main collections of Rik or ''recitation." Whether the "song " or "recitation " is on the whole earlier, Oldenberg does not attempt to decide. As to book ix., he points out clearly the evidence that the Soma hymns belong to the family collections, although they are no longer grouped with them. On one point, he has no doubt: books i.-ix. formed a complete whole, and were so recognized before the poems of book x. (in the main) were written. His arrangement of the RV. is therefore as follows: first, books i.-ix.; second, hymns added later to i.-ix.; and then x. Oldenberg's argument is as just in what it decides as in what it leaves undecided, and the grouping i.-ix.; x. must on all grounds be preferred to Grassmann's unsupported grouping ii.-vii.; viii.; i., ix., x. The first is based upon a careful analysis of the character and form of the hymns: the latter merely on the superficial observation that the books viii., i., ix., x., as finally arranged, each contain more than one of the earlier collections which are the basis of all. Further, the later date of book x. is supported by a consensus of opinion: whilst the relatively later date of viii., i., ix. has been constantly called in question.

Arnold's summary of Oldenburg inadvertently shows up all the problems that Witzelians do not mention at all:

(1) Oldenburg lists hymns as "later" based on his "belief".
(2) He identifies a particular metre - dubbed by him the "later anustubh" - in the "latest hymns". The circularity of the argument is hilarious. Oldenburgh already has a ready list of "latest" hymns in which he identifies a pattern, whose absence in other sections of RV, the non-latest hymns indicates that these other hymns were "earlier", which in turn helps to show that the "latest" are the latest.
(3) Pattern matching leads to portion of (i) being classified with the "earlier" set, and the whole of (i)-(ix) set as one "earlier group", singling (x) out as "later".


Note that overall - each scholar fixes on a pattern - based on appearance of words, phrases, metres, whatever - and divides up the internal ordering of RV as earlier or later based on the presence or absence of those patterns. However crucially, note that the presence or absence of a desired pattern in a portion of the RV still does not on its own predict whether that portion is really later or older.

This dating portion comes by identifying a pattern as existing in some other text that is already assigned a period.

This period in turn is assigned based on how close that other text is to so-called "classical" Sanskrit.

So the claim that "dating" or ordering is based on "internal structure of RV alone" and not on linguistics, is a lie.

[shiv]

So, Q: which came first? the not yet banned word hindu or the to be banned word aryan?

I attended a talk by David Frawley - who is a genuine Veda scholar - about 2 months ago. I asked him if the word Hindu should be disowned. But he said no , because it will them be misused by all the people who are striving to break up Hinduism. It offers them the very opening they seek.

We lose little by keeping Arya and disowning Aryan. The semantic difference IMO can be used to convey the difference in meaning. But Hindu must stay.

[shiv]

Iranian and Afghan use of "Aryan" breaks our strategy to define its use on our own terms!

That is the bad news!

I would say "Don't say "Aryan". Say Arya ( Civilized people) Not Aryan (Nazi/Pakistani.)

IMO we don't have to convert anyone but ourselves first. Make the word Arya mainstream and sideline Aryan.

[A_Gupta]

Dadaji Pandurang Shashtri Athavale's Swadhyay movement uses Arya happily. And of course, the Arya Samajis.

[Murugan]

During the peak of Pandurang Shastri Athavale-ji's movement, this slogan was very popular in their processions

कृण्वन्तो विश्वं आर्यम ||

Google krinvanto vishwam aryam

[RajeshA]

brihaspati garu,

thanks for shedding some light on the completely subjective and superficial analytic depth of these "great" Indologists from the Anglo-German world.

Western scholarship is indeed overrated!

[svinayak]

Western scholarship is indeed overrated!

It is a fraud.

[RajeshA]

Iranian and Afghan use of "Aryan" breaks our strategy to define its use on our own terms!

That is the bad news!

I would say "Don't say "Aryan". Say Arya ( Civilized people) Not Aryan (Nazi/Pakistani.)

IMO we don't have to convert anyone but ourselves first. Make the word Arya mainstream and sideline Aryan.

I quite agree, that we should proceed as you suggest, regardless of how others see it.

But I would like to explore a bit how things could/would pan out!

Right now the situation is:

1. We say 'Arya' means noble/civilized.
2. We say 'Aryan' is an abuse of the word by the Europeans (Anglo-Germans mostly), and should be discontinued.
3. The Anglo-German right-wing continue to show their fondness for the term 'Aryan'.
4. Iranians and Afghans continue to assert their Aryan roots in a racial way.
5. For reasons of political correctness, Western academicians (historians, linguists) claim 'Aryan' should not be used as a racial marker. Popular opinion disregards this whispered advice - both right-wing and writers.
6. Western academicians keep the term alive in linguistics as a historical euphemism for 'Indo-European' and explicitly in Indo-Aryan. In our case it is explicit in order to emphasize the Aryan-Dravidian divide. They use the semantics of the term as claimed by Iranians and Afghans to justify their continued use of the word 'Aryan' as they deem fit.
7. The Western imaging of the term 'Aryan' as a band of fierce warriors on horses and chariots, appeals to the sentiments of Iranians and Afghans to feel pride in their heritage, and so they continue with their identification with 'Aryan', IN a racial way.
8. Due to the overwhelming dominance of Westerners in history, linguistics, anthropology, archaeology, geology, evolutionary sciences, genetics, paleontology, etc. Indian academicians and government defer to their opinion on this, and continue to teach the same in our schools.
9. We grow up with cognitive dissonance and in fact deranged, and our society grows increasingly politically divided due to these narratives, well exploited by foreign interests.

Here I'll like to share an anecdote.

Once my better half and I went to a film festival in Europe and watched the screening of "Sita sings the Blues", where the director, an American woman, Nina Paley, came in the end to get her applause and to answer some questions from the audience. She was surrounded with a few Indian-American MUTUs, who had helped her. I got up and told her that even though I like her creativity, it was my opinion that while (real) Hindus have full freedom to explore their scriptures any way they want, the scriptures being their cultural heritage and Hinduism being a religion that cherishes freedom, it is not right for an outsider to use India's cultural treasures to promote herself, to profit from its commercialization if it is treated irreverently and without respect, which is exactly what she did (Rama mistreats Sita).

She gave me the usual babble about right-wing Hindus and that it is not just the heritage of Indians but people in Indonesia (Bali) also use Ramayana.

In the mean time, she has given the film as freeware. She is now spreading the word!!!

So if any term or product originally Hindu is used outside India, it becomes common property and Indics lose their ability to intercede and demand proper respect for it. Well they would hurl abuses anyway, but we lose the argument.

Same is the case with the term 'Aryan'. Because Iranians and Afghans use the term in a racial sense, we would have a hard time claiming ownership of it and its semantics.

It doesn't mean we shouldn't persevere and make the claims. I am just pointing out the loopholes, which we should try to shut.

That is one reason, why I think, we need to team up with the Iranians to jointly take back the ownership of the term 'Aryan'.

I believe in the case of 'Basmati' too, India and Pakistan needed to cooperate a bit as well on the question of trademarks.

[RajeshA]

During the peak of Pandurang Shastri Athavale-ji's movement, this slogan was very popular in their processions

कृण्वन्तो विश्वं आर्यम ||

Google krinvanto vishwam aryam

Some understand it as "Let's bring the whole world under Hindu/Aryan domination"
.
.
.
even though it means, "let's make the world noble"!

[Lalmohan]

you can't take "ownership" of these things - they are ideas. you can however create an alternative narrative