Aryana Dravidians and Nagas--SOME MYTHS, SOME LEGENDS- PART ONE

'ARYANS', 'DRAVIDIANS and 'NAGAS'--SOME LIES, SOME MYTHS AND SOME LEGENDS--PART ONE Jul 2 2008  | Views 6682 |  Comments  (35)  | Report Abuse Tags: nagas aryans dravidian myths ‘ARYANS’, ‘DRAVIDS’AND ‘NAGAS’---SOME LIES, SOME MYTHS AND SOME LEGENDS-PART ONE        Who are Dravidian people? Are they ethnically same? Do they owe their origin to South India? Strange questions I ask and strange answers I will give. I will quote from known written sources but deduce based on what the ORAL HISTORY of the people would dictate to me. Firstly, DRAVIDIAN PEOPLE are neither one nor ethnically same. The origin of the word is interesting.  As I Go through WIKIPEDIA article, it makes certain amusing observations. These are:-     -The word first time finds mention in SANSKRIT TEXTS in and around seventh century AD. It was used by KUMARILA BHATTA in his book TANTRIKAVARTTIKA. It is alleged the word was used to describe TAMIL LANGUAGE. It was an Englishman, namely, Robert Caldwell, who used this phrase to describe people of South India. He coined the term DRAVIDIANS in the 19th Century.  How ironic—there are people in South India whose ancestors coined this dergatory term to describe lowly people but today they as descendants of 'ANCIENTS GREATS' are also clubbed into the same category.    -The Origin of the word DRAVIDA is attributed to the Sanskrit word “DRAMILA” or “DAMILA”, which later corrupted to Tamil or Tamil speaking people. It has been done by Linguists and they have gone to the extent of equating these words with TAMIL or TARMIZ. However, I have a different definition. I personally feel the word has been coined out of old Sanskrit and ancient PERSIAN words. There is a Persian word “DRI-CHE-SHAK”, meaning undoubtedly or without doubt. Here, DRI stands for WITHOUT and ‘SHAK’ for ‘DOUBT’. Even in SANSKRIT the word ‘DRI’stands for “LACKING- IN”. The word DRAVID is made of two Sanskrit words “DRI” and “VID”.  DRI, as explained, would stand for ‘Lacking-in or poor’ while “VID” means KNOWLEDGE. Thus DRAVID was a person who did not have the knowledge. It was used to refer to people who were considered INFERIOR---as till a few years back or even today, NON-ENGLISH speaking people are viewed. It was not referring to a race or one ethnicity but was used as a derogatory term.    -Robert Caldwell, a renowned linguist, in his book “Grammar of the Dravidians or the People of South India, published in 1856,  recognized 73 Dravidian languages spoken from South India to Baluchistan(PAKISTAN),Western Iran, Afghanistan and Urals. It is now believed they were the people who established Pre –Aryan or the HARAPPAN civilization .I call it the civilization of NAGA people who were the worshippers of lord Shiva. The VEDIC knowledge belongs to them which had been usurped by the ARYANS because by that time, say around 1900 BC to 2800 BC NATURAL UPHEAVALS had devastated the NAGA CIVILISATION. Anyway at this stage, dates are not important.      The more I dig into VEDIC and ARYAN myths and legends, the more I am astonished at the written volumes of BRITISH-INTERPRETTED accounts of ancient Indian History. I do not blame the BRITISHERS for this gaffe but the obedient servants of HIS MASTER’s VOICE---the genre of modern Indian historians of colonial and post-colonial era.  My pointer is towards the callous neglect of the ORAL HISTORY while interpreting ancient Indian history. There was a need for a deliberate effort to establish a linkage of ORAL HISTORY with the archaeological sites. The BRITISHERS couldn’t have done this. They did not understand the local facts of customs, traditions, folklores, food habits and the development of language and local dialect to include, sayings, maxims, phrases and the grammar. Let me explain my point regarding the impact of historical events on language, dialect, customs, traditions and children games. I will do so with some examples from rural Punjab of yesteryears to show as to how do games, phrases and idioms evolve?                                There was a game in rural PUNJAB, some 3-4 decades back, which the young children used to play. In this game, they drew out a square on the ground. Divided it into five rectangles from top to bottom. The third and fifth rectangles were further subdivided vertically into two equal rectangles each. The own side of the side is called ‘GHAR’ (Home). The far side is called ‘SAMUNDAR’ (THE SEA).  And then they throw a dice sequentially from the HOME SIDE rectangle first and go towards the SEA SIDE rectangles step by step. Each time they have to go hopping on one leg to the rectangle where the dice is lying and push it out of the square. It is done in turns. Should the dice go out sideways or land in the opponent’s square—the player is considered out. Should you successfully bring the dice out of the square---you own the rectangle where you had thrown the dice.  There are two players or two teams. It is called “ADDEE –CHHARAPPA”, meaning “HEEL- HOPPING”. Now, how would you interpret this game? If I write it, for your convenience as “ADDEE-CH-HARAPPA”, then, what would you say?  Let me translate it for you: HARAPPA UNDER MY HEEL. Are you raising your heckles? Why not? This is what the game means—if you follow its basic characteristics.          Go to SANGHOL—an archaeological site of HARAPPAN period---near Chandigarh, some 60 kms South West of it on the road to Ludhiana. They say it lay on the banks of river SATLUJ when it was a tributary of river SARASWATI. The excavations reveal that it was a well planned city—which one day, some distant time in the past, just banished. The folk lore says that it was the outcome of the curse of a woman of the village.  They tell you the story of the curse of a widowed girl of the village who, being harassed and troubled, wanted the TOWN to cave in---or in typical Punjabi word---“NIGGHAR JAAVE”. And Lo! It caved in one evening with the sound “GARH—GARH—GARH---GARH---GARH”.  Is the name “GHAGGAR”—the name of the dry stream—alleged to be ancient SARASWATI CHANNEL based on this sound “GARH ---GARH---GARH”? Just think about it? Go to Ropar, some 50 Kms WEST of Chandigarh on the road to Jalandhar/Hoshiarpur. It is on the banks of river SATLUJ as it comes out of the Shivalik Hills. The excavations, there too, tell a similar story. How about Chandigarh itself?  The museum in the Punjab University tells the story of its linkage with Harappa sites. In India, the story of our historical evolution has been greatly mystified in our attempt to glamourise our past based on certain epochal stories. We tend to be emotional in claiming everything as indigenous. Let me illustrate this in succeeding paragraphs.        Take the case of evolution of Hinduism. I t must be understood that unlike other religions, it was not founded by any MESSIAH, PROPHET or a SAINT. It evolved itself by the confluence of various TEMPORAL PHILOSOPHIES, both indigenous and external. It graduated from geographical identity to religious identity over 1000 years. Primarily, it emerged with the synthesis of two diametrically opposite philosophies---SHAIVISM and VAISHNAVISM. While SHAIVITES were NON-VEGETERAIANS; VAISHNAVITES are VEGETARIANS.  Even today KASHMIRI PANDITS—the Staunch SHAIVITES ---eat MEAT and that too ‘HALAAL’ and not JHATKA’. ‘Shaivites’ had Lord Shiva as its presiding deity; Vaishnavites had Lord Vishnu. ‘Shaivites’ believed in LIVING LIFE HAPPILY TODAY---thus their guiding principle was: EAT, DRINK and BE MERY. Vaishnavites believed in the betterment OF FUTURE through ‘GOOD DEEDS TODAY’.         SHAIVISM is indigenous and VAISHNAVISM is imported. In the times bygone, both of them were competitive temporal philosophies. In the history of ‘Chalukyas’, a dynasty ruling in the peninsular India around 1000-1200AD,   there are instances of kings patronizing SHAIVISM and prosecuting the Vaishnavites. It is alleged that one of the Chalukya kings, namely Kullothunga Chola II, had removed the statue of Lord Vishnu from the SHIVA shrine at CHIDAMBRAM. History and EPOCHS tell us that LORD SHIVA had been the most revered deity of ancient India. The mythical RAVANA of RAMAYANA was worshipper of LORD SHIVA. Balmiki, who wrote, original RAMAYANA was a CHANDAL—who were SHIVA followers.  But, over a period of time the competition between SHAVITES and VAISHNAVITES has gone and both of them merged to create HINDUISM---which further gave birth to Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism.        Both of them had so well meshed into one another, today, that it laid the foundation of the basic two TENETS of TOLERANCE and PEACEFUL CO-EXISTENCE of Hinduism. Their merger gave rise to the concept of COLLECTIVE WISDOM and MULTIPLICITY of GODS---so as to give freedom of choice in religious matters.  They had merged so well that each lost its individual identity. The emergence of HINDUISM, around 530 AD, did exactly the same to INDIA what GLOBALISATION was doing to the WORLD, today. I may add here that the emerging “INDIANISM or INDIANESS” of today, might have the finer characteristics of al prevailing major religions in India, as did HINDUISM in the 6th Century AD. Geography and climatic environments do play their part in shaping the course of history as for as traditions, customs and lingual peculiarities are concerned. The point is we have to study our history in unison with ORAL TRADITIONS, ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES and AVAILABLE WRITTEN RECORDS.        The excavations of the archaeological sites and historical monuments do not tell the true tale of our HISTORY unless we take into account the folklores, food habits, dresses, traditions, customs and lingual dialects. All this make oral history besides some written accounts.  Purely basing your judgment on the artifacts discovered gives out only a disconnected and disconcerted story. Most of the ancient Indian History has been interpreted on the bases of potteries and metal works and ‘periods’ have been assigned by a process of elimination.  This is amongst the reasons that after the excavations at HARAPPA—the ancient history has fallen prey to the reasoning and argument whether HARAPPA was PRE-VEDIC / ARYAN or POST VEDIC. Equally ironical is the fact that it has been dubbed as INDUS VALLEY CIVILISATION—whereas it might be SAPTA SINDHU or NAGA CIVILISATION.        Who were Aryans? I agree with ROMILLA THAPAR on their LINGUAL IDENTITY. I am not going to indulge in the debate whether they were indigenous or from outside. Before I go further, let me ask you some pertinent questions. Who are the ENGLISH SPEAKING people of modern India? Are they ethnically one? Are they fair complexioned or dark complexioned? “What silly questions”, some of you would say? Yes, they are very very silly and stupid questions. Frankly speaking, they are as stupid as has been the case of the ARYANS identity with some superior ethnicity or VEDIC KNOWLEDGE.  How did English language come to India? It was not of Indian origin. Today, a major chunk of URBAN India, reads, writes and may be, speaks English. It does not make them ethnically one. Linguistic uniformity does not represent ethnic connectivity. Same is true of ARYANS. It only speaks of their Lingual affinity and not of racial. I would say same of the word, “DRAVID”.        Let me emphatically state that there were no ETHNIC identities of the words ‘ARYANS’ or ‘VEDIC’ and ‘DRAVID’.  The DRAVIDS do not have even the lingual similarity. They might include ‘EARLY ARYANS’, ‘NAGAS’ and various nomadic tribes who lived in the forests of a region EAST of ‘SARASWATI-SINDHU’ basin. As I have stated above, ‘DRAVID ‘was a word concocted by SANSKRIT speaking ARYANS to represent NON-SANSKRIT SPEAKING people. It had the similar connotation as the ENGLISH SPEAKING PEOPLE of today have towards NON-ENGLISH SPEAKING native PEOPLE. It had some derogatory and disrespectful implications—like CRUDE, BARBARIAN or an uneducated person might be referred to. I will come back to it a little later.        ‘Aryan’ is a word used for people who spoke probably, a crude dialect of a language now recognized as SANSKRIT. They were the people who branched off from a tribe which migrated to ancient PERSIA from steppes of Central Asia. ‘Crude Sanskrit had many similarities with ancient Persian language AVESTAN. SANSKRIT was reformed and perfected around FIRST CENTURY AD by PANINI---“SAMAST KRIT---meaning PERFECTED”. It is after this that dissimilarities might have cropped up in the two languages. Modern day IRAN (ancient PERSIA) derives its name from the word ARIANA. It was in the 19th Century and early 20th Century that the word was glamorized, by GERMAN SCHOLARS who, too, claimed to be descendants of the same tribe. It was thus accorded an ethnic supremacy—which was exploited by HITLER to discredit Jews and other European people.        When ‘Harappa’ and ‘Mohan Jodaro’, both in Pakistan, were excavated around early 20th Century, a myth was woven around the supremacy of ‘Aryans and Vedic’ people, based on the architectural greatness of these two towns. In the absence of any available written historical records, it was assumed that crude and brute people of India could not have such an advanced civilization in the past. No attempt was made to seek a connection with ORAL HISTORY of the land. Thus a theory of ARYAN INVASION and CONQUER of INDIA was forwarded and accorded legitimacy. Thus was created a myth of VEDIC PEOPLE and INDUS VALLEY CIVILISATION. To this, confusion was added by some INDIAN SCHOLARS who claimed INDIA as the origin of VEDIC or the ARYAN PEOPLE. Both were eccentrically wrong.        The word VEDIC or VEDAS has it roots in a SANSKRIT word ‘VID’, which means knowledge and education, as explained previously. Thus, the VEDAS do contain KNOWLEDGE but it PRE-EXISTED the arrival of ARYANS. The four VEDAS have their amplifications given in BRAHMANAS, PURANS, UPNISHADAS and ARYANIKAS. This knowledge belonged to people who lived in the region called SAPTA SINDHU and ALP-GANHSTHAN (AFGHANISTAN). They were neither ARYANS nor DRAVIDS—they were SAIVITES—or the followers of Lord SHIVA or what I would say “NAGA PEOPLE”. Mythology tells us that NAGAS owe their origin to RISHI (SAINT) KASHYAP. These RISHIS used to live in the forests with their families---the ARYANAKAS are the explanatory notes by them on various forms of VEDIC LITERATURE. Rishi KASHYAP or KASHPYO in GREEK is reported to have given his name to CASPIAN SEA and KASHMIR. There are different mythological stories to be told but at some other times. Here,  suffice to say the descendants of KASHYAP still exist as a CASTE amongst Hindus. They claim themselves as KASHYAP RAJPUTS but worked as WATER BEARERS or PLANQUIN BEARERS in the good old days.        The Naga civilization was spread from modern day Afghanistan to East up to Assam and Kashmir in the North to Karnataka in the South. They generally lived along the water bodies such as lakes and rivers, that is why also called ‘WATER PEOPLE’. Bulk of the civilization was around rivers SARASWATI -SINDHU and their tributaries. Ninety percent of the HARAPPAN sites are located in this region. These people had trade links with the west right up to Greece, Mesopotemia and River Oxus or AAMU River.        They had their own script---closer to BRAHMI or PRAKRITI which resembles more with Indo-Dravidian or Tamil  or South Indian Language. Some 434 characters have been identified. It needs to be deciphered. Efforts are on to do so. The seals recovered at Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro tell the tale of family histories. Most prominent one is of a UNICORN BULL—not a known animal species these days. I will come back with some detailed interpretations of these seals.                                       ----TO BE CONTINUED IN PART TWO © rajee kushwaha., all rights reserved. Bookmark this pageEdit this blog   mrmaverick1982 posted 3 yrs ago hi Rajee, i see that you have well immersed your self into the northern sects and the mythical timelines. you ahve also well attempted to give an logical sequence to connect it just the way the world or an outsider has. Now, the question revolves around the Aryans, Mongolids, Negros, Dravidians, Your favorite Nagas, buddhists, Jainism, taoism or X Y and Z sects.. wat we do need to understand is WATS ABOVE THESE is the message.. its a well known fact that the caste system was created as DEPARTMENTS AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES LIKE KRAS ARE WE DO TODAY.... wat incidently happened is people wanted to create a NICHE of their trade and demand for money and comfort... so our Brahmans.. started to mention .. WE ARE THE CHOSEN ONES TO READ THE SHASTRAS.. and hid all the knowledge.. trust me the REAL VEDIC TEXTS.. are still hiddenn,, its the word of mouth and interpretations that have reached us and that does nto AUTHENTICATE the truth.... Now form a scientific and rational thought.. if we have pondered on simple facts.. POINT ONE -----"OUR THROAT IS THE MOST DIVERSE SOUND OR NOISE OR VIBRATION CREATING INSTRUMENT".... POINT TWO ---- "ANY LANGUAGE IS A COMBINATION OF VIBRATIONS AND SOPUND FREQUENCIES WHICH ARE IN TURN CONNECTED TO VIRTUAL IMAGES PRODUCED IN OUR CORTEX". my inference is that .. i don care wat language or wat word you give it or want to name that the ORIGINS are from.. wat matters is the KNOWLEDGE...... Now comin to the Aryans and other sects classifications... i would suggest a good reading of the MAYANS, AZTECS, EGYPTIANS, GREEK GODS, ATLANTIS - THE LOST CITY, AGARTALA - HOLLOW EARTH CONCEPT, THE NAGAS (THE ORIGINS FROM THE REPTILIAN SPECIES), MONGOLIDS AND CHINESE ALCHEMY POWERS IN 200 BC, SHAMANISM, THE BROTHERHOOD OF THE WEST, NAZI CULTURE AND THE ASSOCIATION WITH SWASTIKA..... The output has to be taken from a common thread of all these cultures and try to understand the origin of the race and from where these knowledge has been collected or written or realised.... relating the mythologies to science.. the NAGAS were mentioned as the reptilian species even in Mahabarata.. where Bhima was sedated and thrown into the river.. where he was rescued by the snakes... then we can think on the Pushpaka Vimanas which were flyin machines of the past.. or the arrows with fire which had power of atomic destruction,.... the Rakshasa who lived under earth is connected to the HOLLOW EARTH Concept and Agarthala at Nagaland..... now as far as i see.. its science that has been written in a poetic sense and taken as shastras.. were in we have forgotten the real essence of the script..... DRAVIDIANS were they originated and wit LESS KNOWLEDGE is ABSURDITY... i expect some inputs from the south too.. about who were the pioneers in SPACE, TRIGNOMETRY AND ARCHITECTURAL ADVANCES.....EVER HEARD OF ARYABHATTA, was he a DRAVIDIAN with NO KNOWLEDGE as the inference state.... and yes.. being advanced and modern does not necessarily having a good lifestyle and hygiene and follow latests trends of MATERIALLISTIC NATURE.... the evolution happens within not from external habits and pattern,.... i would also suggest to understand the THREE levels of cultural symbolisation...... i WOULD SUGGEST OUR BRAINS TO LOOK AT COLLECTIVE UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORLD WITH ALL KNOWLEDGES COLLATED AND NOT FROM.............. HEARSAY...... AND A REGION SPECIFIC OUTLOOK.... sUGGESTED READING: 1. STEPHEN HAWKINGS 2. RICHARD DAWKINS 3. SILVAS MIND CONTROL METHOD 4. RAMAKRISHNA MISSION BOOKS 5. VEDAS AND UPANISHADS FROM ASSOCIATIONS WHO DON DO IT FOR MONEY AND DONATIONS. WE LIVE IN A WIDE WORLD WITH UNEXPLAINED EVENTS AND ANAMOLIES... TRYIN TO UNDERSTAND A SECT OR RACE IS TOOO TRIVIAL A NEED...... I AM A FREETHINKER AND DON ASSOCIATE WIT ANY CASTE, RELIGION OR METHOD OF WORSHIP...ITS THE MIND THAT HAS TO BE MODULATED.. NOT THE FACTS AND FICTION..... Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   Ashraf Quraishi posted 3 yrs ago Raji Jee! Thank you for your kind response. I did not oppose your theory at all. It still can be right or wrong. I rather appreciate your quest to find a truth out of myth. with all the best wishes and regards. Yours, ashraf. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 3 yrs ago Dear Ashraf, First of all, I do not mind at all. It is open for discussion and that is why I wrote this. Secondly I claim no righteousness on PERSIAN words or my theory. It is just my point of view. If you have a different point of view---there is No dispute. But I do feel that coining of the word DRAVID was a mischief by English as was the importance given to the word ARYAN by GERMAN SCHOLARS and then built a theory of BLUE BLOOD on this.. To my mind, both are trash--you might feel different. Ashraf, sahib---apna apna khyal aur andaz hai. My reference is to two languages and two words. When I talk of DAREEN CHE SHAK---I do seek its parallel with Sanskrit word DRI---which means poor or lacking like in DRIDRA. I see no difference in WITHOUT DOUBT or There is no doubt. I am not seeing this PERSIAN word in isolation. Anyway I am grateful. But my THEORY is not based on these TWO WORDS. I have quoted a number of other things. Therefore your assumption is not correct. Regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   Ashraf Quraishi posted 3 yrs ago Raji Jee! Who told you that Dari means lacking in? First of all it is not Dari but it is dar aeen. Dar in persian means IN and Aeen means IT or This. Actually Dar aeen chih shak means What doubt is in it? It is negative question which indicate positive meaning. Like in Hindi we say YEH KOI JHOOT HAY? means It is not a lie. I dont say any thing about your theory, but the base on what you tried to build your building is not correct. I hope you will not mind this. Regards. Ashraf Quraishi. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   desh raj bhakt posted 3 yrs ago regarding aryan theory there is no race called aryan,arya word was used for sambodhan of family or any other entity`s head who followed his duties(dharma) as described in shashtras,bharya was used for wife as she was the one who used to spend and control budget of household etc.acharya was the word used for a teacher teaching the family or family like structure,which also applied to whole kingdom also.there is no mention of aryan race in any hidutext,the country was called aryavrata because the same sambodhan applied to theking also. . Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   j LUKE posted 3 yrs ago kushwahaji, drpriya005ji kushwahaji's coverage of ancient india, aryan, dravidian, naga issues gives a broad perspective, mostly based on spiritual literature know to hindus. i also suggest you view a video-presentation by swami visnu that covers several aspects of ancient india: aryan invation theory vs vedic context, archeological finds in ancient indus river valley, historical perspective dating back british history of india... etc.  swami visnu video presentation is done well & makes one think rationally. suresh_rao blogged about in sulekha. not many in sulekha have viewed the absorbing video presentation made by swami visnu. here is a link: http://sureshrao.sulekha.com/blog/post/2008/12/eternal-power-of-krshna-mantras-in-india-s-history/comments.htm Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   drpriya005 posted 3 yrs ago hi rajee, oh my god!!!etni saari research aap ne kahan se ki??? really very good post.harappa & sindhu civilization mera pasandida subject hai.thanks for sharing. priya Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   BVic posted 4 yrs ago dear rajee, thanks for the reply and the link for the second part. regards victor Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear bvic,  welcome to my page. i am grateful tou you for these observations. would you like to read part two also? the link is given below:-     http://rajee.sulekha.com/blog/post/2008/07/aryans-dravids-and-nagas-some-lies-myths.htm     you please read my replies to various viewers --because i have amplified certain aspects which are not their in the main blogs.     i am thankful again. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   BVic posted 4 yrs ago dear rajee, fantastic, really.. really.. a serious and thought provoking writeup on a topic which i am deeply interested in. cant wait for your next part. congrtulations and thanks for all the work put in. victor borde Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse 1 2 3 4 Displaying  1 -  10 of  35  Blog Comments    Poonam Mishra posted 4 yrs ago rajee sir, not sure why first of all i never get any update for your comments, yeah very true that whenever you try to find the facts you will get various people who will do faltoo ka halla gulla not having any fact in hand, same as happened with gilealio when he told its earth rotating around sun... so never mind since its a human nature they never wanna listen anything beyond their own trust. i believe in the fact the hindus were not one evolved from a single root, we have our own lords often called as kuldevi or kuldevta, the one which we trust our ancestors worshiped always along with the common gods and goddess, it gives me a feel like somewhere in past for the growth and peace of everyone our great ancestors mutually agreed and decided to tie everyone with a single knot still leaving enough space for one to follow its own belief... verbal stories can't be overruled completely since we have a tredition of learning things by remembering them rather than keeping them written, but very storng fact is that when things go verbal, you will various versions of same things floating around... a very common and small example from daily life - i heard two versions of ganesh strota -  1. vakratuna mahakaya suryakoti  samprabha 2. vakratunda mahakaya kotisurya samprabha both versions are floating around, but since my belief goes with 1st one, i turst that. so i strongle believe that even you can not ignore verbal history but one need to be very catious while making a pickup choice. hope to read further on the topic. thanks and rgds, poonam Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear ashualec,  thanks for the support--yes, i am only making an empirical statement based on my exposure and knowledge i have gained. i claim no total righteousness. when you talk of events which have taken place thousands of years before---one can not be sure. i am only trying to give a different perspective on our ancient history.  wait for my part two, it will lead to more unheard conclusions--i want people to comment with positive approach and open mind.regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear gopalkrishanan,   firstly welcome to my blog. secondly i am really grateful to you for your contribution to the debate. i have been saying this only that hinduism as a philosophy is as old as the human history but as a name it is only 1500 years old. its geographical connotation some 2500 years back was equavalent of what you call an indian, today.   today, every hindu, christian, muslim, buddhist or a jain proudly says that he was an indian. in the days begone, so did vaishnavites, shaivites, buddhists and jains when they proudly called them hindus.   in fact ashoka--a practising budhist had constucted a "sri temple" in kashmir--what is called srinagar today. it was around 250 bc. there was no temporal distinction in those days--ashoka might have followed buddhism but he called himself a hindu. we must know this distinction.    also, i am grateful to you for the correction on kulothunga--i could have wrongly read it. you must appreciate i am only reading assimilating and concluding--i might go wrong in the dates and dynasties but the basic theme i am very particular. i am once again--very grateful to you. please await my part two---i will like your enlightening comments. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear dmrsekhar,     no, no sir, i am not disturbed--i was only clarifying the point  i know about jainism---you have evoked my interest in this aspect also. sounds very very intersting. the mention of ravana in jain tirathankars does raise my hackles. i will read jainism too.    my initial thoughts are that budhism and jainism as they came out of sanatana dharma or the forerunner of hinduism, they heavily borrowed from the original stories and created their own myths.    i have gone through the link you gave--it really lit up curiosity in me. i must thank you for the same as i do sh gopal krishanan for correcting me on kaluthanga of chola dynasty. thanks once again and keep coming--i will come back with my part two with more questions on harappa and vedic lineage. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   dmrsekhar posted 4 yrs ago oh rajee sb, this is not to create any disturbance! it is just academic as the subject you are dealing is also of interest to me. i need to know the truth . it is said that there is a bhagavan ravan parshvanath temple in alvar. the deity got this name as the idol was made by mandodari so that ravana may perform the puja. thus i presume that jainism was there prior to ramayana period. may see this link. thanks. http://www.jaintirth.com/rajasthan/alvar.htm                                                                                         dmr sekhar.   Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   Gopalkrishanan posted 4 yrs ago informative blog! hinduism per se is not a religion. in fact, our dharm did not name it at all. shivite or vaishnavites are just creeds of our dharm. in fact, buddha is revered as one of the incarnations of lord sri vishnu. its the modern day historians have classified buddhism, jainism and sikhism as separate religions. they are all part and parcel of sanatan dharma only. our dharm did not have regulations unlike others had and it preached freedom of practicing and amendments from time and again. this may be the reason there is no dearth of religious leaders in our country. for your info, kulothunga cholan is not from chalukya dynasty but from chola dynasty. it is true that one of his wives belong to chalukya dynasty. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   ashualec posted 4 yrs ago you have raised valid points and it can be a possibilty ...we should be open to accept new theories Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear poonam,     thanks for the very positive observations---it would nudge me to go through with part two also. i am only putting forward a theory based on how i see certain things around me in the society. thankfully ruins or relics of some of them are still seen in our social system---we ought to critically examine their evolution and growth to know our ancient history---this is my point. we can allow oral history left uninterpretted and have talks on our history, which are in conflict with this.     we have to be emotionless to understand this. most of us who were taught or reared on the existing thoughts will get emotionally carried away and feel hurt. there is no need for this. i am saying if you have logical proof--a demonstrable one--please present. we must remember emotions make us blind. and i am one who is prepared to take any amount of fire on this as long as it is substantiated with evidence.   some people are taking affront to my statement that the religious connotation of the word hindu was accorded only in 530 ad. they are so emotionally rigid that they are not prepared to accept that shaivism and vaishnavism were two separate temporal cults in the distant past. take sikhism today. it has everything what hinduism hasbut can you deny that it was now a separate religion.     tell you frankly, it was this religious orthodoxy of these bigots in 1327 ad in kashmir--led by one devaswamy that rinchen--the tibetan prince and second husband of kota rani was disallowed from converting to hinduism---he opted for islam- as sadruddin--and kashmir's history got changed--today devswamy's descendants have become displaced persons--they are homeless. this is the history--not to accept these facts is to fool yourself.     thanks a lot for your wonderful remarks. i am grateful to you. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear sampath sir,     thanks for the nice words. do let me know if you remember the name of the guy who wrote on the same subject. i will like to take the lad. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear ether,    you do have a point on the antiquity of the philosophy embedded in the name hinduism. but i am not talking about this. i am only saying about the religious connotation of this philosophy which was bottled in a brand name hinduism.     and dear ether, superlatives cum expletives do not make a good arguement. kindly quote from the sources if you know when the word hindu was first used.. you are getting emotional and unnecessarily feeling aggrieved and not prepatred to take the logical line---i am prepared to take criticism---i am not irrational--i know there would be grey areas in what i am proposing ---you got to give me logic--not emotion filled discourse---on earth, wind, rivers and atmosphere. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse 1 2 3 4 Displaying  11 -  20 of  35  Blog Comments    Ether posted 4 yrs ago dear rajee well there are many schools of thought declaring many claims and we do have to bear a lot of theories indeed ...and sir rajee, gautam buddha was born to a hindu father. surely i do not understand and that is by way not just my fault if the teacher is unable to drive through well enough hypothetical theories on evolution of worship... honestly, due to no aggressive conversion undertaken by hinduism a lot of assumptions are hurled on this particular religion and history is contorted to make it obscure as well... scholarly attitude to subjugate or corner falls flat because practice of this ancient religion is very evident in length and breath of this earth in every whisper of the breeze, in the rest of the night, in the purity of the sunshine... not only in the tender rendition of nature but also in the thunder and lightening ... well, if you can take criticism the very existence is hindu thus a hindu is born - later he gives himself a name - he calls himself as per some certain claims... please bear with me and i am not trying to denigrate this write up ---but you cannot shy away from this truth that existence of hinduism is as ancient as this universe without connotation from homogenous westerly.  please read the atmosphere - atma around the globe left on the rock sand water fire breath we inhale ... in the rivers, seas oceans contours, lands, rainbow colours,,, animals on land, fishes in water birds in the sky, in the very philosophy of life. kashmir is just a tiny fraction on earth. regards ether Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   DSampath posted 4 yrs ago dear rajje, well researched . .'seen article on this subject written by someone . . i forget whom waiting for the next... Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   Poonam Mishra posted 4 yrs ago sir ji.. tussi cha gaye.... this time... its wow... something i always loved to read and discuss... so well written that i just say 'oh why u worte it so late?' kumarila bhatta, if i remeber was a geat philospher from ancient past who tried to stop buddha followers from forcing people to join them, a guy from hills of north india, who travelled a lot to do 'shastrath' (discussion) and made big number of people in believing him. not sure how true is the fact, just wanna add since his name made me remember him. a great writeup... definitely tickled one of my most favourite serious reading bones.... waiting for more... rgds, poonam Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear dmr sekhar,     thanks for the wonderful words. i claim no righteousness---i am not very emotional about this. i do understand there would be lacunas in the theory i am proposing. but the basic tenetes that i highlighted of claiming harappans as nagas would remain the same.     to be frank i have not studied jainism ---but i suppose it was contemporary of buddhism which came around sixth century bc. if that be so i will say vaishnavism goes back farther than this ---may be around second or third millenium bc-or if i believe indian scholars it might be around fourth millenium bc.     i would take the date of the rise of vaishnavism in kashmir around 1000bc as narrated by kalhana in his rajtarangini---the river of kings. he wrote it in 1148 ad and it starts off with the date in 1184 bc--with king dayakaran of kashmir---who preceded mahabharta, lord krishana and pandavs. it was a grand son of arjuna --who usurped power from gonanda-ii---a saivite descendant of dayakaran------ by fraud. anyway some other time on this. let me see your blog first. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear nl,    thanks for your wonderful words. no, i have no intention of writing a book--idea  of this blog is to draw people's attention towards oral history and make them think as to why do they follow certain customs and traditions. also, it is to give a new orientaion to our known history. records. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear v_s gopal ji,     thanks for nice comments. i will eagerly await your observations. this is the aim. i know there will be grey areas--i claim no righteousness--i am only trying to draw attention towards a point of view.     i will read right now your blog on evolution of tamil.    come back soon with your observations because i have to work on part-two after comments by you all. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear amit shankar,      thanks for the kind appreciation. i know there will be grey areas. this is the aim of this blog to train people's mind towards this thinking--we had far too much misinterpretation of our ancient history by people who are not awre of our cultural nuances--you do not get them by reading books---you got to be one of them.    yes, i will come wit the second part soon---may be in other fortnight. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear scribbling pad,      firstly welcome--secondly i did not say that hinduism was born in 520 ad. knidly read my comments on ether's comments. also i request you to read my blog "is hinduism a euphemism for a people? please do note i have said hinduism evolved with the confluence of two diametrically opposite temporal philosophies. how can christanity be older than this? yes the term hindu as a religious connotation became popular in 530 ad.     in fact the word hindu in reality is the elder brother of the word indian today. john keay  , famous british historian, writer and indologist, maintains that as late as 18th century the word hindu had the same connotation as a britisher or an american or even indian has today. would you like to read his books "history of india" and " into india". thanks. regards. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   rajee kushwaha posted 4 yrs ago dear ether, i am commenting because you have not understood the evolution of hinduism as a religion. first time the word hindu finds a mention in the written records is 518 bc on a tablet by king darius-1 of ancient persia. it was then a geographical connotation---it is only in 530 ad when gopalditya ---a hun king of kashmir--son of mihirkula the tyrant ---came to power in kasmir that he gave this a religious meaning. till then, everyone from buddhist to a jain to vaishnavite to shaivite was considered a hindu as is the word  'indian' today. it was geographical identity though everyone had separate temporal practices and rituals. for detailed reading --go to my blog 'is hinduism  an evolved euphemism". the link is:http://rajee.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/12/is-hinduism-an-evolved-euphemism-for-a-people-or.htm    please bear with me i am not trying to denigrate this great religion---but you can not shy away from this truth that it got religious connotation only in 530 ad. please read kashmir history. regards. rajee. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   Ether posted 4 yrs ago the emergence of hinduism, around 530 ad, though some thoughts echo truth like not considering local legends etc... hinduism finds need no enclosure - the freedom imparted to follow one's own path to dharma karma and ahimsa param dharam... and it depicts iswar - nirakar - but never condemn the form in akar as per one's own concept Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse 1 2 3 4 Displaying  21 -  30 of  35  Blog Comments    amit shankar posted 4 yrs ago i think that rajee did not use the word "emergence" (of hinduism) in the sense of being born, but rather in the sense of being taking its current shape/form in its development from sanatan dharm. remember that the religion we know by hinduism has no name by itself because there were no main proponent of this religion (like christ or buddha) nor was there any primary principle (like jinn=pure or islam=submission) on which this religion was based. moreover the word "hindu" is a later coinage from sindhu/indus and literally means the religion of the people of the sindhu/indus basin and beyond. so it is more a geographical description than a theological one. eagerly looking forward to part-2 of the article. regards, amit shankar saha. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   scribblingpad posted 4 yrs ago i was amused to read that hinduism was born in 520 ad. quite a bit of news. so by ur analysis, christianity should be older than hinduism, lol. what easy surmises Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   V-S-Gopal posted 4 yrs ago  hi rajee, congrats for this post. i will have to read this carefully. you must have taken a lot of time for researching on this. this is a passionate and favourite subject of mine. i shall revert with my observations soon !  my blog on tamil language, posted here on 18 may 2008 will be relevant. the link is: evolution of tamil cheers vs gopaal Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   dmrsekhar posted 4 yrs ago excellent blog and highly educative. but as far as my knowledge goes jainism  is as old as shivism. vishnu is a vedic god and much later to shiva and jainism. my study is still on and hence …… thanks, rajee kushwaha sb.. dmr sekhar. Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse   NAVAL LANGA posted 4 yrs ago dear friend rajee kushwaha i think you have sufficient materials to publish in fom of a book. naval langa   Reply  |  Delete  |  Block this user  | Report Abuse 1 2 3 4 Displaying  31 -  35 of  35  Blog Comments