Post No.1809; Date: 18th April 2015
Compiled by London swaminathan
Uploaded from London at 18-45
Foreign scholars are trickier than liars. Once we identify the liars, we isolate them or simply ignore their views. But foreign broadcasting organisations, newspapers and academicians will tell you half-truths and mislead you or confuse you and make you doubt your own father and mother. They will make you think that you are a bastard. The best example for this is the Aryan Dravidian Racist theory. It is nowhere found in Sanskrit or Sangam Tamil literature. But they even made Hitler to believe in the pure Aryan race and provoked him to kill twenty million people! They will tell you fifty percent truth and sow poisonous weeds of doubts in your mind. Today I came across some examples in the book “History Revealed by Ramayana Astronomy” written by Puspendu Chaudhury (Calcutta, 1998). I wanted to share some of the points he discussed in his book
1.In the Bhagavad Gita (2-2), Sri Krishna reproached Arjuna using the words ‘Anaryajustam’ to mean like an ‘Anarya’ where ‘Anarya’ meant uncivilized. In Ramayana Vali was addressed ‘Aryaputra’ by his wife Tara. Ravana was addressed ‘Aryaputra’ by his door keepers; but these words were NOT translated by the Western Scholar T H Griffith, though he used the word ‘vile’ in translating the word ‘Anarya’ used by Dasaratha in scorning Kaikeyi in the same book, ‘The Ramayana of Valmiki’ just because it would go against the ‘theory of the Aryan Invasion’ (though Max Muller had at last to retreat from the theory).
2.The religious bias of many Western scholars may be understood from the fact that Sir William Jones fixed the time of Manu B.C.4006 i.e the time of creation of the earth according to the Bible and that of Rama B.C.2029, quite ignoring the Bharatiya Puranic tradition.
ERAN STONE INSCRIPTION
3.Western scholars have tried to prove, as far as possible a late date for our civilization and they picked up the pen with a questionable motive to cast doubts upon facts which constitute an object of pride to Indians. And such motive is reflected when the Eran Stone Pillar Inscription reading ‘trayodasyam suraguror divase’ offered by James Prinsep (who first deciphered the Brahmi scripts) was changed by putting ‘Dva’ in place of ‘Trayo’ by John F Fleet to make the tithi of offer of the stone pillar (as a Victory Pillar = dwaj sthamba) Dvadasi in place of Trayodasi so that the date could be available in 484 AD (June 21 Thursday) while Trayodasi could be available in 150 BC (Thursday, June 1)
Dvadasi is not a favourable tithi for holy ritual of offer of Vijaya Dhvaja (Victory Tower) to God Vishnu, while Sukla Trayodasi causes a nectar like benevolent combination .Knowledge of Indian astrology is, therefore, necessary for correct dating of such events. Rama attacked Lanka fort of Ravana in Sukla Trayodasi
- Distortion of Ramayana by Michael Madhusudan in his Meghanadhavadha Kavya:- “Lakshmana killed weapon less Indrajit against moral code of war. The idea of Ravana elevates and kindles my imagination. He was a grand fellow. Though as a jolly Christian youth, I don’t care a pin’s head for Hinduism … it is my ambition to engraft the exquisite graces of the Greek mythology on our own” (But according to Ramayana both Indrajit and Lakshmana bitterly fought with each other. Indrajit was killed by Lakshmana. Indrajit was an immoral warrior who broke the code of war by keeping himself disguised behind the cloud created by him with the Nikumbhila Yajna technology)
Monier Williams
5.”It may, however, be mentioned that the motive behind such work of the Western scholars in general was, as pointed out by Mr Steve Rosen, the religious bias for Christianity, while he discussed the matter in his book ‘Archaeology and the Vaishnava Tradition” (pages 18 to 28). The motive was delineated by Prof Monier-Williams: “ I am only the second occupant of the Bolden Chair, and that its founder, Colonel Bolden, stated most explicitly in his will (dated August 15, 1811) that the special object of his munificent bequest was to promote the translation of scriptures from Sanskrit – so as to enable his countrymen to proceed in the conversion of the natives to the Christian religion”.
Tamil and Vedas 
R Nanjappa
/ April 19, 2015Over the years, I have come across many statements refuting the Aryan theories- of both race and invasion. But these lie scattered in many sources and there is no one book which explains the whole thing cogently, neatly and in a professional, academic manner. Sri Aurobindo has written that the term Arya connotes a level of culture and has no reference to race or ethnicity. But his writings on the subject are also scattered. Even Sri Aurobindo Ashram has not cared to bring out a separate booklet on the subject, as they have done on many other topics. Political correctness,perhaps?
Recently, independent scholars and researchers like N.S.Rajaram have called the bluff of Max Muller in various publications, but there is not a single book exclusively devoted to the subject. Michel Danino has done wonderful work to disprove the Aryan Invasion theory in his book “*The Invasion That Never Was” *and he even brought out a special, simpler edition for students. He also wrote a masterpiece on the Saraswati river, giving the results of latest scientific research. I was surprised to find that even a Tamil edition of the book has been brought out by Kizhakku Pathipppakam. Even so, the subject needs wider dissemination. I find we require efforts in three directions:
1. Dating the Vedic Age. The blind tendency is to follow the atrociously arbitrary dates fixed by bogus ‘phoren’ elements, following after the idiotic Biblical date of 4004 BC which stands so throroughly discredited. But even so called Hindu organisations like the RK Mutt follow this date faithfully! There is need for a simple, straight book explaining these matters., in clear language. 2. The concept of Arya as it is originally employed in our scriptures (and not Aryan); the flaws in the Aryan Invasion theory and the arguments against it – these have to be explained in a cogent, scientific manner. This has to be done by a general scholar and not one who advocates a pet theory of his own! It is now admitted by independent historians that the Aryan Invasion theory has no evidence at all. See for instance:”*A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India ” by Upinder Singh (Pearson,Delhi,2009) P.179 . Much information lies scattered in many sources- these have to be brought together and presented for the general reader.* 3. The background and not so honourable motive of the so called ‘scholars’ and even their pathetic professional competence have to be brought to light. Sri Aurobindo has debunked the Sanskrit knowledge of the so called Indologists; he has even questioned the claims of ‘philology’ – which provided the initial force for such speculations- to being a science. N.S.Rajaram has explained the background of Max Muller. Nirad Chaudhry who wrote a biography of Max Muller has shown how the professor could not follow spoken Sanskrit, he could not even identify the language when he was spoken to in Sanskrit!; yet he dared to translate the ‘Shruti’! There are still our own people who call Max Muller ‘Moksha moolar’ in Tamil. Above all, what can we say when even a Vivekananda seems to have been floored by him!
Michael Madhusudhan Dutt once came to meet Sri Ramakrishna. He was asked why he converted to Christianity. Dutt simply pointed to his stomach! Sri Ramakrishna could not impart any instructions to him for the Divine Mother “*pressed his tongue”! *This is recorded in the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. Seeing such incidents, we realise the truth of the saying in the Purananuru: “* periyorai viyattal ilamae” – we are not dazzled by the so called big people or their reputation!*