Research Article Written by london swaminathan

Date: 9^th    August 2016

Post No. 3047

Time uploaded in London :– 15-35

( Thanks for the Pictures)

 

DON’T REBLOG IT AT LEAST FOR A WEEK!  DON’T USE THE PICTURES; THEY ARE COPYRIGHTED BY SOMEONE.

 

(for old articles go to tamilandvedas.com OR swamiindology.blogspot.com)

 

Manu says,

God’s Country:

“The country that Gods made between the two divine rivers Sarasvati and Drsadvati is what they call the Land of Veda (Brahmavarta).

Manu 2-17

The conduct of the classes (four) and the intermediary classes in that country, handed down from one person to another, is called the conduct of good people.

Manu 2-18

The field of the Kurus, the Matsyas, the Pancalas and Surasenakas constitute the country of Priestly sages (Brahmarsi Desa), right next to the Land of the Veda

Manu 2-19

My comments

Since Manu refers to perennial river Sarasvati he must have lived long long ago.

The areas he mentioned falls under Indus Valley Civilisation. He says that is the Land of Veda. So Indus valley and Vedic Civilisation are one and the same.

 

He mentioned the above two rivers as divine, so he must have lived during Vedic times. We have to note that Ganges is not mentioned!

xxx

Antelope Land!

From the eastern sea to the western sea, the area in between the two mountains (Himalayas and Vindhyas) is what wise men call the Land of the Noble ones.

Manu 2-22

Where the black antelope ranges by nature, that should be known as the country fit for sacrifices; and beyond it is the country of the Mlechas.

Manu 2-23

 

No Ganges River!

The above passages raise lot of questions:-

1.Why did not Manu mention the holiest river Ganges when he mentioned Sarasvati and Drsadvati?

2.For whom Did Manu write his code?

3.Where did the Land of the Mlechas begin? And who were the Mlechas?

 

4. If Manu has written only for the land between the Vindhyas and Himalayas, what happened to the South Indians? Did civilised people live at that time in the South or not?

 

My comments:

Ganges River is one of the rivers in the Rig Veda; not the holiest of the holy rivers. So can we take that Manu lived well before the Epic age?

Manu mentioned the land where black bucks roam is the holy place fit for sacrifices. We know that it roamed from Nepal to South India. So South is also a holy place?

 

If Manu had written only for the noble people between the two seas and two mountains why should others bother about it?

 

Is there any proof to show that someone was ill treated or harmed for violating Manu’s code? No, definitely not in ancient times. Even the Ramayana reference to a Shudra doing penance and Rama punishing him is considered a later addition or interpolation according to the scholars. They point out that it is in gross contradiction to the picture of Rama’s relationship with Sabari and Guha.

Ganges Mystery!!

Ganga Mystery can be solved by dividing the period into two: Holy Saraswati period and Holy Ganga period; when Saraswati River completely dried up and disappeared without leaving a trace or imprint Ganga came into prominence. There is another way of looking at it. Bhagiratha , the king cum the greatest Hindu civil engineer planned and executed the diversion of River Ganga into the present Gangetic plains. Earlier kings failed in this. So Ganga became holy and prominent only after some period. We have to find out when. Manu did not give any prominence to River Ganges. So he must have lived in the Saraswati period. Ikshwaku came after Vaivaswata Manu. And Bhagiratha was the 54^th ruler in the Ikshwaku dynasty. So there is a gap of 1500 to 2000 years (Western Kings ruled only for 20 years on an average. But Hindu kings ruled for 30 to 40 years on an average.)

(Please read my research article: “Great Engineers of Ancient India”, posted on 25 June 2011)

 

Bones in Indus Valley

It is very interesting that black antelope’s bones are discovered in Indus Valley civilisation. Can we take it that Rishis—ancient seers – raised them in their Ashramas in the Indus valley?

 

Half baked Westerners and their Indian pawns placed Manu in second century BCE. But Manu talks about perennial Sarasvati and sale of Soma herbs! Manu definitely wont fit into this period.

 

Mlechas in Tamil

Mlechas (barbarians) according to 2000 year old Sangam Tamil literature are ‘Yavanas’ from Rome, Greece and Arabian land. So the mention of Mlechas by Manu is not about Dravidians of the South. Cunning and divisive foreigners attributed this word to the Dravidians. Non Tamil speakers were called Mlechas by the Tamils.

 

Holy Ganges is praised sky high by Tamil Sangam literature, where as Ganges is not found in Manu. So there must be a wide gap between the Sangam period and Period of Manu.

Picture of a Mlecha in Barhut, 2nd Century BCE

The treatment of the Ganges and the Mlechas in two different ways in two different languages show the big time gap between the Manu Smrti and Sangam Literature of first three centuries of our period.

 

In short, the geography and the beliefs and customs of the people mentioned by Manu, place him well before the second century BCE that is attributed to it by the foreigners.

 

The biggest blunder is that the foreigners try to cramp Buddha, Mahavira and 1001 Smrti writers, litterateurs, writers of Ramayana , Mahabharata, Puranas, medical treatises – all into a period of 600 years or so. It is not reasonable and there is no evidence for such a thing in any other civilisation.

 

If we apply the same scale to other civilisations, this theory will fall flat. Max Muller’s theory that ‘a language changes every 200 years’ is not applied anywhere in the world except Sanskrit. Even if we apply it to Tamil, all the dates of Tamil literature will collapse and hang in balance!

 

In short, foreigners thought Hindus are simpletons and tried to foist  their rubbish theories on us like they do dump today all the unwanted, banned medicines and pesticides on us. They polluted the world with all tobacco smoking, firing arms, nuclear explosions, burning coal and petrol. And today they advise us that we should do this or shouldn’t do that. It is the same with their writings and theories as well!

 

Read my earlier article:

“Yavana(Mlechas) Mystery in Tamil Literature”, posted on 31 July 2014.

–subham–