Dnyaneshwaricha abhyas adhyay 1 ani 2

Adhyay 1 

Part 1 

Part 2 

                                                                           Adhyay 2 

 

INDIAN ECONOMY AND MANAGEMENT: A JEWEL TO BE DISCOVERED AND RESTORED

 

 

INDIAN ECONOMY AND MANAGEMENT: A JEWEL TO BE DISCOVERED AND RESTORED

A lighthouse for India and the world of today and tomorrow

Dr. Narendra Joshi

Introduction:

The word management as it is prevalent in modern times is considered synonymous with the art and science of optimum utilization of men, materials, machines, methods and money to mimimize cost, time and efforts and maximize quality as well as output. The aim is perpetually the same throughout the long history of the entire mankind but the means are largely limited to those understood, proclaimed and supposedly practiced post industrial revolution by western nations, especially by Europe  and US and then blindly aped by the rest of the world. The nations which is  still struggling to ‘decolonize’ themselves. The word economics is also seen only with reference to the works during last couple of centuries by some thinkers while thinking on questions like how there can be maximum well being of maximum number of people with unlimited wants and limited resources by optimum creation, use and distribution of wealth. The science and growth of Economics as a branch of knowledge is attributed to Adam Smith and his work ‘The Wealth of Nations.’ which came in last decades of 18^th century.  In the second half of 19th century we see a rise of the subject of ‘Management’ esp. Scientific management, also called as Fordism and Taylorism through the works of F W. Taylor, Ford and Gilbreth. 

What was this western idea of rational management or scientific management? Even after industrial revolution when industries were busy extracting mineral wealth, processing it and making usable marketable products of need and luxuries, the whole process was very haphazard and there was no application of reason to the process. Taylor was particular to use scientific method of analysis, classification, experimentation and deduction to an industrial set up. He asserted that each job should be defined, and also time needed for it, there must be a fair day’s work decided for each person. There has to be standardization. Ford brought with his famous assembly line idea that each person should do only smaller part of the whole work repeatedly and that will build his skill, increase speed and the whole product can be ready in lesser time. Gilbreth couple worked tirelessly to find micro elements of each motions and found standard time to complete a specified job by a qualified worker.

Indeed all these persons were great thinkers and men of heroic mould who pulled the society from infrarational, conventional and unscientific chaos to the well ordered structured and systematized work in industry, in society and in national plans. In the Human cycle there are stages like Infrarational, Rational and Suprarational. We can say that the era of Taylor and Smith was natural application of the dawn of scientific revolution which brought in the age of reason. The age when Newtonian, Cartesian, Baconian and above all Descartein thought of reductionism and materialism ruled the world. Reason was used to its highest possibilities in the decades to follow till the beginning of 20^th century. This was indeed great turn in human history else the organized but faith based irrational religion on one side and the autocratic and exploitative rulers ..both rulers in state polity and in industry had reduced human beings to unthinking, irrational slaves and subjects. 

The problem persists:

However, the solutions they provided were thought of and rationalized from the level of mind. They were far from the higher truths or the Ultimate truth. A great awaken-er for societies in Tamas or slumber, a dire need of that time but not a long term solution to the basic objective of human well being. However every prism ( an outcome of human mind ) ultimately becomes a prison ( another bondage and limitation )! As a part of Eurocentricism, a product of the arrogant power driven ‘Columbus within’ or ‘The White Man’s burden’ it bulldozed the native systems of   most of the third world nations. Such was the inertia and slavish mentality of the neo educated classes of the pre independent nations like India that they were more than eager to adapt the European model as the great saviour in education, polity, sociology and so on. Unfortunately after independence Indian industries were made to follow the model of Western management. India economy was subjected to European ideas and standards. It is ironical that  India in spite of her much longer history, not just longer in time but greater in substance, clearer in motive and outstanding in the final aim of it, had to become a docile pupil of the West and repeat the failed experiments of western management and economy for the past 70 years.

Ironically Indian civilization is not just existing but even shining since more than five thousand years. It is illogical to suppose that a culture which can be at a pinnacle of glory in material, mental and spiritual pursuits, a lighthouse to rest of the humanity, was having no sound foundation in Management and Economics. That it had no worthwhile contribution to the world thought in the fields of human knowledge like Management, Business and Economy and its unparallelled prowess in trade, business  and exports and its top rankings in world GDP share  for several centuries was mere  accidental, a fluke or  a myth.

The  Gross  Domestic  Product  (GDP) figures for  India since   the  beginning of  the   Common   Era   (CE) show very clearly the economic performance of India.  Angus Maddison, anoted Economic researcher  has provided  these   details and  his  works areextremely imporatnt to show perhaps for the first time that the blinded eye of Columbus has done much harm to the colonised nations in destroying thier centuries old economic prowess in world economies. See the following statistics for example :

At the beginning of the 0 AD

Total  GDP of the  world  $102.5 billions.

India  was  the  largest contributor to  the  global  GDP  $33.75 billions.

China was following India with  $26.82  billions.

Africa's  contribution was  $7.01 billions, 

while  that of Japan  was  $1.2 billions. 

That means India’s share of world GDP  was  32.9 per  cent almost 2007  years earlier.

(Indian Models of Economy, Business and Management (Bible) Paperback – 2012 by Kanagasabapathi P (Author)

 

From the massive 32.9 % the share fell down miserably to single digit and almost nowhere after British rule gripped India and destroyed the beautiful Indian model of Economy and Management

Even after independence it could not rise up substantially for few decades as shown below:

TABLE: INDIAN GROWTH 1900-2000

Colonial Post-Independence Reform Period

	1900-1950	1950-1980	1981-1990	1991-2000
GDP growth	0.8	3.5	5.6	6.2
Per capita growth	0	1.3	3.5	4.4

 Sources: 1900-1990: Angus Maddison (1995), Monitoring the World Economy, 1820-1992 (Paris:OECD); 1990-2000: World Bank/IMF.

***

Salient features of ancient education system

 

Ancient Education System of India 2019-20 90 It so happened... SALIENT utu

and focused on the holistic development of the individual by taking care of both the inner and the outer self. The system focused on the moral, physical, spiritual and intellectual aspects of life. It emphasised on values such as humility, truthfulness, discipline, self-reliance and respect for all creations. Students were taught to appreciate the balance between human beings and nature. Teaching and learning followed the tenets of Vedas and Upanishads fulfilling duties towards self, family and society, thus encompassing all aspects of life. Education system focused both on learning and physical development. In other words, the emphasis was on healthy mind and healthy body. You can see that education in India has a heritage of being pragmatic, achievable and complementary to life. SOURCES OF EDUCATION The ancient system of education was the education of the Vedas, Brahmanas, Upanishads and Dharmasutras. You must have heard the names of Aryabhata, Panini, Katyayana and Patanjali. Their writings and the medical treatises of Charaka and Sushruta were also some of the sources of learning. Distinction was also drawn A page from a manuscript* of the Rigveda *This birch bark manuscript of the Rigveda was found in Kashmir. About 150 years ago, it was used to prepare one of the earliest printed texts of the Rigveda, as well as an English translation. It is now preserved in a library in Pune, Maharashtra. (Class VI, Our Pasts-1, NCERT, 2017) heritage: something that is handed down from the past, as a tradition tenets: the main principles of a religion or philosophy 2019-20 Ancient Education System of India 91 between Shastras (learned disciplines) and Kavyas (imaginative and creative literature). Sources of learning were drawn from various disciplines such as Itihas (history), Anviksiki (logic), Mimamsa (interpretation) Shilpashastra (architecture), Arthashastra (polity), Varta (agriculture, trade, commerce, animal husbandry) and Dhanurvidya (archery). Physical education too was an important curricular area and pupils participated in krida (games, recreational activities), vyayamaprakara (exercises), dhanurvidya (archery) for acquiring martial skills, and yogasadhana (training the mind and body) among others. The Gurus and their pupils worked conscientiously together to become proficient in all aspects of learning. In order to assess pupils' learning, shastrartha (learned debates) were organised. Pupils at an advanced stage of learning guided younger pupils. There also existed the system of peer learning, like you have group/peer work. ANCIENT EDUCATION SYSTEM IN INDIA — A WAY OF LIFE In ancient India, both formal and informal ways of education system existed. Indigenous education was imparted at home, in temples, pathshalas, tols, chatuspadis and gurukuls. There were people in homes, villages and temples who guided young children in imbibing pious ways of life. Temples were also the centres of learning and took interest in the promotion of knowledge of our ancient system. Students went to viharas and universities for higher knowledge. Teaching was largely oral and students remembered and meditated upon what was taught in the class. Visual mapping of the various disciplines encompassed in the Vedas indigenous: originating or occurring naturally in a particular place Vihara: Buddhist monastery 2019-20 92 It so happened... Gurukuls, also known as ashrams, were the residential places of learning. Many of these were named after the sages. Situated in forests, in serene and peaceful surroundings, hundreds of students used to learn together in gurukuls. Women too had access to education during the early Vedic period. Among the prominent women Vedic scholars, we find references to Maitreyi, Viswambhara, Apala, Gargi and Lopamudra, to name a few. During that period, the gurus and their shishyas lived together helping each other in day-to-day life. The main objective was to have complete learning, leading a disciplined life and realising one's inner potential. Students lived away from their homes for years together till they achieved their goals. The gurukul was also the place where the relationship of the guru and shishya strengthened with time. While pursuing their education in different disciplines like history, art of debate, law, medicine, etc., the emphasis was not only on the outer dimensions of the discipline but also on enriching inner dimensions of the personality. Comprehension Check 1. Why were travellers attracted towards India? 2. What were the sources of the ancient education system? 3. What were the features of education system in ancient India? 4. What was the role of guru in pupils’ lives? II • In Part I, you have read about the ancient education system in ashrams/gurukuls, and the way of life in them. • This system continued to flourish during the time of the Buddha and the subsequent periods. Many monasteries/viharas were set up for monks and nuns to meditate, debate and discuss with the learned for their quest for knowledge during this period. Around these viharas, other educational centres of higher learning developed, which attracted monastery: a place where monks line and worship 2019-20 Ancient Education System of India 93 students from China, Korea, Tibet, Burma, Ceylon, Java, Nepal and other distant countries. VIHARAS AND UNIVERSITIES The Jataka tales, accounts given by Xuan Zang and I-Qing (Chinese scholars), as well as other sources tell us that kings and society took active interest in promoting education. As a result many famous educational centres came into existence. Among the most notable universities that evolved during this period were situated at Takshashila, Nalanda, Valabhi, Vikramshila, Odantapuri and Jagaddala. These universities developed in connection with the viharas. Those at Benaras, Navadeep and Kanchi developed in connection with temples and became centres of community life in the places where they were situated. These institutions catered to the needs of advanced level students. Such students joined the centres of higher learning and developed their knowledge by mutual discussions and debates with renowned scholars. Not only this, there was also occasional summoning by a king to a gathering in which the scholars of the country of various viharas and universities would meet, debate and exchange their views. In this section we will give you glimpses of two universities of the ancient period. These universities were considered among the best centres of learning in the world. These have been recently declared heritage sites by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). TAKSHASHILA OR TAXILA In ancient times, Takshashila was a noted centre of learning, including religious teachings of Buddhism, for several centuries. It continued to attract students from around the world until its destruction in the 5th century CE. It was known for its higher summon: to officially arrange a meeting of people university: institution of higher education 2019-20 94 It so happened... education and the curriculum comprised the study of ancient scriptures, law, medicine, astronomy, military science and the eighteen silpas or arts. Takshashila became famous as a place of learning due to its teachers' expertise. Among its noted pupils were the legendary Indian grammarian, Panini. He was an expert in language and grammar and authored one of the greatest works on grammar called Ashtadhyayi. Jivaka, one of the most renowned physicians in ancient India, and Chanakya (also known as Kautilya), a skilled exponent of statecraft, both studied here. Students came to Takshashila from Kashi, Kosala, Magadha and also from other countries in spite of the long and arduous journey they had to undertake. Takshashila was an ancient Indian city, which is now in north-western Pakistan. It is an important archaeological site and the UNESCO declared it to be a World Heritage Site in 1980. Its fame rested on the University, where Chanakya is said to have composed his Arthashastra. Archaeologist Alexander Cunningham discovered its ruins in the mid-19th century. ROLE OF THE TEACHER Teachers had complete autonomy in all aspects from selection of students to designing their syllabi. When the teacher was satisfied with the performance of the students, the course concluded. Postage stamp of Indian grammarian, Panini autonomy: freedom to act on one’s will statecraft: the skill of governing a country 2019-20 Ancient Education System of India 95 He would admit as many students as he liked and taught what his students were keen to learn. Debate and discussions were the primary methods of teaching. Teachers were assisted by their advanced level students. NALANDA UNIVERSITY Nalanda, when Xuan Zang visited it, was called Nala and was a centre of higher learning in various subjects. The University attracted scholars from the different parts of the country as well as world. The Chinese scholars I-Qing and Xuan Zang visited Nalanda in the 7th century CE. They have given vivid accounts of Nalanda. They have noted that as many as one hundred discourses happened on a daily basis, in a variety of disciplines through the methods of debate and discussions. Xuan Zang himself became a student of Nalanda to study yogashastra. He has mentioned that the Chancellor of Nalanda, Shilabhadra, was the highest living authority in yoga. The courses of study offered by Nalanda University covered a wide range, almost the entire circle of knowledge then available. Students at Nalanda studied the Vedas and were also trained in fine arts, medicine, mathematics, astronomy, politics and the art of warfare. The ancient Nalanda was a centre of learning from the 5th century CE to 12th century CE. Located in present day Rajgir, Bihar, India, Nalanda was one of the oldest universities of the world and UNESCO declared the ruins of Nalanda Mahavihara, a world heritage site. The new Nalanda University is envisaged as a centre of inter-civilisational dialogue. Xuan Zang I-Qing 2019-20 96 It so happened... ROLE OF COMMUNITY At that time, knowledge was considered sacred and no fee was charged. Contributions towards education were considered the highest form of donation. All members of the society contributed in some form or the other. Financial support came from rich merchants, wealthy parents and society. Besides gifts of buildings, the universities received gifts of land. This form of free education was also prevalent in other ancient universities like Valabhi, Vikramshila and Jagaddala. At the same time in the south of India, agraharas served as centers of learning and teaching. South Indian kingdoms also had other cultural institutions known as Ghatika and Brahmapuri. A Ghatika was a centre of learning including religion and was small in size. An agrahara was a bigger institution, a whole settlement of learned Brahmins, with its own powers of government and was maintained by generous donations from the society. Temples, Mathas, Jain Basadis and Buddhist Viharas also existed as other sources of learning during this period. CONTINUATION OF INDIAN EDUCATION SYSTEM The Indian education system continued in the form of ashrams, in temples and as indigenous schools. During the medieval period, maktabas and madrassas became part of the education system. During the pre-colonial period, indigenous education flourished in India. This was an extension of the formal system that had taken roots earlier. This system was mostly religious and spiritual form of education. Tols in Bengal, pathshalas in western India, chatuspadis in Bihar, and similar schools existed in other parts of India. Local resources via donations supported education. References in texts and memoirs inform that villagers also supported education in southern India. As we understand, the ancient education system of India focused on the holistic development of the students, both inner and outer self, thus preparing them for life. Education was free and not centralised. Its foundations were laid in the rich cultural traditions 2019-20 J Ancient Education System of India 97 Exercise Discuss the following questions in small groups and write your answers. 1. Which salient features of the ancient education system of India made it globally renowned? 2. Why do you think students from other countries came to India to study at that time? 3. Why is education considered 'a way of life'? 4. What do you understand by holistic education? 6. Why do you think Takshashila and Nalanda have been declared heritage sites? •JTalk to your History teacher and find out more about Takshashila geographical locations of these universities at that time? and Nalanda Universities. What could have been the Think it OverJJ

Aryan invasion myth totally proved malacious and baseless ...invasion that never was

Since the late 20th century, a growing number of scholars have rejected both the Aryan invasion hypothesis and the use of the term Aryan as a racial designation, suggesting that the Sanskrit term arya (“noble” or “distinguished”), the linguistic root of the word, was actually a social rather than an ethnic ...

 

The word Arya is used in Vasistha Dharma Sutras as follows:

8.      The country of the Âryas (Âryâvarta) lies to the east of the region where (the river Sarasvatî) disappears, to the west of the Black-forest, to the north of the Pâripâtra (mountains), to the south of the Himâlaya. 8

9.      (According to others it lies to the south of the Himâlaya) and to the north of the Vindhya range (being limited east and west by the two oceans). 9

10.  Acts productive of spiritual merit, and customs which (are approved of) in that country, must be everywhere acknowledged (as authoritative);

11.  But not different ones, (i.e. those) of (countries where) laws opposed (to those of Âryâvarta prevail).

12.  Some (declare the country of the Âryas to be situated) between the (rivers) Gaṅgâ and Yamunâ.

(Vasistha Dharmasutras,Chapter 1)

Manu Smriti also uses the word Arya or Aryan many a times.This text uses such words to mean a twice-born who has received his sacraments and who is also performing his duties without failure.

2.21. That (country) which (lies) between the Himavat and the Vindhya (mountains) to the east of Prayaga and to the west of Vinasana (the place where the river Sarasvati disappears) is called Madhyadesa (the central region).

2.22. But (the tract) between those two mountains (just mentioned), which (extends) as far as the eastern and the western oceans, the wise call Aryavarta (the country of the Aryans).

2.39. After those (periods men of) these three (castes) who have not received the sacrament at the proper time, become Vratyas (outcasts), excluded from the Savitri (initiation) and despised by the Aryans.

2.103. But he who does not (worship) standing in the morning, nor sitting in the evening, shall be excluded, just like a Sudra, from all the duties and rights of an Aryan

2.165. An Aryan must study the whole Veda together with the Rahasyas, performing at the same time various kinds of austerities and the vows prescribed by the rules (of the Veda).

2.169. According to the injunction of the revealed texts the first birth of an Aryan is from (his natural) mother, the second (happens) on the tying of the girdle of Munga grass, and the third on the initiation to (the performance of) a (Srauta) sacrifice.

Arya in the Vedas

I have found more than one references to Arya in the Vedas themselves. Here is one such mantra from Yajur Veda:

YathA imAm vAcham kalyAnim AvadAni janebhyah (1) BrahmarAjanyAbhyAm sudrAya cha AryAya cha (2) SwAya cha aranAya cha (3)

............

May i speak the sacred word to the masses of the people (janebhya) (1) to the brahmana, kshatriya, to the sudra and the Arya (2) and to our own men and the strangers.

Shukla Yajur Veda 26.2

And, here is another mantra from the Atharva Veda:

Priyam mam krinu deveshu piyam rAjashu mA krinu piyam sarvasya pashyat uta sudra utArye.

.............

Make me dear to everyone (to Gods, Kshatriyas etc) and both to sudra and an AryA.

Atharva Veda 19.62.1

In these mantras the word Arya simply means a noble one. Also note that, in the first mantra Brahmin, Kshatriya and Arya are all mentioned separately.

So, it implies that it is not necessary for an Arya to belong to a particular caste (varna) like Brahmin or Kshatriya.

·        Manu says आ समुद्रात् तु वै पूर्वादा समुद्राच्च पश्चिमात् । तयोरेवान्तरं गिर्योरार्यावर्तं विदुर्बुधाः ॥ २२ ॥ (2.2) but there exists no Eastern and western ocean between Himalayas and Vindhyas. Anyways, i think Arya means just noble people, not particular race. You can get Sanskrit verses for Manusmriti 

·        Arya means one who's worthy of initiation and also one who after initiation performs his duties as prescribed in Shastras without fail..Noble one is also right but that definition/translation is somewhat vague IMO.. – 

he Sources of History

There are four sources, which can provide factual information for the study or a better understanding of history. They are:

Archaeological sources like the excavations at Harappa and Mohenjodaro.
Literary sources like scriptures, epics, legends such as the Vedas or the Mahabharata.
Historical accounts of travellers like Megasthanes.
New scientific and technological innovations like genetics, satellite photography or new dating techniques.
Archaeological Discoveries

The first major archaeological discoveries which opened new horizons in Indological studies were the excavations at Mohenjodaro and Harappa. These excavations, which was a well-known event reported in all text-books of history and encyclopedias, pushed back in time the origin of Indian civilisation to make it one of the most ancient civilizations of the world, probably contemporary with Egypt, Sumeria , ancient Greece, Assyria and the Celtic.

Sometime in the year 1922 archaeological excavations conducted in the province of Punjab, Sind and Baluchistan unearthed two ancient cities. They are Mohenjodaro on the banks of the Indus and Harappa on the banks of the Ravi and Lothal. Further excavations carried over many years dug out a large number of villages, towns, cities and went on to uncover the buried remnants of a vast and ancient urban civilisation which was given the name Indus-valley civilisation

After Harappa and Mohenjodaro, the next major archaeological discovery is at Mehgarh in Pakistan. Excavations at Mehgarh pushed back further the date of the Harappan civilization to about 8000 BC. Excavations near by Nausharo, also in Baluchisthan, indicates the growth of urban centers, which later developed into large cities with a population of over 80,000 people. These excavations confirm the antiquity of the Indian civilization, as having existed before that of Mesopotamia and some 2500 years before Egypt. According to some archaeologists, at its prime, Mohenjodaro was the largest city in the world.

The most striking feature of the Indus-valley settlement is that it was built with remarkable architectural and engineering skill. There were well-built houses, big and small, constructed with smooth, perfectly aligned and standardised bricks. Towns were carefully planned with a well-laid network of roads and efficient drainage and water-supply systems. Many of the towns were like some of our modern metros. An English visitor who was looking at the Indus-valley sites was reported to have remarked that he felt himself to be surrounded by ruins of some present day working town in Lancashire.(2) Among the ancient civilizations, only the Romans, after many centuries, had displayed an equal engineering and building skill as the Harappans. The other important feature of the Harappan civilization was trade. Trade and commerce seemed to be the main source of Harappan economy. The Harappan merchants used a standardised system of measures based on the decimal systems and had extensive trade contacts with other contemporary civilizations.

The first impression we get from looking at the Indus-valley excavations is that these early Indians were not navel gazing spiritual dreamers with no grip or mastery over material life. This is the usual popular prototype of ancient Indians, especially in the west. The Harappan Indian seemed to possess a well-developed pragmatic mind with a lively interest and skill in earthly occupations like building towns, trade and commerce, and even in making toys.

Some scholars and archaeologists looking superficially at the highly standardized and utilitarian structures of the Harappans, without any religious edifices like the pyramid or the Temple, concluded that their civilization was materialistic, lacking in religious or spiritual advancement. But that would be a hasty judgment. Harappan Indians probably preferred to express their spiritual knowledge through the subtler medium of speech or the word rather than through the concrete medium of architecture. And this word of knowledge was transmitted orally from the Master to the disciple as in all ancient spiritual traditions or else preserved through a vigorous education and discipline of memory and recitation as in the Vedic culture. The other possibility is that Harappan culture was a phase in the evolution of Indian civilization, a phase in which it could have probably slipped into materialism and conventionalism. Such lapses do happen in the evolution of civilizations, even to a spiritually advanced civilization. In fact, such a lapse happens quite often after a period of intense spiritual endeavour. This is because we humans, limited as we are, cannot sustain spiritual effort for a long time. The need to rest and relax and the clamour of the needs and desires of the body, heart and mind act as a gravitational pull. However, evolutionary Nature uses such lapses to develop the qualities and faculties of other parts of our being like the body, vital or mind which remained under-developed or undeveloped in the previous cycle.

But there is strong evidence within the Harappan artefacts to show that these ancient Indians were not materialistic as their outer material life suggests. One of the fascinating Harappan seals is of a horned figure sitting in a classical meditative posture of yoga. There were many such figures in yoga posture among Harappan artefacts. This shows that Harappans were well aware of the spiritual art of meditation and yoga which is one of the unique contributions of Indian genius to human progress. As the eminent Indian archaeologist and an authority on Indus archaeology, S.K. Rao points out:

“One of the major contributions made by Harappans is Yoga which the Vedic Aryans practiced. Several terracotta figures of Harappa are depicted in Yogic asanas and what is quite impressive is that the human figures with horn, which suggest divinity, are seated in Yoga posture”(3)

Whether the science of yoga (not the outer posture) was the invention of Harappans, as Rao seems to suggest, or it belongs to a much earlier epoch is a debatable point. But the element of Yoga in Harappan artefacts provides the spiritual link between the archaeological and literary evidence and suggests a continuity or even a possible identity between the Harappan and Vedic civilization, for, yoga is the central core of Vedic religion and spirituality.

 

The Aryan Invasion: Was there any?

This brings us to the important question: Who are the builders of the Indus-valley civilization? Many answers have been suggested. But one of the answers which established itself in the academic community as the most authoritative explanation of the origin of Indian civilization is the Aryan Invasion theory. The most surprising element in this scholarly coup of the Aryan Invasion theory is that it gained wide acceptance among the scholastic world and entered into history textbooks and encyclopedias without any credible archaeological and literary evidence.

The theory of the Aryan invasion is a creation of European scholars based on some linguistic affinities between Indian and European languages. In the 17th and 18th Centuries, European scholars who first studied Sanskrit were struck by the similarities between its syntax and vocabulary and that of Greek and Latin. This resulted in the theory that there had been a common ancestry for these and other related languages, which came to be called the Indo-European languages. This in turn led to the notion that Indo-European speaking people had a common homeland from which they had migrated to parts of Asia and Europe. Based on such linguistic speculations, later European scholars led by German Indologist Max Mueller conceived the idea of an Aryan Invasion of India. The scenario of Aryan invasion runs somewhat like this:

A horde of nomadic Aryan barbarians from Afghanistan in Central Asia, somewhere around 1500 BC, invaded India, which was at the time inhibited by the culturally advanced Dravidians. Aryan invaders, blonde, blue-eyed and fair skinned, crude and primitive but vigorous and aggressive with a superior military technology, thundered into the Indian subcontinent in their chariots and horses, plundered and slaughtered the native dark skinned Dravidians, destroyed their cities and politically and culturally subjugated them, replacing their language with their own Sanskrit tongue, composing the Vedas and going on to build the later Indian civilization and culture. There are here three ideas or assumptions of which we have to take note. First is the idea that the origin of Indian civilization is not indigenous. Second, is the suggestion of a conflict between Aryan and Dravidian, who are considered as two distinct races; third is the assumption that Harappan civilization is pre-Vedic.

We must note here, though most of the scholastic world accepted this Aryan invasion theory and its implications, there were many scholars who even while accepting the invasion scenario admitted lack of supportive evidence for the invasion. British archaeologist Mortimer Wheeler, a diehard defender of Aryan invasion theory, said, “It is best to admit that no proto Aryan material has been identified in India.”(1) Another Indian scholar and supporter of Invasion theory S.K. Chatterjee admitted: “There is no indication from the Rigveda that the Aryans were conscious of entering a new country when they came to India.”(2) And B.K. Ghose remarks: “It really cannot be proved that the Vedic Aryans retained any memory of their extra Indian association….”(3) A.L. Bhasan, who believed in the Aryan invasion, confesses honestly: “Direct testimony to the assigned fact is lacking and no tradition of an early home beyond the frontier survived in India.”(4) But all of them tenaciously clung to the idea of invasion and tried to buttress the lack of evidence with some ingenious speculations.

The first among the critical voices to question the very idea of invasion were that of two great Yogis of modern India: Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo. Vivekananda raised the issue of lack of evidence in his characteristic flamboyant style:

“Where the Europeans find an opportunity, they exterminate the aborigines and settle down in ease and comfort on their lands; and therefore they conclude that the Aryans must have done the same. But where is your proof? Guess work? Then keep your fanciful ideas to yourself! In what Veda, in what Suktha do you find that the Aryans came into India from a foreign land? Where do you get the idea that they slaughtered the wild aborigines? What do you get by talking such nonsense?”(5)

We can understand the truth behind the first part of Vivekananda’s statement, when we look at some of the scenarios constructed by invasion theorist—a horde of blue-eyed and blonde warriors coming crashing in their chariots and horses and destroying cities—the scene seems to proceed more from a dramatic imagination based on the violent and aggressive histories of European nations than from an objective consideration of facts. We are not against imagination. In fact we are very much in favour of it. But when it is used for external events of history like the Aryan invasion it has to a certain extent correspond to facts. However, if the event belongs to a very remote past where there is no possibility of any evidence or if it is related to invisible psychic, occult or spiritual realities, the imagination has to be based on an authentic spiritual intuition. The main defect of the Aryan invasion scenario is that it is an imaginative construction based exclusively on linguistic speculations without any correspondence to facts. After Swami Vivekananda, Sri. Aurobindo, taking a critical view of Aryan invasion theory, wrote:

“But the indications in the Veda on which this theory of a recent Aryan invasion is built are very scanty in quantity and uncertain in their significance. There is no actual mention of any such invasion. The distinction between Aryan and Non-Aryan on which so much has been built seems on the mass of evidence to indicate a cultural rather than a racial difference….” (6) Sri Aurobindo came to the following conclusion on Aryan invasion: “…it is indeed coming to be doubted whether the whole story of Aryan invasion through the Punjab is not a myth of the philologist.”(7)

However, since Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo did not belong to the academic community and made no attempt to substantiate their critique of Aryan invasion theory in a systematic way, their views remained outside the academic mainstream. This work of bringing the critique of the Aryan invasion theory to the academic mainstream was done by K.D.Sethna, an Indian scholar, poet and a disciple of Sri Aurobindo. In his brilliant, meticulously researched studies on ancient India, Sethna systematically negates the Aryan invasion theory and provides new insights on ancient Indian history based on Sri.Aurobindo’s thoughts. Sethna’s thesis reiterates Sri Aurobindo’s views on ancient Indian civilization as of indigenous origin and inhabited by homogeneous people. Rig Veda, according to Sethna, is pre-Harappan, that is, Harappan civilization is placed somewhere in the post-rigvedic Suthra period in Vedic literature and viewed as “a derivative, a development and a deviation” from the Rig Vedic culture. Sethna arrived at this conclusion through a keyword for cotton, Karpasa, in Rig Veda. He found that the word Karpasa for cotton appears for the first time in the post-Rigvedic Suthra literature. The earlier Vedic literature shows no knowledge of cotton. But Harappan archaeology reveals widespread use of cotton. Sethna was also the first among Indian scholars to recognize and state the fact that the Aryan problem is not merely of academic interest but has social and political ramifications for modern India. In his book, Problems of Aryan Origin, Sethna writes:

“In India the problem of Aryan origins has not only a bearing on the remote past. It has also a relevance to the immediate present. Ever since Western historians pronounced, and the historians of our country concurred, that a Dravidian India had been invaded by the Aryans of the Rig Veda in the second millennium B.C., there has been a ferment of antagonism, time and again, between the North and the South. The Northerners, figuring in their own eyes as Aryan conquerors, have occasionally felt a general superiority to the Southerners who have come to be designated Dravidians. The people of the South have often resented those of the North, as being, historically, intruders upon their indigenous rights. An unhealthy movement has arisen in the Tamil lands, sometimes erupting in violent strength and otherwise flowing as a subtle pervasive undercurrent which tends to make for a touchy and suspicious relationship between the two parts of our subcontinent, in spite of a broad unifying sense of nationhood”(8)

The other problem with Aryan invasion is that most of the cultural and spiritual achievements of India are attributed to an alien influence, which is a distortion of history. So, the problem of ‘Aryan’ origins has ramification in education, society, and politics. If an idea which has crept into the mainstream of national education turns out to be unsound, lacking in evidence, distorts history and likely to be harmful to the solidarity of the nation, then all its defects have to be highlighted and exposed to the student and the public, and alternative views have to be presented so that people may choose what they think or feel to be true. But, at the same time national interests should not be allowed to cloud our objectivity as historians. As Sethna points out:

“But, of course, the fact that the extra-Indian origins of Aryanism has been a pernicious force amongst us and that its demolition would lead to greater harmony and cooperative creativity in India must not prejudice us as historians. We have to be calm and clear in our approach to the problem even while realizing that we cannot afford to be lax about a matter that keenly affects our collective future.”(9)

After Sethna, an increasing number of scholars, from India and abroad, are rejecting the Aryan invasion model and some of them are trying to evolve a new paradigm of Indian history based on the idea of indigenous origins of Indian civilization. This emerging trend of scholarship can be considered as a new school of thought in Indian history with Sri Aurobindo, Vivekananda and Sethna as its leading pioneers. This school of thought accepts in principle the views of Sri Aurobindo and Sethna on the origins of Indian civilization and further develops the leads and clues given by them with more supportive thoughts, arguments, facts and evidences. The exponents of this new school of thought, armed with new discoveries in archaeology, science and other sources have presented an impressive array of arguments and evidences against the Aryan invasion theory.

 

owever, before proceeding further with our discussion on the Aryan invasion debate we have to answer a legitimate question which may arise in the mind of a thoughtful reader. What is the need for giving so much space and attention to an academic debate on an external historical event in a study which is focused on the spiritual and cultural genius of India? First of all, the ongoing debate on Aryan invasion is an important event in the intellectual and cultural history of India. A new idea related to the origins of Indian civilization is fighting against an old, established idea and trying to dislodge it. Secondly, the debate raises some ticklish cultural issues like the distinction between the Dravidian and the Aryan people and the meaning of the term ‘Aryan’ which has acquired harmful racial overtones due to misunderstanding of the word by modern western scholarship. Thirdly the debate is related to the question on the origins of India’s spiritual and cultural genius: Is it entirely indigenous or of alien origin? Keeping these factors in our mind, let us now examine some of the arguments advanced by the new school of thought against the Aryan invasion theory.

The first argument is the one voiced forcefully by Vivekananda. There is no trace of any aggressive invasion in the memory, records, literature, legends and archaeological remnants of the Invaded or the Invader. How can such an allegedly massive invasion which affected an entire civilization as vast as India leave no trace or record in the memory of the invaded or invading people? This is a mystery which the invasion theorists were never able to explain satisfactorily.

The second argument is that invasion theory attributes incredible feats of cultural advancement and assimilation to a horde of nomadic barbarians. According to invasion theorists, invading ‘Aryans’ after politically and militarily subjugating the more culturally advanced native population, the ‘Dravidians’, either imposed their culture or entirely assimilated all the cultural achievement of the natives, invented a new language or replaced the language of the natives with their own highly sophisticated Sanskrit language and went on to develop one of the most spiritually advanced civilizations of the world. For example, how can a group of primitive and uncivilized nomads invent a language like Sanskrit which was described by British indologist Sir William Jones as, “…more perfect than Greek, more copious than Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either.” Such fantastic feats of cultural or spiritual assimilation was possible if the invaders are more spiritually and culturally advanced than the natives. A certain amount of cultural assimilation happens when a primitive tribe invades a more advanced civilization, but never on such a massive scale as suggested by invasion theorists. As Sri Aurobindo, pointing this cultural anomaly in the Aryan invasion scenario, says:

“We have then to suppose that entering a vast peninsula occupied by civilized people, builders of great cities, extensive traders, not without mental and spiritual culture, they were yet able to impose on them their own language, religion, ideas and manner. Such a miracle would just be possible if the invaders possessed a very highly organized language, a greater force of creative mind and a more dynamic religious force and spirit.”(1)

The third argument is that all the recent archaeological, literary and other evidences indicate a continuity and concordance between the Vedic and Harappan culture and the later development in Indian culture. None of the archaeological or literary data in the Harappan civilization or in the Vedic literature suggest a discordant note of an alien invasion. We have already mentioned one of the evidences, the Yoga posture in the Harappan. The other important evidence is the sacrificial altars discovered in some of the Harappan sites. Sacrificial oblations in fire-altars was one of the important outer forms of the Vedic religions. The Yoga-seal and fire-altars found in Harappan sites show that Harappans were following the Vedic religious and spiritual traditions and practices.

The fourth argument is that nowhere in Indian history or tradition do we find any trace of conflict between “Aryans” and “Dravidian” based on racial feelings. One of the factors behind the Aryan invasion theory is the attempt to explain two distinct language groups in India and its dialects Tamil in the south and Sanskrit in the north, with a certain amount of corresponding variation in culture and tradition and physical characteristics of people. But the Aryan invasion theorists made these variations (which could be due to cultural or climactic factors) into a race conflict. First of all, the word “Arya” in the Vedas or in the Indian tradition, did not mean “race”. It meant a state of culture, refinement or higher aspiration. Here are some definitions of Arya from the Vedas and Indian epics:

“Arya is one who hails from a noble family, of gentle behaviour and demeanour, good natured and righteous conduct.”

“Children of Aryan seek and are led by Light.”

“Arya is the one who cared for the equality of all and was dear to everyone.”

Even Buddha who rejected the Vedic tradition described the Path He preached as the “Aryan Path.”

It is interesting to note that a book on Indian History published recently by Encyclopedia Britannica shows a much better understanding of the concept of Arya than the earlier European scholars. On the meaning of the Arya in the Vedas, this publication by Britannica says:

“Rita the order of the cosmos is a main theme of the Rigveda, which distinguishes humans as votaries of rita or enemies of rita. Rita (right, rite) invokes the principle of order, restraint, generosity and altruistic compassion. It is universal law that works for the benefit of all creation. The gods and sages preserves this order, and the right thinking man must do likewise and if he does he is an arya (noble). Those whose inclination is for pleasure, power and possession violate the Rita, knowingly or unknowingly; and they are unarya (ignoble).” (2)

However, it is quite possible that ancient India was a multi-ethnic society with each group following a distinct tradition and culture. It is also possible that there existed in ancient India two distinct cultures or spiritual traditions in different geographical regions. As Sri Aurobindo states:

“The one thing that seems fairly established is that there were at least two types of ancient cultures in ancient India, the ‘Aryan’ occupying the Punjab and Northern and central India, Afghanistan, and perhaps Persia and distinguished in its cult by the symbols of the Sun, the Fire, and the Soma sacrifice, and the Un-Aryan occupying the East, South, and West, the nature of which it is quite impossible to restore from the scattered hints which are all we possess.” (3)

For example, along with the Vedic or the ‘Aryan’ religious and spiritual tradition and culture created by the Vedic sages with Sanskrit as the main language, there was in ancient India an equally deep and profound spiritual tradition of the Siddhas in the South created by great Yogis, with Tamil as its main language and its own distinct philosophy, literature, culture, and Yogic practices. Such things are possible in a spiritual civilization like India shaped by sages who created from the innermost depth and sources of their being in direct communion with divinity. A spiritually illumined sage can create a new and original language, tradition and culture. In fact, according to an Indian legend, Tamil language is created by the sage Agastya who is a Vedic sage. If there were many sages there could be many original languages, traditions, and cultures.

However, when we examine the history and literature of ancient India, we never find any conflict between the ‘Aryan-Sanskrit-Northern’ and the ‘Dravidian-Tamil-Southern’ cultures. As we have mentioned earlier, one of the Indian legends says that Tamil was created by Agastya who was a Vedic sage, but he is also venerated in the Siddha tradition in the South as one of its founders. Another Indian legend says that both Tamil and Sanskrit emanated from the Drum, Damaru of Shiva, ascribing equal divine origin to these two great and ancient languages of India. Southern kingdoms of India like the Chola, Pandya, Pallava, and Vijayanagara, where Tamil and other South Indian languages were spoken, actively and vigorously promoted Sanskrit and Vedic learning. In fact, some of the important and prestigious schools of Vedic learning were in South, for example, Kancheepuram. Similarly some of the greatest exponents of Vedic culture, who made important contributions to the preservation and propagation of Vedic culture, for example, Sankara, Ramanuja, Madhwa, Sayana, Baudhayana, belong to the South. Thus, there is no sign of any conflict between the ‘Aryan’ and ‘Dravidian’ people. So to convert cultural differences into a race conflict is a mischievous distortion which, as Sethna pointed out, can have harmful consequences for the solidarity of the Indian nation.

The difference in the structure of the language between Sanskrit and Tamil was cited by the invasion theorists as a strong argument in favour of their racial ideas. But when we examine more deeply and closely both these ancient languages of India, we may perhaps find that the difference is not as big or radical as it was made out by European scholars. However, such a statement can be made only by those who have made a deep comparative study of these two languages. To close with remarks by Sri Aurobindo:

“And there was always the difference of language to support the theory of meeting of races. But here also my preconceived ideas were disturbed and confounded. For on examining the vocables of the Tamil language, in appearance so foreign to the Sanskritic form and character, I yet found myself continually guided by words or by families of words supposed to be pure Tamil in establishing new relation between Sanskrit and its distant sister Latin and occasionally between Greek and Sanskrit. Sometimes the Tamil vocables not only suggested the connection, but found the missing link in a family of connected words. And it was through this Dravidian language that I came first to perceive what it seems to me now the true law, origin, and as it were, the etymology of the Aryan tongues. I was unable to pursue my examination far enough to establish any definite conclusion, but it certainly seems to me that the original connection between the Dravidian and Aryan tongue was far closer and more extensive than is usually supposed and the possibility suggests itself that they may even been two divergent families derived from one lost primitive tongue.” (4)

 Recent Discoveries and Evidence

We have discussed some of the arguments against the Aryan invasion model. Let us now look at some of the more recent evidences against the model. The first important discovery was regarding the Sarasvati river. The Rig Veda mentions seven rivers of which Sarasvati seems to be the largest and the most important of the Vedic people. Sarasvati seems to be the major river which sustained the Vedic civilization. However, most scholars considered Sarasvati as a mystical river. But recent archaeological and hydrological surveys supported by satellite photography indicate that such a great, ancient river flowed through Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan, emptying into the Arabian sea near Bhrigukucha, the modern Broach. Interestingly, archaeological survey conducted by American archaeologist Mark Kenoyer in 1991 showed the greatest concentration of Indus-valley sites were located not near the Indus river, but along the course of the ancient river Sarasvati. According to the emerging scientific opinion, this Sarasvati river dried up completely somewhere around 1900 BC, long before the supposed Aryan invasion around 1500 BC. Thus after the discovery of the Sarasvati river, scholarly opinion is veering around to the view that Harappan civilization ended not by Aryan invasion as it was believed by European scholars, but as a result of an ecological catastrophe which dried up the Sarasvati river. As a result, the Harappan population, abandoned their cities and migrated to the Gangetic plains. In the words of scientist- turned-historian, Navarathna S.Rajaram:

“The verdict of science therefore is clear and unambiguous: the Rig Veda describes the geography of North India as it was before the Sarasvati dried up. The Harappan civilization of the Indus Valley was a continuation of the Vedic; its ending coincided roughly with the final drying up of the Sarasvati in 2000BCE. So the idea of the Aryan invasion in1500BCE and the composition of the Rig Veda in 1200BCE are pure fiction. Since there was no invasion of any kind—all talk of Aryan-Dravidian wars is also a figment of imagination.”(1)

The second evidence from science comes from the research of American mathematician Seidenberg. Most of the historians still believe that Indian mathematics came later than Babylonia, Greek and Egyptian mathematics. But Seidenberg after extensive research on ancient mathematics has come to the following conclusion:

“Hence we do not hesitate to place the Vedic altar rituals or more exactly like them, far back of 1700 BC. To summarise the argument: the elements of ancient geometry found in Egypt and Babylonia stem from a ritual system of the kind observed in Sulabasutra.”(2)

Based on Seidenberg’s research some scholars like Navarathnam S.Rajaram, have come to the following conclusions:

i) The Vedic people possessed a fairly advanced mathematical knowledge needed for planning and building big cities of the Harappan civilization. This was confirmed by further studies on Harappan archaeology, and Vedic literature which show that Vedic mathematics texts were used in the design of the cities of Harappan civilization.

ii) Harappan civilization corresponds to the Sutra period in Vedic literature.

In the Vedic literature, the Sutras and Brahamnas belong to the post Rig Vedic period. Sutras contain mostly practical instructions on conduct and ritual. And Sulabasutra gives the mathematical formula for building ritual altars According to Seidenberg, old Babylonians of 1700 BC and the Egyptians of the Middle Kingdom of 2000 to 1800 BC derived their mathematics from the Sulabasutra.

As we have mentioned elsewhere, Sethna approaching from a different angle came to the same conclusion as Rajaram. When we link together the evidence or conclusion of Sethna, Seidenberg, Rajaram and other archeological evidences like the yoga-seal and five altars, it strongly reinforces the indigenous continuity of ancient Indian Civilization and very much undermines the theory of an alien invasion.

Interestingly, the mounting evidence and criticism against the invasion theory have made some of the supporters of the theory shift their position from the scenario of aggressive invasion to a milder migration. For example, a well-known Indian historian and a strong supporter of the invasion theory writes:

“It is now generally agreed that the decline of Harappan urbanism was due to environmental changes of various kinds, to political pressures and possible breaks in trading activities, and not to any invasion .Nor does the archaeological evidence register the likelihood of a massive migration from Iran into north-western India on such a scale as to overwhelm the existing culture. If invasion is discarded then the mechanism of migration and occasional contact come into sharper focus. The migration appear to have been of pastoral cattle-breeders who are prominent in Avesta and Rig Veda.”(3)

But this new version of the theory does not solve the cultural anomalies of the older version. As David Frawley, commenting on this migration theory, points out:

“How can small groups of pastoral migrants accomplish changing the language of a country as big as a subcontinent—which already has given birth to its own great civilization—and imposing their own culture and social system upon it? It is highly improbable and almost absurd. An existent complex cultural order—such as ancient Indian indicates—can assimilate easily a few cattle breeders moving in, but such groups cannot be given the credit to assimilate the whole culture of a big country.”(4)

So if we are willing to drop the idea of an alien intrusion, then all the archaeological and literary evidence fits together into a simple and coherent picture of ancient India. All this new thinking, research and evidence have left a dent on the established opinion. A recent Publication on Indian History by Encyclopedia Britannica, says:

“The decline of Mohenjodaro is no longer attributed to Indo-Aryan invasion, migrations, disease or flood as proposed by earlier scholars, but rather to a combination of factors that include the changing river system, the disruption of the subsistence base, and a breakdown in the important integrative factors of trade and religion.”(5)

The New Model

But what is precisely this new picture of ancient India? In the previous section we have discussed mainly the arguments, facts and evidences against the Aryan invasion theory. But what are the positive conclusion and alternative view points emerging from this debate on Aryan invasion theory? To answer this question, we present here the conclusions of one of the leading exponents of the new school of History.

“The New model of ancient India that has emerged from the collapse of the Aryan invasion theory is that of an indigenous development of civilization in ancient India from the Mehrgarh site of 6500BC.The people in this tradition are the same basic ethnic groups as in India today, with their same basic types of languages –Indo-European and Dravidian. There is a progressive process of the domestication of animals, particularly cattle, the development of agriculture, beginning with barley and then later wheat and rice and the use of metal, beginning with copper and culminating in iron, along with the development of villages and towns. Later Harappan (Saravati) civilization 3100-1900 BC show massive cities, complex agriculture and metallurgy, sophistication of arts and crafts and precision in weights and measures. This Sarasvati civilization was a center of trading and for the diffusion of civilization throughout South and West Asia, which often dominated the Mesopotamian region.

Post-Harappan civilization 1900-1000BC shows the abandonment of the Harrapan towns owing to ecological and river changes but without a real break in the continuity of the culture. There is a decentralization and relocation in which the same basic agricultural and artistic traditions continue, along with a few significant urban sites like Dwaraka. This gradually develops into the Gangetic civilization of the first millennium BC, which is the classical civilization of ancient India, which retains its memory of its origin in the Sarasvati region through the Vedas.”(6)

 

Literary Sources: The Vedas

Our discussion so far is based mainly on archaeological and scientific discoveries. But a more extensive source of information for understanding ancient India are the literary sources like the Vedas. We will discuss this ancient sacred literature of India in greater detail in our subsequent chapters. Here, in this section, we will take a bird’s eye-view of some of the apparent facts of the vedic literature as it appears to an ordinary view with no deep insight, and see what it tells us about ancient India. We use the term Vedas or vedic literature to include the four Vedas, Brahmanas and the Upanishads.

The first impression we get when we take a sweeping view of vedic literature is that like all ancient civilizations, religion dominates the life of the people. When we look at the outer forms of religion, we find ritualistic sacrifice—by pouring oblations into the fire, with a belief that it is carried by the fire to the gods—seems to the main practice. When we look at the religious thought of the Vedas we find a bewildering range from what appears to be a primitive, nature worshipping and polytheistic religion of the early vedism to the most spiritually advanced religion of the later Upanishads. However even in the early vedic religion which in its outer form seems to be predominantly naturalistic or ritualistic, praying for mundane objects like cows and horses, we find sometimes sublime and beautiful verses which express deep and profound spiritual thoughts or lofty monism. We give here below a few verses from the vedic literature to show the apparent range of vedic religious thought:

“Give us treasure of cattle, or heroes, O Dawn, treasure of horses that nourishes many. Make not our altar grass a reproach among men, O Gods, protect us with blessings.” (Rig Veda).

“Heaven and Earth bow before Him, the mountains are in fear of His might, who is known as the soma-drinker, with thunderbolt on his arms, He, O, men, is Indra.” (Rig Veda)

“Varuna spread abroad the air through the forests, he put speed in horses, milk in cows, intellect in the heart, Agni in the waters, the Sun in the sky, Soma in the mountain.” (Rig Veda)

“The Universal Being (the purusha) has infinite heads, unnumbered eyes, and unnumbered feet . Enveloping the universe on every side, He exists transcending it…..From a part of Him was born the body of the universe. Out of it were born the gods, the earth, and men.” (Rig Veda)

“That which exists is the One, sages call it variously.” (Rig Veda)

“That moves and That moves not; That is far and the same is near; That is within all this and That also is outside all that.” (Isha Upanishad)

“But he who sees everywhere the self in all existences and all existences in the self, shrink not therefore from ought.” (Isha Upanished)

What is the process by which this progress took place from a seemingly primitive religion of the early vedism to sublime spirituality of the Upanishad? Is it a gradual spiritual progression? Or is the Upanishadic religion, as most western scholars believed, an abrupt revolt or departure from the primitive and ritualistic religion of early vedism or else as Sri Aurobindo suggests, it is only a restatement and recovery of a spiritual knowledge which was already present in early vedism, but concealed behind symbols of outer life and nature? These are important question for understanding the deeper truth of Indian civilization.

When we come to the geographical and social condition of the Vedic age, the Vedic literature talks about several rivers and two oceans, cows, horses and cattle, towns and cities, kings and wars, merchants and trade and a fourfold social order. In Rig Veda there were constant references to conflict between Aryans who are the favorites of the gods and Dasyus and the various forms of demons. The gods, especially Indra was frequently invoked by the Aryans for help and protection against their enemies, Dasyus and demons. Dasyus were sometimes described as dark and stub-nosed. This has given birth to speculations amongst scholars, especially aryan invasion theorists, that the Dasyus were perhaps the dark-skinned Dravidians. But there are many verses in the Rig Vedas in which Dasyus are described as ‘noseless’, ‘handless’ and ‘footless’ which makes us wonder whether Dasyus are human being or denizens of another world.

All these references in the Vedas may help us to have some image of the economic, social and political life and geography of ancient India. However, If the early vedism turns out to be what Sri Aurobindo has suggested, and these antique vedic hymns are the expressions of the spiritual experience and discoveries of the vedic seers, expressed in the symbols of outer life, then all the objects, events, and beings described in the vedic hymns acquire a deeper symbolic and spiritual significance.

When we pass from the early vedic to the later Upanishadic age, as described in the Upanishads, we find a remarkable civilization in which people from every section of the society—lowly outcastes, kings, merchants, ascetics—seeking for the highest truth of the spirit. If this great spiritual efflorescence of the Upanishad is not a sudden growth unrelated to the past but only a recovery or rekindling of the spiritual knowledge inherent in the earlier age, then the beginnings of Indian civilization points out to a unique civilization and culture which has a special, or natural and inborn affinity to religion and spirituality.

 

___________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

One of the main ideas used to interpret - and generally devalue - the ancient history of India is the theory of the Aryan invasion. According to this account, India was invaded and conquered by nomadic light-skinned Indo-European tribes from Central Asia around 1500-100 BC, who overthrew an earlier and more advanced dark-skinned Dravidian civilization from which they took most of what later became Hindu culture. This so-called pre-Aryan civilization is said to be evidenced by the large urban ruins of what has been called the "Indus valley culture" (as most of its initial sites were on the Indus River). The war between the powers of light and darkness, a prevalent idea in ancient Aryan Vedic scriptures, was thus interpreted to refer to this war between light and dark- skinned peoples. The Aryan invasion theory thus turned the "Vedas", the original scriptures of ancient India and the Indo-Aryans, into little more than primitive poems of uncivilized plunderers.

This idea - totally foreign to the history of India, whether north or south - has become almost an unquestioned truth in the interpretation of ancient history Today, after nearly all the reasons for its supposed validity have been refuted, even major Western scholars are at last beginning to call it in question.

In this article we will summarize the main points that have arisen. This is a complex subject that I have dealt with in depth in my book "Gods, Sages and Kings: Vedic Secrets of Ancient Civilization", for those interested in further examination of the subject.

The Indus valley culture was pronounced pre-Aryans for several reasons that were largely part of the cultural milieu of nineteenth century European thinking as scholars following Max Mullar had decided that the Aryans came into India around 1500 BC, since the Indus valley culture was earlier than this, they concluded that it had to be pre-Aryan. Yet the rationale behind the late date for the Vedic culture given by Muller was totally speculative. Max Muller, like many of the Christian scholars of his era, believed in Biblical chronology. This placed the beginning of the world at 400 BC and the flood around 2500 BC. Assuming to those two dates, it became difficult to get the Aryans in India before 1500 BC.

Muller therefore assumed that the five layers of the four 'Vedas' & 'Upanishads' were each composed in 200 year periods before the Buddha at 500 BC. However, there are more changes of language in Vedic Sanskrit itself than there are in classical Sanskrit since Panini, also regarded as a figure of around 500 BC, or a period of 2500 years. Hence it is clear that each of these periods could have existed for any number of centuries and that the 200 year figure is totally arbitrary and is likely too short a figure.

It was assumed by these scholars - many of whom were also Christian missionaries unsympathetic to the 'Vedas' - that the Vedic culture was that of primitive nomads from Central Asia. Hence they could not have founded any urban culture like that of the Indus valley. The only basis for this was a rather questionable interpretation of the 'Rig Veda' that they made, ignoring the sophisticated nature of the culture presented within it.

Meanwhile, it was also pointed out that in the middle of the second millennium BC, a number of Indo-European invasions apparently occurred in the Middle East, wherein Indo-European peoples - the Hittites, Mittani and Kassites - conquered and ruled Mesopotamia for some centuries. An Aryan invasion of India would have been another version of this same movement of Indo-European peoples. On top of this, excavators of the Indus valley culture, like Wheeler, thought they found evidence of destruction of the culture by an outside invasion confirming this.

The Vedic culture was thus said to be that of primitive nomads who came out of Central Asia with their horse-drawn chariots and iron weapons and overthrew the cities of the more advanced Indus valley culture, with their superior battle tactics. It was pointed out that no horses; chariots
or iron was discovered in Indus valley sites.

This was how the Aryan invasion theory formed and has remained since then. Though little has been discovered that confirms this theory, there has been much hesitancy to question it, much less to give it up.

Further excavations discovered horses not only in Indus Valley sites but also in pre-Indus sites. The use of the horse has thus been proven for the whole range of ancient Indian history. Evidence of the wheel, and an Indus seal showing a spoked wheel as used in chariots, has also been found, suggesting the usage of chariots.

Moreover, the whole idea of nomads with chariots has been challenged. Chariots are not the vehicles of nomads. Their usage occurred only in ancient urban cultures with much flat land, of which the river plain of north India was the most suitable. Chariots are totally unsuitable for crossing mountains and deserts, as the so-called Aryan invasion required.

That the Vedic culture used iron - & must hence date later than the introduction of iron around 1500 BC - revolves around the meaning of the Vedic term "ayas", interpreted as iron. 'Ayas' in other Indo - European languages like Latin or German usually means copper, bronze or ore generally, not specially iron. There is no reason to insist that in such earlier Vedic times, 'ayas' meant iron, particularly since other metals are not mentioned in the 'Rig Veda' (except gold that is much more commonly referred to than ayas). Moreover, the 'Atharva Veda' and 'Yajur Veda' speak of different colors of 'ayas'(such as red & black), showing that it was a generic term.
Hence it is clear that 'ayas' generally meant metal and not specifically iron.

Moreover, the enemies of the Vedic people in the 'Rig Veda' also use ayas, even for making their cities, as do the Vedic people themselves. Hence there is nothing in Vedic literature to show that either the Vedic culture was an iron- based culture or that there enemies were not.

The 'Rig Veda' describes its Gods as 'destroyers of cities'. This was used also to regard the Vedic as a primitive non-urban culture that destroys cities and urban civilization. However, there are also many verses in the 'Rig Veda' that speak of the Aryans as having cities of their own and being protected by cities upto a hundred in number. Aryan Gods like Indra, Agni, Saraswati and the Adityas are praised as being like a city. Many ancient kings, including those of Egypt and Mesopotamia, had titles like destroyer or conquerer of cities. This does not turn them into nomads. Destruction of cities so happens in modern wars; this does not make those who do this are nomads. Hence the idea of Vedic culture as destroying but not building the cities is based upon ignoring what the Vedas actually say about their own cities. Further excavation revealed that the Indus Valley culture was not destroyed by outside invasion, but according to internal causes and, most likely, floods. Most recently a new set of cities has been found in India (like the Dwaraka and Bet Dwarka sites by S.R. Rao and the National Institute of Oceanography in India) which are intermediate between those of the Indus culture and later ancient India as visited y the Greeks. This may eliminate the so-called Dark Age following the presumed Aryan invasion and shows a continuous urban occupation India back to the beginning of the Indus culture.

The interpretation of the religion of the Indus Valley culture -made incidentally by scholars such as Wheeler who were not religious scholars much less students of Hinduism - was that its religion was different than the Vedic and more likely the later Shaivite religion. However, further excavations - both in Indus Valley site in Gujarat, like Lothal, and those in Rajsthan, like Kalibangan - show large number of fire altars like those used in the Vedic religion, along with bones of oxen, potsherds, shell jewelry and other items used in the rituals described in the 'Vedic Brahmanas'. Hence the Indus Valley culture evidences many Vedic practices that can not be merely coincidental. That some of its practices appeared non-Vedic to its excavators may also be attributed to their misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of Vedic and Hindu culture generally, wherein Vedism and Shaivism are the same basic tradition.

We must remember that ruins do not necessarily have one interpretation. Nor does the ability to discover ruins necessarily give the ability to interpret them correctly.

The Vedic people were thought to have been a fair-skinned race like the Europeans owing to the Vedic idea of a war between light and darkness, and the Vedic people being presented as children of light or children of the sun. Yet this idea of a war between light and darkness exists in most ancient cultures, including the Persian and the Egyptian. Why don't we interpret their scriptures as a war between light and dark-skinned people? It is purely a poetic metaphor, not a cultural statement. Moreover, no real traces of such a race are found in India.

Anthropologists have observed that the present population of Gujarat is composed of more or less the same ethnic groups as are noticed at Lothal in 2000 BC. Similarly, the present population of the Punjab is said to be ethnically the same as the population of Harappa and Rupar 4000 years ago. Linguistically the present day population of Gujrat and Punjab belongs to the Indo-Aryan language-speaking group. The only inference that can be drawn from the anthropological and linguistic evidences adduced above is that the Harappan population in
the Indus Valley and Gujrat in 2000 BC was composed of two or more groups, the more dominant among them having very close ethnic affinities with the present day Indo-Aryan speaking population of India.

In other words there is no racial evidence of any such Indo-Aryan invasion of India but only of continuity of the same group of people who traditionally considered themselves to be Aryans.

There are many points in fact that prove the Vedic nature of the Indus Valley culture. Further excavation has shown that the great majority of the sites of the Indus Valley culture were east, not west of Indus. In fact, the largest concentration of sites appears in an area of Punjab and Rajasthan near the dry banks of ancient Saraswati and Drishadvati rivers. The Vedic culture was said to have been founded by the sage Manu between the banks of Saraswati and Drishadvati rivers. The Saraswati is lauded as the main river (naditama) in the 'Rig Veda' & is the most frequently mentioned in the text. It is said to be a great flood and to be wide, even endless in size. Saraswati is said to be "pure in course from the mountains to the sea". Hence the Vedic people were well acquainted with this river and regarded it as their immemorial homeland.

The Saraswati, as modern land studies now reveal, was indeed one of the largest, if not the largest river in India. In early ancient and pre-historic times, it once drained the Sutlej, Yamuna and the Ganges, whose courses were much different than they are today. However, the Saraswati River went dry at the end of the Indus Valley culture and before the so-called Aryan invasion or before 1500 BC. In fact this may have caused the ending of the Indus culture. How could the Vedic Aryans know of this river and establish their culture on its banks if it dried up before they arrived? Indeed the Saraswati as described in the 'Rig Veda' appears to more accurately show it as it was prior to the Indus Valley culture as in the Indus era it was already in decline.

Vedic and late Vedic texts also contain interesting astronomical lore. The Vedic calendar was based upon astronomical sightings of the equinoxes and solstices. Such texts as 'Vedanga Jyotish' speak of a time when the vernal equinox was in the middle of the Nakshtra Aslesha (or about 23 degrees 20 minutes Cancer). This gives a date of 1300 BC. The 'Yajur Veda' and 'Atharva Veda' speak of the vernal equinox in the Krittikas (Pleiades; early Taurus) and the summer solstice (ayana) in Magha (early Leo). This gives a date about 2400 BC. Yet earlier eras are mentioned but these two have numerous references to substantiate them. They prove that the Vedic culture existed at these periods and already had a sophisticated system of astronomy. Such references were merely ignored or pronounced unintelligible by Western scholars because they yielded too early a date for the 'Vedas' than what they presumed, not because such references did not exist.

Vedic texts like 'Shatapatha Brahmana' and 'Aitereya Brahmana' that mention these astronomical references list a group of 11 Vedic Kings, including a number of figures of the 'Rig Veda', said to have conquered the region of India from 'sea to sea'. Lands of the Aryans are mentioned in them from Gandhara (Afghanistan) in the west to Videha (Nepal) in the east, and south to Vidarbha (Maharashtra). Hence the Vedic people were in these regions by the Krittika equinox or before 2400 BC. These passages were also ignored by Western scholars and it was said by them that the 'Vedas' had no evidence of large empires in India in Vedic times. Hence a pattern of ignoring literary evidence or misinterpreting them to suit the Aryan invasion idea became prevalent, even to the point of changing the meaning of Vedic words to suit this theory.

According to this theory, the Vedic people were nomads in the Punjab, coming down from Central Asia. However, the 'Rig Veda' itself has nearly 100 references to ocean (samudra), as well as dozens of references to ships, and to rivers flowing in to the sea. Vedic ancestors like Manu, Turvasha, Yadu and Bhujyu are flood figures, saved from across the sea. The Vedic God of the sea, Varuna, is the father of many Vedic seers and seer families like Vasishta, Agastya and the Bhrigu seers. To preserve the Aryan invasion idea it was assumed that the Vedic (and later Sanskrit) term for ocean, samudra, originally did not mean the ocean but any large body of water, especially the Indus river in Punjab. Here the clear meaning of a term in 'Rig Veda' and later times - verified by rivers like Saraswati mentioned by name as flowing into the sea - was altered to make the Aryan invasion theory fit. Yet if we look at the index to translation of the 'Rig Veda' by Griffith for example, who held to this idea that samudra didn't really mean the ocean, we find over 70 references to ocean or sea. If samudra does not mean ocean why was it translated as such? It is therefore without basis to locate Vedic kings in Central Asia far from any ocean or from the massive Saraswati River, which form the background of their land and the symbolism of their hymns.

One of the latest archeological ideas is that the Vedic culture is evidenced by Painted Grey Ware pottery in north India, which appears to date around 1000 BC and comes from the same region between the Ganges and Yamuna as later Vedic culture is related to. It is thought to be an inferior grade of pottery and to be associated with the use of iron that the 'Vedas' are thought to mention. However it is associated with a pig and rice culture, not the cow and barley culture of the 'Vedas'. Moreover it is now found to be an organic development of indigenous pottery, not an introduction of invaders.

Painted Grey Ware culture represents an indigenous cultural development and does not reflect any cultural intrusion from the West i.e. an Indo-Aryan invasion. Therefore, there is no archeological evidence corroborating the fact of an Indo-Aryan invasion.

In addition, the Aryans in the Middle East, most notably the Hittites, have now been found to have been in that region atleast as early as 2200 BC, wherein they are already mentioned. Hence the idea of an Aryan invasion into the Middle East has been pushed back some centuries, though the evidence so far is that the people of the moun- tain regions of the Middle East were Indo-Europeans as far as recorded history can prove.

The Aryan Kassites of the ancient Middle East worshipped Vedic Gods like Surya and the Maruts, as well as one named Himalaya. The Aryan Hittites and Mittani signed a treaty with the name of the Vedic Gods Indra, Mitra, Varuna and Nasatyas around 1400 BC. The Hittites have a treatise on chariot racing written in almost pure Sanskrit. The Indo -Europeans of the ancient Middle East thus spoke Indo-Aryan, not Indo-Iranian languages and thereby show a Vedic culture in that region of the world as well.

The Indus Valley culture had a form of writing, as evidenced by numerous seals found in the ruins. It was also assumed to be non-Vedic and probably Dravidian, though this was never proved. Now it has been shown that the majority of the late Indus signs are identical with those of later Hindu Brahmi and that there is an organic development between the two scripts. Prevalent models now suggest an Indo-European base for that language.

It was also assumed that the Indus Valley culture derived its civilization from the Middle East, probably Sumeria, as antecedents for it were not found in India. Recent French excavations at Mehrgarh have shown that all the antecedents of the Indus Valley culture can be found within the subcontinent and going back before 6000 BC. In short, some Western scholars are beginning to reject the Aryan invasion or any outside origin for Hindu civilization.

Current archeological data do not support the existence of an Indo- Aryan or European invasion into South Asia at any time in the pre- or protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural development from prehistoric to historic periods. The early Vedic literature describes not a human invasion into the area, but a fundamental restructuring of indigenous society. The Indo-Aryan invasion as an academic concept in 18th and 19th century Europe reflected the cultural milieu of the period. Linguistic data were used to validate the concept that in turn was used to interpret archeological and anthropological data.

In other words, Vedic literature was interpreted on the assumption that there was an Aryan invasion. Then archeological evidence was interpreted by the same assumption. And both interpretations were then used to justify each other. It is nothing but a tautology, an exercise in circular thinking that only proves that if assuming something is true, it is found to be true!

Another modern Western scholar, Colin Renfrew, places the Indo- Europeans in Greece as early as 6000 BC. He also suggests such a possible early date for their entry into India.

As far as I can see there is nothing in the Hymns of the 'Rig Veda' which demonstrates that the Vedic-speaking population was intrusive to the area: this comes rather from a historical assumption of the 'coming of the Indo-Europeans.

When Wheeler speaks of 'the Aryan invasion of the land of the 7 rivers, the Punjab', he has no warranty at all, so far as I can see. If one checks the dozen references in the 'Rig Veda' to the 7 rivers, there is nothing in them that to me implies invasion: the land of the 7 rivers is the land of the 'Rig Veda', the scene of action. Nor is it implied that the inhabitants of the walled cities (including the Dasyus) were any more aboriginal than the Aryans themselves.

Despite Wheeler's comments, it is difficult to see what is particularly non-Aryan about the Indus Valley civilization. Hence Renfrew suggests that the Indus Valley civilization was in fact Indo-Aryan even prior to the Indus Valley era:

This hypothesis that early Indo-European languages were spoken in North India with Pakistan and on the Iranian plateau at the 6th millennium BC has the merit of harmonizing symmetrically with the theory for the origin of the Indo- European languages in Europe. It also emphasizes the continuity in the Indus Valley and adjacent areas from the early Neolithic through to the floruit of the Indus Valley civilization.

This is not to say that such scholars appreciate or understand the 'Vedas' - their work leaves much to be desired in this respect - but that it is clear that the whole edifice built around the Aryan invasion is beginning to tumble on all sides. In addition, it does not mean that the 'Rig Veda' dates from the Indus Valley era. The Indus Valley culture resembles that of the ‘Yajur Veda’ and reflects the pre-Indus period in India, when the Saraswati River was more prominent.

The acceptance of such views would create a revolution in our view of history as shattering as that in science caused by Einstein's theory of relativity. It would make ancient India perhaps the oldest, largest and most central of ancient cultures. It would mean that the Vedic literary record - already the largest and oldest of the ancient world even at a 1500 BC date - would be the record of teachings some centuries or thousands of years before that. It would mean that the 'Vedas' are our most authentic record of the ancient world. It would also tend to validate the Vedic view that the Indo-Europeans and other Aryan peoples were migrants from India, not that the Indo-Aryans were invaders into India. Moreover, it would affirm the Hindu tradition that the Dravidians were early offshoots of the Vedic people through the seer Agastya, and not unaryan peoples.

In closing, it is important to examine the social and political implications of the Aryan invasion idea: First, it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian cultures that were made hostile to each other. This kept the Hindus divided and is still a source of social tension.

Second, it gave the British an excuse in their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago.

Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from Middle Eastern cultures. With the proximity and relationship of the latter with the Bible and Christianity, this kept the Hindu religion as a sidelight to the development of religion and civilization to the West.

Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis, as any Vedic basis was largely disqualified by the primitive nature of the Vedic culture.

This discredited not only the 'Vedas' but the genealogies of the 'Puranas' and their long list of the kings before the Buddha or Krishna was left without any historical basis. The 'Mahabharata', instead of a civil war in which all the main kings of India participated as it is described, became a local skirmish among petty princes that was later exaggerated by poets. In short, it discredited the most of the Hindu tradition and almost all its ancient literature. It turned its scriptures and sages into fantacies and exaggerations.

This served a social, political and economical purpose of domination, proving the superiority of Western culture and religion. It made the Hindus feel that their culture was not the great thing that their sages and ancestors had said it was. It made Hindus feel ashamed of their culture - that its basis was neither historical nor scientific. It made them feel that the main line of civilization was developed first in the Middle East and then in Europe and that the culture of India was peripheral and secondary to the real development of world culture.

Such a view is not good scholarship or archeology but merely cultural imperialism. The Western Vedic scholars did in the intellectual sphere what the British army did in the political realm - discredit, divide and conquer the Hindus.

In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary nor archeological but political and religious - that is to say, not scholarship but prejudice. Such prejudice may not have been intentional but deep-seated political and religious views easily cloud and blur our thinking. It is unfortunate that this approach has not been questioned more, particularly by Hindus. Even though Indian Vedic scholars like Dayananda Saraswati, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Arobindo rejected it, most Hindus today passively accept it. They allow Western, generally Christian, scholars to interpret their history for them and quite naturally Hinduism is kept in a reduced role. Many Hindus still accept, read or even honor the translations of the 'Vedas' done by such Christian missionary scholars as Max Muller, Griffith, Monier- Williams and H. H. Wilson. Would modern Christians accept an interpretation of the Bible or Biblical history done by Hindus aimed at converting them to Hinduism? Universities in India also use the Western history books and Western Vedic translations that propound such views that denigrate their own culture and country.

The modern Western academic world is sensitive to criticisms of cultural and social biases. For scholars to take a stand against this biased interpretation of the 'Vedas' would indeed cause a reexamination of many of these historical ideas that can not stand objective scrutiny. But if Hindu scholars are silent or passively accept the misinterpretation of their own culture, it will undoubtedly continue, but they will have no one to blame but themselves. It is not an issue to be taken lightly, because how a culture is defined historically creates the perspective from which it is viewed in the modern social and intellectual context. Tolerance is not in allowing a false view of one's own culture and religion to be propagated without question. That is merely self-betrayal.

@@@@@@@

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Aryan Invasion theory- Something I am being taught in school right from 5th grade. Unlike most of my classmates who read subjective fields like history and sociology, get influenced by the school of thought which the text book imposes, complying with the personal biases of majority of their professors, prefer not doing additional research or thinking out of the text instead, write in paper whatever is indoctrinated in them, I generally look for a more compatible and objective way of finding historical truth and strongly abide by the reality –  although in paper, I need to show them what they “want” to see. 

This fallacy of the Indian educational system forced me to explore the truth out of the conformity since within the Institution, never have I ever experienced an environment of free academic debate.

This article consists of 5 main parts-

A. Explanation of the Aryan invasion theory

B. Reasons for its proposal

C. Refutation of the Theory – 8 arguments against the AIT

D. Counter theory based on interpretation of Indo – Greek (Hindu – Pagan) similarities in culture and linguistics

E. Ending notes and future of the AIT

****************************************************

A] What is the Aryan Invasion Theory –

It states that “Aryan” were a race of tall, fair and blue – eyed people who migrated to the Indian subcontinent from Eastern Europe and Central Asia between 1500 – 2000 BCE, waged war against the original inhabitants of India – the Dasyus or Dravidians of the Indus Valley civilization who were comparatively darker and shorter and forced them to adapt their own Vedic Culture and norms while pushing the Dasyus Southwards.

While the Aryans did this, they designated the caste of “Shudra” to the native Indians while they maintained their ethnic purity of Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas.

B] Why the Aryan Invasion Theory – Reasons by the British. 

The proposal of the Theory was an attempt to explain the entry and development of the Hindu Culture which exists today in India along with the Caste system which has a big role to play in society.

It also fairly explains why many people in India have a taller and fairer complexion as compared to others. The Theory also proposes a possibility for the decline of the Indus Valley Civilization or the Harappa civilization at the hands of the Aryan Invaders. This Theory was first proposed by the British Historians when India was a British colony.

C] Refutation of the Aryan Invasion Theory–

1) “Vedic invaders” refutation–

Aryan Invasion Theory states that Aryans, a race entered India from Europe “with the Vedic Culture”.

This point is refuted by the argument – the oldest of the Vedas – Rig Veda mentions all climatic and geographic conditions, plant and animal species and soil conditions that belong to Central and North West parts of the Indian subcontinent.

It would have definitely been impossible for people living in Central Asia and Europe to be aware of these.

2) The Saraswati River argument-

The Rig Veda also makes a special mention of the Saraswati River (Rig veda 7:36:6 and others) which has been proved to be an existing River between 9000 and 5000 years back by a paper published in Nature’s Science Magazine in November, 2019. This period highly contradicts the period when Aryans were said to have come.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-53489-4

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-05745-8

3) Corruption of terminologies by the British-

The term “Aryan” is a Western one used by the British. The Sanskrit term is “Arya” and Arya doesn’t equate to being a “Race” as the English historians mention. Arya simply means a Noble Person while Dasyu too doesn’t refer to a group of people but rather is synonymous for a “thief” or an “evil person” in Sanskrit Language.

4) Authenticity of Ancient Indian History-

The texts Ramayan and Mahabharata which with adequate amount of evidence have been proved to have been narrated since 7000 and 5000 years respectively do mention the term “Aryavrata” (Land of the Nobles) for the Indian Subcontinent or “Bharatvarsh” (Named after King Bharat) at that time. These two epics too have been proved to match the astronomical positioning of the stars with that of what is mentioned in the texts as time of the events.

https://detechter.com/evidences-that-support-mahabharata-actually-happened/

https://www.boloji.com/articles/1052/dating-mahabharata–two-eclipses-in-thirteen-days

https://www.vifindia.org/transcriptions-paper/2012/07/03/scientific-dating-of-ancient-events-from-7000-bc-to-2000-bc

5) The so called Aryans and Harappas-

The existence of the submerged city of Dwarka which according to archaeological studies proves to date back 9000 years (7000 BCE) points towards the high probability of the Harrapa and Vedic civilizations to be one and the same, living in co-existence.

https://www.newindianexpress.com/lifestyle/spirituality/2018/aug/12/the-mythical-city-of-dwarka-1855600.html

The reasons for decline of the Indus Valley civilization holds true merely on the following reasons which are enough to perish any ancient civilization –

i) Changing river patterns leading to loss of water and ineffective drainage system.

ii) Pattern of earthquakes

iii) Proof for diseases in the civilization like leprosy, plague, small pox, etc.

iv) Drastic change in climatic conditions

6) Archaeological dissimilarities-

There appears to be absolutely no similarly between ancient Indian architecture and ancient European or Central Asian architecture which again disapproves the Theory. A civilized, cultural “race” would definitely have left some traces of its development in its place of origin and the same would have been seen in the new place where they would migrate. But this trace is absent completely.

7) DNA argument refutation post experiment-

Later studies have also found evidence for a common gene – R1A1 haplogroup which is common to some Indians as well as Europeans and is called an “Eurasian Gene” implying a gene found at the stretch of India as well as Europe.

This argument falls weak as a result of a study conducted by a team of Journal of Human Genetics which shows a common pattern of the presence of that gene in the percentage of samples collected across the Indian subcontinent from Pakistan in the West to tribals in the East, Kashmiris in the North to the southern Indian States and not only this, but a proportionate sample from all Castes mentioned in the Hindu Scriptures.

This shows that the proposal of a race with a distinguished DNA invading a place and giving a separate caste to the people of that land fails to prove its authenticity when subjected with scientific DNA testing.

https://www.nature.com/articles/jhg20082

8) Colour difference-

The difference in complexion among the Indians too appears to follow the most common pattern which is the universal truth – as a country in the Northern Hemisphere, the

Southern parts of the subcontinent, bring closer to the equator experience more heat as compared to the northern parts.

Hence, the complexion of Indians gradually gets lighter as one moves from extreme South to extreme North. The complexion of Indians on the West – East axis (from Gujarat to Arunachal Pradesh) remains more or less the exact same considering an average altitude throughout the scale.

The explanation of complexion difference through the Aryan Invasion Theory seems to hold no substance at all since this difference is thoroughly based on geographic conditions! 

D] Alternative Possibility of reverse migration

This research on the contrary reverses the migration as proposed earlier and gives incentive to do studies on whether there was migration from the Indian subcontinent towards other countries with more models such as common linguistics between Sanskrit and Greek along with other Latin derived languages as well as many common elements between Indian Hindu and Greek Pagan Mythology and culture have been found in abundance.

This gives some idea that English is not a direct derivative from Latin but there is some amount of Sanskrit interference either directly from Sanskrit to English or indirectly through Latin.

This evolution of linguistics with this deep similarity is next to impossible considering there was no migration from one side.

Out of many a few shall be listed as evidence and incentives for further speculation on the topic by the readers –

1) Cultural Similarities–

Ramayan, Mahabharat and The Trojan War.

Derivation of Saturday, Sunday and Monday from the same planets by both – Babylonians and Indians.

(Saturday, Shanivaar – named after Saturn or Shani.

Sunday, Ravivaar – named after the Sun or Ravi.

Monday, Saumvaar – named after the Moon or Saum) 

The common pagan deities – Indra and Lord Zeus (both the king of all Gods,Responsible for lightning and Thunder and in possession of a similar looking weapon)

Hindus and Greek pagans – Nature Worshippers, idol worshippers and have a God for everything – Sky, Fire, Water, Sun, Planets, etc.

Similarities between the Greek and Indian Epics – Mahabharata, Ramayana

2) Linguistic Similarities–

Common linguistics between Sanskrit and and English with Latin as the mediating language

Sweet and स्वाद

Penta and पंच

Dental and दन्त:

Man and मनु

Cow and गौ 

Mother and मैत्री

Anonymous and अनामिका

Door and द्वार

Medium and मध्यम

Me and मम:

Credible reference-

This idea of opposite migration has also been highly elaborated and explained in the book called, “Return of The Aryans” Authored by Shri. Bhagwandas Gidwani.

https://penguin.co.in/book/fiction/return-of-the-aryans/

E] Ending Notes-

1) Success of Agenda-

The Aryan Invasion Theory was a great weapon for the British to defend their narrative of being foreigners and invaders and justifying the same with designating the Hindus of India with the same title.

This Theory successfully divided the already unstable Hindu Society during the British rule on the grounds of caste, colour, ethnicity and North – South geography.

2) Future of the Aryan Invasion Theory-

It is unfortunate that many schools still teach the AIT not as a mere theory but as the truth. However, in recent times there have been historians and archaeologists refuting with debates, discussions and research articles that are published either to defend or refute the AIT.

For the first time in the history of independent India, this topic is being given attention in a number of educational institutions. However, there is no change or addition of reverse arguments or refutation of the AIT that seems to be present in the history text books of today. The HRD ministry under the current Indian Government will hopefully bring a change through their New Educational Policy after 60 years of previous government’s monopoly on the subject of History – agenda based, biased, falsified and truth suppressing History.

@@@

 

In a major finding that could impact the understanding of Indian ancestry, the DNA study of a 4500-year-old skeleton found in Rakhigarhi, in Haryana, suggests that modern people in India are likely to have descended from the same population. 

These path-breaking insights came to light after scientists were able to sequence genome from the skeleton of a woman and study the archaeological evidence found in Rakhigarhi, a village located some 150 kilometers from Delhi.  Rakhigarhi is the largest Harappan site in India. 

“The ancient-DNA results completely reject the theory of steppe pastoral or ancient Iranian farmers as source of ancestry to the Harappan population. This research also demolishes the hypothesis about mass human migration during the Harappan time from outside South Asia,” Prof Vasant Shinde, director of the Rakhigarhi project, said. 

Shinde said the new breakthrough completely sets aside the Aryan migration or invasion theory. “The skeletal remains found in the upper part of the citadel area of Mohenjodaro belonged to those who died due to floods and not (of those) massacred by the Aryans as hypothesised by Sir Mortimer Wheeler. The Aryan invasion theory is based on very flimsy ground,” Shinde said, adding that the history being taught to us in text books should now be changed.

The DNA revealed that there was no migration or inclusion of any Iran or Central Asian gene into Harappan people. "There is a continuity till the modern times. We are descendants of the Harappans. Even the Vedic culture and (that of) Harappans are same,” Shinde said.

“This research, for the first time, has established the fact that people of Harappan civilisation are the ancestors of most population of South Asia. For the first time, the research indicates movement of people from east to west. The Harappan people's presence is evident at sites like Gonur in Turkmenistan and Shahr-i-Sokhta in Iran. As the Harappans traded with Mesopotamia, Egypt, Persian Gulf and all over South Asia, there are bound to be movements of people resulting into mixed genetic history,” he added.

These revelations assume political significance as there have been demands to rewrite the history books to say that Vedic people were the original inhabitants of the country and they did not come from Central Asia. “Our premise that the Harappans were Vedic people thus received strong corroborative scientific evidence based on ancient DNA studies,” he added.

Another significant claim in the study published in the scientific journal Cell, titled "An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers”, is that farming was not brought to South Asia by large-scale movement of people from the Fertile Crescent where farming first arose. Instead, farming started in South Asia by local hunter-gatherers.

As the study results were published, separate statements were issued by Harvard Medical School which had collaborated in the study.

"Even though there has been success with studies of ancient-DNA from many other places, the difficult preservation conditions mean that studies in South Asia have been a challenge," says senior author David Reich, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School, the Broad Institute, and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.