On “AIT”, Islamic Invasions and “Whitewashing History”
I recently came across The Whitewashing of History, by Nithin Sridhar. Nitin has kindly agreed to let me reproduce the article on this blog. Those of you who are interested in history will find here a devastating critique of current studies and interpretation of Indian History - which has largely been driven by leftist-leaning scholars steeped in their prejudices and with varying agendas.
The article looks at the now thoroughly discredited “Aryan Invasion Theory” (AIT), the impact of Islamic invasions on India and the red-herring of “Hindu vandalism”.
I have also included a selection of comments at the end.
*** ARTICLE BEGINS / LONG POST ***
The history of India has been whitewashed and distorted, first by European rulers, and after independence by eminent historians of India and their supporters the Leftists, Seculars and self-claimed Progressives of India to meet their own ends. They have painted the pre-Islamic invasion period as a Dark Age and have glorified the Islamic period to be very peaceful and prosperous.
Ram Swarup says, “Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists’ contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists.”1 Some of the common claims of these eminent historians are:
1] The Aryan Invasion Theory is true2
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples was done by Hindus in pre-Islamic India.3
3] The Muslim rulers were religiously tolerant and Islamic rule was prosperous. The eminent historians deny the destruction of Hindu temples or the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers. They also deny the religious motive behind the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers.4
Let us examine the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT).
The history of India has been whitewashed and distorted, first by European rulers, and after independence by eminent historians of India and their supporters the Leftists, Seculars and self-claimed Progressives of India to meet their own ends. They have painted the pre-Islamic invasion period as a Dark Age and have glorified the Islamic period to be very peaceful and prosperous.
Ram Swarup says, “Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists’ contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists.”1 Some of the common claims of these eminent historians are:
1] The Aryan Invasion Theory is true2
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples was done by Hindus in pre-Islamic India.3
3] The Muslim rulers were religiously tolerant and Islamic rule was prosperous. The eminent historians deny the destruction of Hindu temples or the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers. They also deny the religious motive behind the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers.4
Let us examine the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT).
The AIT was introduced to justify the presence of the British among their Aryan cousins in India as being merely the second wave of Aryan settlement there. It supported the British view of India as merely a geographical region without historical unity, a legitimate prey for any invader capable of imposing himself. It provided the master illustration to the rising racialist worldview: “The dynamic whites entered the land of the indolent dark natives and established their dominance and imparted their language to the natives; they established the caste system to preserve their racial separateness; some miscegenation with the natives took place anyway, making the Indian Aryans darker than their European cousins and correspondingly less intelligent; hence, for their own benefit they were susceptible to an uplifting intervention by a new wave of purer Aryan colonizers.”5
Dr. Koenraad Elst, in “The Vedic Evidence,”6 after examining the Vedic corpus for any evidence of Aryan invasion theory proposed by the Marxist school, concludes, “The status question is still, more than ever, that the Vedic corpus provides no reference to an immigration of the so-called Vedic Aryans from Central Asia….” He further provides astronomical and literary evidence against the AIT in his other essays.
Jim Shaffer in “The Indo-Aryan Invasions: Cultural Myth and Archaeological Reality,” wrote, “Current archaeological data do not support the existence of an Indo-Aryan or European invasion into South Asia any time in the pre- or protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archaeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural developments from prehistoric to historic periods…”7 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, a U.S. expert who has extensively studied such skeletal remains, observes, “Biological anthropologists remain unable to lend support to any of the theories concerning an Aryan biological or demographic entity.”8
David Frawley, while commenting on the political and social ramifications, asserts, “First it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other… Second, it gave the British an excuse for their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago. This same justification could be used by the Muslims or any other invaders of India. Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from the Middle Eastern… Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis… Fifth, it gave the Marxists a good basis for projecting their class struggle model of society on to India, with the invading Brahmins oppressing the indigenous Shudras (lower castes).” He further concludes, “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.”9
Archaeological evidence in no way contradicts Indian tradition, rather it broadly agrees with it (except for its chronology). Whether from North or South India, tradition never mentioned anything remotely resembling an Aryan invasion into India. Sanskrit scriptures make it clear that they regard the Vedic homeland to be the Saptasindhu, which is precisely the core of the Harappan territory. As for the Sangam tradition, it is equally silent about any northern origin of the Tamil people. These show that AIT which Marxists have been propagating is based on assumptions and pre-conceived notion, rather than hard evidences.
About the alleged destruction of Buddhist and Jain temples by Hindus, Sita Ram Goel observes,10 “It is intriguing indeed that whenever archaeological evidence points towards a mosque as standing on the site of a Hindu temple, our Marxist professors start seeing a Buddhist monastery buried underneath. They also invent some Saiva king as destroying Buddhist and Jain shrines whenever the large-scale destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders is mentioned. They never mention the destruction of big Buddhist and Jain complexes which dotted the length and breadth of India, Khurasan, and Sinkiang on the eve of the Islamic invasion, as testified by Hüen Tsang.” He asks the historians to produce epigraphic and literary evidences to suggest the destruction of Buddhists and Jain places by Hindus, the names and places of Hindu monuments which stand on the sites occupied earlier by Buddhist or Jain monuments. Yet, till today no concrete evidence has been given by historians to substantiate their claim.
But, there is enough evidence to show that Buddhist and Jain temples and monasteries at Bukhara, Samarqand, Khotan, Balkh, Bamian, Kabul, Ghazni, Qandhar, Begram, Jalalabad, Peshawar, Charsadda, Ohind, Taxila, Multan, Mirpurkhas, Nagar-Parkar, Sialkot, Srinagar, Jalandhar, Jagadhari, Sugh, Tobra, Agroha, Delhi, Mathura, Hastinapur, Kanauj, Sravasti, Ayodhya, Varanasi, Sarnath, Nalanda, Vikramasila, Vaishali, Rajgir, Odantapuri, Bharhut, Champa, Paharpur, Jagaddal, Jajnagar, Nagarjunikonda, Amravati, Kanchi, Dwarasamudra, Devagiri, Bharuch, Valabhi, Girnar, Khambhat Patan, Jalor, Chandravati, Bhinmal, Didwana, Nagaur, Osian, Ajmer, Bairat, Gwalior, Chanderi, Mandu, Dhar etc were destroyed by the sword of Islam.11
It should be noted that though Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain sects and sub-sects had heated discussions among themselves, and used even strong language for their adversaries, the occasions when they exchanged physical blows were few and far between. The recent spurt of accusations that Hindus were bigots and vandals like Christians and Muslims seems to be an after-thought. Apologists, who find it impossible to whitewash Christianity and Islam, are out to redress the balance by blackening Hinduism.
The Islamic conquest has been described as the “Bloodiest,”12 “monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions,”13 as well as “bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”14
Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes, “While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful. These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage…”
Dr. Koenraad Elst, while summarizing the Hindu losses at the hands of Muslim invaders, concludes,15 “There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like “punishing” the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.”
From Mohamud Quasim to Tipu Sultan, every Mohammedan invader killed, converted, took as slave or put Jiziya on Hindus. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. While describing the conquest of Kanauj, Utbi, the secretary and chronicler of Mahmud Gahzni, sums up the situation thus: “The Sultan[Ghazni] levelled to the ground every fort, and the inhabitants of them either accepted Islam, or took up arms against him. In short, those who submitted were also converted to Islam. In Baran (Bulandshahr) alone 10,000 persons were converted including the Raja”. The conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated.
About the conversion of Hindus to Islam, K.S.Lal observes, “The process of their conversion was hurried. All of a sudden the invader appeared in a city or a region, and in the midst of loot and murder, a dazed, shocked and enslaved people were given the choice between Islam and death. Those who were converted were deprived of their scalp-lock or choti and, if they happened to be caste people, also their sacred thread. Some were also circumcised. Their names were changed, although some might have retained their old names with new affixes. They were taught to recite the kalima and learnt to say the prescribed prayers”.16
When Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked Waihind in 1001-02, he took 500,000 persons of both sexes as captive [This figure is given by Abu Nasr Muhammad Utbi, the secretary and chronicler of Mahmud Gahzni]. Next year from Thanesar, according to Farishtah, the Muhammadan army brought to Ghaznin 200,000 captives [Tarikh-i-Farishtah, I, 28]. When Mahmud returned to Ghazni in 1019, the booty was found to consist of (besides huge wealth) 53,000 captives. The Tarikh-i-Alfi adds that the fifth share due to the Saiyyads was 150,000 slaves, therefore the total number of captives comes to 750,000. In 1195, when Raja Bhim was attacked by Aibak, 20,000 slaves were captured, and 50,000 at Kalinjar in 1202. Sultan Alauddin Khalji had 50,000 slave boys in his personal service and 70,000 slaves who worked continuously on his buildings. In the words of Wassaf, the Muslim army in the sack of Somnath took captive a great number of handsome and elegant maidens, amounting to 20,000, and children of both sexes. Iltutmish, Muhammad Tughlaq and Firoz Tughlaq sent gifts of slaves to Khalifas outside India. To the Chinese emperor Muhammad Tughlaq sent, besides other presents, 100 Hindu slaves, 100 slave girls, accomplished in song and dance and another 15 young slaves. Firoz Tughlaq collected 180,000 slaves.17
About the destruction of Hindu Temples, Sita Ram Goel writes -“Mahmûd of Ghazni robbed and burnt down 1,000 temples at Mathura, and 10,000 in and around Kanauj. One of his successors, Ibrãhîm, demolished 1,000 temples each in Ganga-Yamuna Doab and Malwa. Muhammad Ghûrî destroyed another 1,000 at Varanasi. Qutbu’d-Dîn Aibak employed elephants for pulling down 1,000 temples in Delhi. “Alî I ‘Ãdil Shãh of Bijapur destroyed 200 to 300 temples in Karnataka. A sufi, Qãyim Shãh, destroyed 12 temples at Tiruchirapalli. Such exact or approximate counts, however, are available only in a few cases. Most of the time we are informed that “many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpets blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islãm”.18
Some of the Temples converted into Mosques are:19
Epigraphic evidences:
1. Quwwat al-Islam Masjid, Qutb Minar, Delhi by Qutbud-Din Aibak in 1192 A.D.
2. Masjid at Manvi in the Raichur District of Karnataka, Firuz Shah Bahmani, 1406-07 A.D
3. Jami Masjid at Malan, Palanpur Taluka, Banaskantha District of Gujarat: ?The Jami Masjid was built? by Khan-I-Azam Ulugh Khan, The date of construction is mentioned as 1462 A.D. in the reign of Mahmud Shah I (Begada) of Gujarat.
4. Hammam Darwaza Masjid at Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh, Its chronogram yields the year 1567 A.D. in the reign of Akbar, the Great Mughal
5. Jami Masjid at Ghoda in the Poona District of Maharashtra, The inscription is dated 1586 A.D. when the Poona region was ruled by the Nizam Shahi sultans of Ahmadnagar
6. Gachinala Masjid at Cumbum in the Kurnool District of Andhra Pradesh, The date of construction is mentioned as 1729-30 A.D. in the reign of the Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah.
Literary evidences:
7. Jhain[name of the place], Jalalud-Din Firuz Khalji went to the place and ordered destruction of temples, mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
8. Devagiri, Alaud-Din Khalji destroyed the temples of the idolaters, mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
9. Somanath, Ulugh Khan, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
10. Delhi, , Alaud-Din Khalji , Tarikh-i-Alai
11. Ranthambhor, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
12. Brahmastpuri (Chidambaram), Malik Kafur, Tarikh-i-Alai
13. Madura, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
14. Fatan: (Pattan), mentioned in Ashiqa
15. Malabar: (Parts of South India), Tarikh-i-Alai
16 The Mosque at Jaunpur. This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi
17 The Mosque at Qanauj it was built by Ibrahim Sharqi
18 Jami (Masjid) at Etawah. it is one of the monuments of the Sharqi Sultans
19 Babri Masjid at Ayodhya . This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya
20 Mosques of Alamgir (Aurangzeb)
According to the reports of Archeological survey of India:
21 Tordi (Rajasthan)- early or middle part of the 15th century
22 Naraina (Rajasthan)- The mosque appears to have been built when Mujahid Khan, son of Shams Khan, took possession of Naraina in 1436 A.D
23 Chatsu (Rajasthan)- At Chatsu there is a Muhammadan tomb erected on the eastern embankment of the Golerava tank. The tomb which is known as Gurg Ali Shah’s chhatri is built out of the spoils of Hindu buildings. The inscription mention saint Gurg Ali (wolf of Ali) died a martyr on the first of Ramzan in 979 A.H. corresponding to Thursday, the 17th January, 1572 A.D.
24 SaheTh-MaheTh (Uttar Pradesh)
25 Sarnath (Uttar Pradesh)- the inscriptions found there extending to the twelfth century A.D
26 Vaishali (Bihar)
27 Gaur and Pandua (Bengal)- The oldest and the best known building at Gaur and Pandua is the Ãdîna Masjid at Pandua built by Sikandar Shãh, the son of Ilyãs Shãh. The date of its inscription may be read as either 776 or 770, which corresponds with 1374 or 1369 A.D? The materials employed consisted largely of the spoils of Hindu temples and many of the carvings from the temples have been used as facings of doors, arches and pillars
28 Devikot (Bengal)- The Dargah of Sultan Pir, The Dargah of Shah Ata are the Muhammadan shrines built on the site of an old Hindu temple
29 Tribeni (Bengal)
This whitewashing of history, the policy of “Suppresio Veri, Suggestio Falsi” followed by ‘eminent historians’ of India is not only dangerous to national integration but also the future of the entire nation. It is time that the self interests are kept aside and the facts of history is made known to the masses.
Footnotes:
1 Indian Express, January 15, 1989, quoted in book “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1” by Sita Ram Goel
2 For example, JNU historian Romilla Thapar.[Article titled “Romila Thapar Defends the Aryan Invasion Theory!” by Vishal Agarwal published here- http://www.india-forum.com/articles/60/1 ]
3 In letter published in The Times of India dated October 2, 1986, Romilla Thapar had stated that handing over of Sri Rama’s and Sri Krishna’s birthplaces to the Hindus, and of disused mosques to the Muslims raises the question of the limits to the logic of restoration of religious sites. How far back do we go? Can we push this to the restoration of Buddhist and Jain monuments destroyed by Hindus? Or of the pre-Hindu animist shrines? [ Quoted in book- Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2 The Islamic Evidence by Sita Ram Goel]
4 In his book Medival India [NCERT 2000], Satish Chandra writes- “The raid into India (by Timur) was a plundering raid, and its motive was to seize the wealth accumulated by the sultans of Delhi over the last 200 years… Timur then entered Delhi and sacked it without mercy, large number of people, both Hindu and Muslim, as well as women and children losing their lives.”, but Timur repeatedly states in his memoirs, the Tuzuk-i-Timuri, that he had a two-fold objective in invading Hindustan. “The first was to war with the infidels,” and thereby acquire, “some claim to reward in the life to come.” The second motive was “that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels.” He further says “Excepting the quarter of the saiyids, the ulema and other Musulmans, the whole city was sacked.”
5 Koenraad Elst, in “The Politics of the Aryan Invasion Debate”
6 “The Vedic Evidence - The Vedic Corpus Provides no Evidence for the so-called Aryan Invasion of India” by Koenraad Elst
7 Jim G. Shaffer, “The Indo-Aryan Invasions : Cultural Myth and Archaeological Reality,” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
8 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, “Have Aryans been identified in the prehistoric skeletal record from
South Asia ?” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
9 David Frawley, in “Myth of Aryan Invasion Theory of India”
10 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2-the Islamic Evidence
11 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2 -the Islamic Evidence
12 Will Durant in “Story of Civilization” observes- “The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.”
13 “Histoire de l’ Inde” - By Alain Danielou; he notes- “”From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races.” Mahmoud Ghazni, continues Danielou, “was an early example of Muslim ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as ruthless as Ghazni: 103 temples in the holy city of Benaras were razed to the ground, its marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked.” Indeed, the Muslim policy vis a vis India, concludes Danielou, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was beautiful, holy, refined.”
14 Francois Gautier
15 Dr. Koenraad Elst in “Was There an Islamic “Genocide” of Hindus?”
16 K.S. Lal in “Indian Muslims Who Are They”
17 K.S. Lal in “Muslim Slave System in Medieval India”
18 Sita Ram Goel, in “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2 The Islamic Evidence”
19 It is taken from the large list of places documented by Sita Ram Goel in his magnum Opus “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1- The Preliminary Survey”
***
Related Posts:
Distorting history…and getting paid for it
Lies and half-truths in the name of national integration
Taj Mahal: The Biggest Whitewash in Indian History?
On Aurangzeb, Kashi Vishwanath, Lies and Half-Truths
*** COMMENTS to Original Article ***
From Bhagwat Shah:
Great info - but - how are we making sure this gets passed onto our children or to the common man in India ? Scholarly treaties, novels or articles are not read by the masses and we need to make sure this info gets to the masses. What is the proposal for that ? Are we going to make sure the education system in India and abroad takes note of these findings and research ? If so, how ?
We continue to shout in the cyber space, but, in the schools and universities around the world - including India, none of this matters. They are still sticking to the old books. What are the plans to change them ?
Sadly, our religious leaders are not concerned with this research or spreading this info. Our politicians are definitely not interested as there are no votes in this (Hindus vote bank does not exist for them !!!!). Our educationalists are not interested as they don’t want to have to re-read and re-educate themselves, besides, they are brought up on old prejudices and are unwilling to change it. Saddest of all, our masses are not interested. They do not care about anything beyond the next bollywood release and cricket score. To them our ruined temples and ruined histories are of no consequence at all.
Until we start to educate the new generation and do so on a wide scale, this info will be limited to the elite and will not help us lift our country, culture or religion out of the mire its in at present. We have to do this in India and outside India. Don’t wait for the gov or religious bodies to do this, I propose we do this ourselves. We are happy to send our children to tennis and piano lessons, we should also send them to Indian culture lessons.
If need be, we have to start these lessons ourselves and use the research on-line to educate our children. Having tried different institutions, I eventually started my own classes in London to teach children of my own friends and family. We can’t wait for others. We have to do this for ourselves.
***
From Dina U. Mehta
To me it is a matter of surprise that when motivated and hostile commentators in the garb of historians, propound a false and propagandist theory like the Aryan Invasion Theory of India, our religious and spiritual leaders, politicians as also our writers, simply beat their breasts and try to say that there was no such invasion. Instead why not write about those times with research and honesty, and show the idiocy and ridiculousness of the Theory.
Can you in such a case, separate an alleged event from the context of those times?
…
In any case, the problem always was and is: how do you disprove a theory without writing about those times? It can only be dismissed when you know the context and the period in which such an event is said to have occurred.
Fortunately, very fortunately, one writer – but only one - has come forward to write about those pre-Vedic times in which this False theory was supposed to have come to life. The writer is Bhagwan S. Gidwani and his book is ‘RETURN of the ARYANS’ published by Penguin Books in India. This book gives a mortal body-blow to the Aryan Invasion Theory of India. But the book has a much larger theme and canvas. Its 1,000 pages tell the fascinating story of the Birth and Beginnings of the roots of Hinduism (Sanatan Dharma) with a thrilling account of how, in 5,000 BC, the Aryans originated from India, and from nowhere else - and why they moved out of their home-land; their trials and triumphs overseas; and finally their return to India. Thus, Gidwani demolishes the theory of Aryan invasion of India. He traces the Hindu ancestry of Aryans from 8,000 BC, and shows that Aryans were born, grew up, and died as citizens of Bharat Varsha, anchored in the timeless foundation of Sanatan Dharma. With equal clarity, the Book also demolishes the theory of North/South Divide, and shows how the people of Ganga, Madhya, Sindhu, Bangla and other regions were together with the Dravidian regions, in a spirit of equality and mutual respect, as a part of Bharat Varsha (India).
Clearly, ‘RETURN of the ARYANS’ explains how the racial differences, like the skin colour, between North Indians and South Indians arose, and how Sanskrit has some words with foreign origin unlike Tamil. The book also shows how Bharat Varsha of 5,000 BC was far more extensive than the present-day territory of India, Pakistan & Bangladesh, as it included additionally Avagana (Afghanistan), parts of Iran, beyond Lake Namaskar (now known as Namaksar), where many Hindu hermits resided; in North, Bharat Varsha territory went across soaring peaks of Himalayas to Tibet to reach Lake Mansarovar, Mount Kailash, upto the source of mighty Sindhu and Brahmaputra rivers, and beyond; Also, Bharat Varsha included Land of Brahma (Burma) and beyond; Kashmir; Lands of Sadhu Newar (Nepal); Bhoota (Bhutan); and Land of Vraon (Sri Lanka).
Note also that RETURN of the ARYANS’ covers a vast panorama to reveal dramatic stories behind the origins of Om, Namaste, Swastika, Gayatri Mantra, and Soma Wines. It tells how Tamil and Sanskrit developed, and how they influenced world-languages; also it has tales of discovery and disappearance of Saraswati River, and founding of Ganga, Dravidian, and Sindhu civilizations; the battles and blood-shed that led to fall and rise of Benaras, Hardwar, and many cities. Besides, Gidwani sheds light on pre-history establishment of legal and constitutional systems; development of ships and harbours; gold-mining; chariots; Yoga; mathematics; astronomy; medicine; surgery; music, dance, drama, art and architecture; and material advancement of the pre-ancient India.
…
Unfortunately, ‘RETURN of the ARYANS’ has not been presented as a formal historical text as the author has chosen to present it in story-form with even dialogues to fully focus on the drama of those times and hence has, withintegrity and objectivity, marked it as fictional, though fully explaining the extent of the fiction in the Preface. This has given a handle to Hindu Organizations and others to dismiss the book; and as some one has said these organizations suffer from some dogma while all other dogma-ridden faiths and religions fully use novels and dramatic presentations to advance their message.
***
From Uma, Pahari , Lalit, Samir and Kotwal
Not many Indians are likely to buy an expensive, bulky book -Return of the Aryans - published by Penguin Books, India and its sale is largely confined to foreign countries, and therefore the best course is to view the Themes from that book which are shown at www.sindhulogy.org. (They appear in that website under “Projects”.).These themes will give an idea of how the roots of Hinduism began in Bharat Varsha (Indian subcontinent) in 8,000 BCE and how the Aryans who originated in India in 5,000 BCE travelled to a large number of countries in Asia and Europe, including Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Russia, Finland, Lithuania, Sweden, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Greece and Germany and their adventures and exploits there. These Themes will give an idea of how art and and development flourished in that period of pre-History in India
Anyone reading the Themes on website will clearly come to the conclusion that the Aryan Invasion Theory of India is false and was designed as a propagandist hoax.
On the topic of “whitewashing history”, there is much to be learnt from the way no mention is made in our history book od the Portuguese Inquisition in Goa. Three hundred years, from the mid-1500s, were spent on torturing Hindus selected by the Grand Inquisitor. The methods of torure were inhuman, and designed to inflict the maximal pain. I don’t think I can detail the methods used here, people would be throwing up on their computers.
No mention of this in our history books.
Comment by Ashish | May 21, 2008
Dear Sir,
Can we provide a History student, BY THE WAY NON COMMIE, a stipend supported by all the bloggers on this Blog and ask him to do a research on this topic and we can publish it as a book for further action at a later date.
Shri. Shantanu, you may take the lead as to how this matter can be taken further, to avoid further whitewashing.
The matter of Goa and the portugese should be brought to light.
Regards,
vck
Comment by v.c.krishnan | May 21, 2008
http://vepa.us/dir00/
Dr Kaushal Vepa has been doing extensive reserach into Indic History. He has a lot of contacts in this area, including being a founder of India Forum (linked on this page) which has some of the best historians I know.
Comment by Ashish | May 21, 2008
http://www.india-forum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1584&st=0&p=79107&#entry79107
Here is a primer on the Goan inquisition
Comment by Ashish | May 22, 2008
Dear Ashish: Thanks so much for the links. I shall have ma look at them over the weekend.
***
Dear vck: That is an excellent suggestion…I am willing to bear a little bit of cost myself…Do you or other readers know of any keen hitsory student who may be looking for some work and extra money during the holidays?
Thanks.
Comment by B Shantanu | May 22, 2008
Dear Shantanu,
There is a link provided by Shri. Ashish. Can you take it up with Dr. Vepa and ask his inputs on a History scholars, they are usually an ignored lot, as people do not like the truth.
Regards,
vck
Comment by v.c.krishnan | May 22, 2008
About the Holy inquisition-
“Varying attempts to stamp out infidels and heretics often proved to be inadequate, so the Holy Inquisition was formed by Pope Gregory IX in 1231 to make the efforts more organized and efficient. Burning was quickly decided upon as the official punishment. In 1245, the Pope gave Inquisitors the right to absolve their assistants of any acts of violence which they might commit in the fulfillment of their duties. Torture of suspects was authorized by Pope Innocent IV in 1252. The Inquisition was not limited to Europe, as Spaniards brought it to the Americas and used it to punish the native inhabitants. Through the 1500s, 879 heresy trials were recorded in Mexico alone.4 The historian Hernando del Pulgar estimated that the Spanish Inquisition had burned at the stake 2,000 people and reconciled another 15,000 by 1490 just one decade after the Inquisition began. (Cited in Kamen op. cit., p. 62.) Juan de Zumarrage, first Bishop of Mexico, writing in 1531, claimed that he personally destroyed over 500 temples and 20,000 idols of the heathens.5 The Goa inquisition which lasted from 1560 to 1812 is considered as the most violent inquisition ever executed by the Portuguese Catholic Church. Inquisition proceedings were always conducted behind closed shutters and closed doors. Hindus were brutally interrogated, flogged, and slowly dismembered in front of their relatives. Eyelids were sliced off and extremities were amputated carefully. Viceroy D Constantine de Braganca issued an order on April 2, 1560, instructing that Brahmins should be thrown out of Goa and other areas under Portuguese control. At the end of 1567, 300 Hindu temples were destroyed.”
http://www.hinduyuva.org/tattva-blog/2008/03/orissa-clash-conversion/
Comment by Nithin Sridhar | May 31, 2008
Dear Shri Sridhar,
I do not know your background, but from your mails i may have come to doubtful conclusion, that you are interested, a sort of historian with an interest in coming to terms with the truth of inquisition and the role of the church in its attempt to exterminate the way of life in this country. It is my personal opinion and note!!!
I would appreciate it, if Shri. Shantanu would like to endorse what i am requesting and also permitting me to say so, may be you can source a historian who can play a part in removing this whitewashed background and get back to the truth.
May be the truth may be bitter for any side, but let us come to terms with it.
Today people are coming to terms with “Hindutva” and “Hinduism” and “Sanatan Dharma”. it hurts a few, terrifies a few, a few celeberate.
Let us get to the truth and let us get the true colors of the painting behind the canvas, let be black or white.
Regards,
vck
Comment by v.c.krishnan | June 1, 2008
“The history of India has been whitewashed and distorted, first by European rulers, and after independence by eminent historians of India and their supporters the Leftists, Seculars and self-claimed Progressives of India to meet their own ends. They have painted the pre-Islamic invasion period as a Dark Age and have glorified the Islamic period to be very peaceful and prosperous.”
I hold no brief for the leftist historians, who have indeed distorted Indian history, but the first para of this article is so biased that I had to stop reading and comment on it -
I can only comment from my experience of the school books I learnt from in Maharashtra - I learnt about the great Rajput kings, about the glorious Maurya dynasty, about the Cholas, about the nawabs of Bengal, of the Marathas and their great empire, of the nobility of Akbar and the savagery of Aurangzeb ….. and, I learned all of the above from state promoted textbooks, vetted by various “leftist historians”, I guess.
Shantanu, while we certainly need to tear down the myths of the past, we also need to see who we are putting forward as our sources. Based on the first para, I would dismiss Sridhar as equally biased as the historians of Delhi.
Let us have credible people on this blog, please.
Comment by Patriot | June 2, 2008
Nithin, vck and Patriot: Thanks for your comments.
***
@ Patriot: Perhaps Shri Sridhar has been a bit harsh in his first para…That however (I feel) should not distract from the otherwise excellent analysis and the huge amount of research and effort that has gone into this…
I am myself sometimes “guilty” of unwittingly slipping into making statements that are hard to bak up…So I hope we will all be a bit more flexible with regards Sridhar’s writing(s).
In any case, the bias of NCERT in providing “guidelines” for history textbooks is something I have commented on before… Please have a look at this link whenever you have a moment:
http://satyameva-jayate.org/2007/07/19/lies-and-half-truths/
Thanks
Comment by B Shantanu | June 3, 2008
Dear Friends
In my view the study of history raises a few higher questions, than just the questions of fact. I’m asking two questions here:
1) Should a government be involved in any way in advocating history? (eg. NCERT).
In my view, history is a matter for independent researchers – and history can change as our research improves. Therefore each school teacher should be free to promote any history book he or she likes as a professional historian. The concept of a ‘government vetted’ history book is dangerous and problematic. Despite the obvious concerns governments may have about history, they should stay out of this area. Governments should not publish any books for schools.
2) Second, what is the real purpose of history? Do we use it to learn anything at all? I don’t find evidence that India learns from history - even the history of the past 60 years hasn’t taught India to abandon socialism and reform its political system.
On the other hand, people do seem to quickly learn the message of hate from history. I know a number of Hindu friends who fanatically hate Islam. And from where did this hatred arise – from history books they studied when they were young.
So how does history help us unless we bring some wisdom and balance into the discussion? What does it matter what our ancestors did? It matters what we do. And if we use history as a pretext to hate each other, then I would even say – we don’t need history at all.
To me one of the major lessons of history is that religion is a potentially dangerous concept. All religions have - at many times - been incompatible with tolerance and life. History without a message of tolerance and critical thinking against the madmen who frequently arise from various religions is a recipe for repeating the tragedies of the past.
So my question to Nithin Sridhar is this: What do you want the reader to do after you’ve listed the great damage done by people in the name of Islam in the past? Does it mean that Hindus should hate their Muslim fellow-citizens even more? Do you want people to die today because some criminals, madmen, or idiots, did something terrible in the past?
Are historians aware of the damage they cause to the present generations by not inoculating their readers from hate? Historians must write a chapter on tolerance and critical thinking to close their books, else history becomes merely a list of criminals and crimes of the past. Why does anyone need to study criminals who lived a thousand years ago?
Regards
Sanjeev
Comment by Sanjeev Sabhlok | June 4, 2008
Sanjeev: A few quick points…
1. First of all, I firmly advocate the study of history…It is not history’s “problem” that people refuse to learn from it….
2. Re. historical wrongs, they cannot be corrected but that does not mean that nothing can be done to have “closure” on cerain issues…A recent case in point (which of course you would be very familiar with) is the apology tendered by Australian PM to the aborginies…(and similar apologies for historical wrongs that have been offered in other instances)
3. I do not agree that “All religions have - at many times - been incompatible with tolerance and life”
But before we get into this debate, it is very important to understand that “Hinduism” is NOT a religion neither is Sanatan Dharma (in the strictest sense of the word) and certainly not in the monolithic, absolute terms of other religions…So I feel very strongly about remarks such as “all religions have at times been incompatible…”
I am very willing to stand corrected on this but please point me in the direction of some evidence which would prove that Sanatan Dharma has been incompatible with tolerance and life.
4. As for government’s involvement in history books, history - as you well know - is only partly about facts, the farther (back in time) it goes (and the more complex it becomes), another factor comes into play - that of interpretation.
Here I would like to reproduce excerpts from an open letter written by Prof. Chakrabarti recently re. the proposed Indus Centre in Vadodara (pl. see Annex 2):
A great example of interpretation and bias is the insistence of certain historians to refer to the Sarasvati-Sindhu civilisation as “Indus Valley” civilisatoin even though enormous amount of research has now shown that the extent of that culture covered parts of Rajasthan, Gujarat, Haryana and Punjab…
5. As for your final question: “Why does anyone need to study criminals who lived a thousand years ago?”…at least one reason is that there acts continue to “inspire” present day regimes (a great example being the names that have been assigned to Pakistan’s missiles - e.g. see this link - although the “names” are now being “claimed” by Afghanistan!)
I have to rush now but I look forward to your thoughts…and that of other readers too..
Thanks
Comment by B Shantanu | June 4, 2008
Dear Shantanu
I sense a strange thing here. It was my family that was kicked out of West Panjab by religious fanatics, and presumably many close relatives lost their lives in that process. So it is I who must want ‘closure’ by studying history, but I don’t want any of that. Closure is a personal matter that can only be achieved through understanding that one’s life is independent and unique, and by trying to ensure that history doesn’t repeat itself.
Closure is not achieved by recalling the brutalities of religious fanatics and criminals. Why study the lives of killers? We have better things to do. Studying about killers is a sure recipe to ensure that hatred will fester in one’s mind. History must be studied, but not to bring closure.
That brings me to your related issue about historians calling Sarasvati-Sindhu civilisation as the “Indus Valley” civilisation. A name doesn’t change the history, in my view, and if the name change is useful then historians will in due course adopt it. It is the job of historians to do such things; not a task for laymen. Like any other discipline, history is full of historians with different opinions on everything. Why not let these professionals battle it out?
About “evidence which would prove that Sanatan Dharma has been incompatible with tolerance and life.” I’m afraid every religion (even if this particular one is not a monolithic religion, as you rightly point out) makes similar claims for its own tolerance. For me the litmus test lies in the actual behaviour of people who claim to lead or follow the path of various religions. I don’t look back to the scriptures but to what people do.
I know that each individual must be held to account for his or her actions, and entire religions cannot be labeled as tolerant or intolerant. And yet, we must watch their leaders to learn what religions stands for. Have a look at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YTMJxx9MQs&feature=related
This person is from VHP and he appears to be a Hindu leader to my untutored mind – unless you say that VHP does not represent Hinduism, in which case I’d ask you to show me who are the true leaders of Hinduism. This person’s is clearly intent on inciting the people. On the incitement of (other) people like him the Babri Masjid was destroyed - see
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=benqtb1bVog&feature=related
Hundreds of similar demagogues parade as leaders of Hinduism today. This particular person has a style quite unlike the peaceful and reasoned style of the Dalai Lama, or even the style that comes out from Vivekananda’s lectures (which I read avidly when I find the time for it).
That was the leaders. Now for the followers. I have pointed out elsewhere the enormous evidence of brutalities committed by followers of Hinduism (and other religions) in various communal riots – many (not all) of the riots are provoked by Hindu followers; and that government forces in India have killed disproportionately larger numbers of Muslims during these riots, deliberately allowing many Hindu arsonists to escape.
So if some of the leaders of a religion are intolerant, and some its followers kill with abandon, then are we to say that the religion in question is fully tolerant? Yes it is by and large tolerant, but the behaviour of the Hindu Mahasabha and its offshoots is problematic, to say the least. When I read Vivekananda and then think or look at these people who call themselves Hindus – and often use his name - a sense of the deep tragedy that is India overcomes me.
I left Hinduism when I was around 12 years old because of many reasons; its intolerance towards its own people – lower castes - was a part (not all) of those reasons. I have not come across any religion attractive enough to make me want to join them; I pick and choose and make my own ‘religion’, primarily founded in freedom and critical thinking.
I would prefer if we could simply live as ordinary human beings, and stop finding reasons to hate each other. History in the hands of the unwise is like fire without control. Unbalanced and one-sided histories are even worse; they are ideologically driven, and dangerous. Let us therefore encourage the study of history by professionals and not by laymen, who unfortunately often use history for purposes it was never meant for.
Regards
Sanjeev
Comment by Sanjeev Sabhlok | June 5, 2008
Hi Sanjeev,
Thanks for your poignant personal insights and experiences. There’re are few points I thought worth making, as saw them:
i) Leaving Hinduism is a misnomer since no one joins ‘Hinduism” which I understand to be a generic term given by foreigners to Indian religions, philosophies and spirituality. This includes athiesm or agnosticism et al. So if you are in any situation of belief or non-belief or just ‘are’ you’re still an Indian partaking of its culture and contributing to it
ii) Atrocities committed in name of ‘Hinduism’ quite simply have no religious sanctiity or motivation, quite simply, because of (i) which makes an divergent contrast to the Semitic/Abrahamic relgions of Islam, Christianity or Judaism. At least islam and Christianity have a strong ‘go ye and convert the non-believers’ motive which is absent from teh ‘Hindu’ practices
iii) Viewing religion as a politically relevant practice is more of an imported concept, definitely applcable today to ‘Hinduism’ but I am inclined to believe its more of a ‘me too’ reaction to the activities of the more organised and politically (as against spiritually) ambitious semitic religions operating in India today
Separating religion from politics is essential in any debate that proceeds on the basis of reason and logic which is a democratic process and if you agree with this - would be interested in some more of your views and insights
*** Part of the comment moved here ***
Comment by Hrishi | June 5, 2008
*** Comment moved here ***
Comment by Dnyanesh Sovani | June 5, 2008
*** Comment moved here ***
Comment by Hrishi | June 5, 2008
Sanjeev, Hrishi and Dnyanesh: Thanks for sharing your thoughts and comments.
This (separation of religion from politics) is a fascinating subject for discussion and I am tempted to move this to a separate thread…I am rushed for time right now but may do this de-linking later tonight.
In the meantime, please continue to post your thoughts here (on this post) and I will move the whole lot when I migrate this to the new thread.
Thanks
Comment by B Shantanu | June 5, 2008
*** Please continue the discussion on separation of politics and religion here ***
Comment by B Shantanu | June 6, 2008
What do you want the reader to do after you’ve listed the great damage done by people in the name of Islam in the past? Does it mean that Hindus should hate their Muslim fellow-citizens even more? Do you want people to die today because some criminals, madmen, or idiots, did something terrible in the past?
My take- Of course not.
Every truth is printable. The study of history should be done to Learn from the mistakes of the past. My intention of writing this article, was not to spread hate, but to make people aware of the threat we are facing from last 1000 years, which we are facing even now.
Every truth is Printable. Truth must be supported always. True national integration is not possible by supressing history in the name of “Maintaining harmony”, but Integration and Harmony is achieved, when we accept the mistakes of the past, and reform ourself and become a better informed citizens.
Are historians aware of the damage they cause to the present generations by not inoculating their readers from hate? Historians must write a chapter on tolerance and critical thinking to close their books, else history becomes merely a list of criminals and crimes of the past. Why does anyone need to study criminals who lived a thousand years ago?
My take- I am no historian. But, the work of a Historian is not to “preach”(it may be love or hate). The duty of Historian is to state the facts of History. That is the only work he should be loyal to.
As for my article being biased, I would say that, it appears biased because, my primary concern was to highlight the “other face of the coin” which is often supressed.
Comment by Nithin Sridhar | June 6, 2008
I might be off topic, but just wanted to point everyone who talks of hindu fundamentalism, and hindu right winged groups etc etc to read this article by David Frawley:
http://pseudosecularism.blogspot.com/2008/05/is-there-hindu-fundamentalism.html
Namaste
Comment by Vidhya | June 8, 2008
From a review of “Pakistan’s westward drift” (Pervez Hoodbhoy) by Vijay Vikram (School of International Relations, University of St Andrews) in Pragati issue dt. 19th Oct 2008
Dr Hoodbhoy goes on to argue that this was a deliberate policy adopted twenty five years ago by the Pakistani government and is driven by a belief that Pakistan must exchange its South Asian identity for an Arab-Muslim in order to better define itself in contrast to India. For example, prayers in government departments were deemed compulsory and floggings were carried out publicly.In the 21st century however, there is no need for the state to impose strict Islam, as there is a spontaneous groundswell of religious zeal in contemporary Pakistan. The notion of an Islamic state is more popular than ever, as people turn to Islam to rescue a failing state.
Moreover, the Pakistani village has undergone a transformation, thanks in part to the return of Pakistani labourers from Arab countries. Village mosques are now “giant madrassas that propagate hard-line Salafi and Deobandi beliefs through oversized loudspeakers.â€
In fact, Punjabis who tended to be relatively liberal on gender issues are increasingly taking a Talibanesque view on the matter. However, it is school militarism that emerges as the most significant issue.
Dr Hoodbhoy argues that the militancy that bedevils Pakistan’s tribal areas as well as its cities as well is a result of an education system that propagates Islam as a complete code of life and is designed to engender a siege mentality in the mind of the child. In fact, a government-approved social studies textbook for Class V students prescribes that the child should “Understand Hindu-Muslim differences and the resultant need for Pakistanâ€.
Dr Hoodbhoy attributes Pakistan’s Arabization or “Saudisation†to the Zia regime and the Afghan jihad. With active assistance from Saudi Arabia, General Zia established a network of over 22,000 madrassas across the length and breadth of Pakistan. It is these madrassas that provided the US-Saudi alliance with willing recruits for the anti-Soviet jihad.
In the end, Pakistan’s future will be determined by the ideological and political battle between citizens who want a theocratic state and those who want a modern Islamic republic.
Comment by B Shantanu | October 18, 2008
From an interview with Dr Andrew Bostom
Alan Johnson: Hasn’t Christianity also been invoked to justify imperialism?
Andrew Bostom: Yes, of course. But Ibn Warraq pointed out to me how instructive it was to compare the impact of British imperialism and Muslim Imperialism on the Subcontinent. The devastation that was wrought by the waves of Muslim Jihad over almost a Millennium was incomparable with what the Europeans did on the same continent. Lord Curzon gave a remarkable speech in 1900 at a meeting of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, while engaged in a campaign to preserve India’s ancient monuments. This is what he said:
This is not the way either Muslim conquerors or rulers treated the Indian subcontinent. Thousands of Hindu temples were destroyed. The Buddhist temples were also destroyed, and the Buddhists—wiped out all together from India—had to retreat into other parts of Asia.
And if you think that Curzon is not a reliable source, listen to the Indian historian, R.C. Majumdar, who was not terribly sympathetic to the Brits. When he compared Hindu advancement under British and Muslim colonial rule, he concluded:
Comment by B Shantanu | December 12, 2008
So much of how a people define their nation and themselves depends on how they view their common history. When two groups have extremely dissimilar views of who was the aggressor (invaders, conquerors) and who were the original inhabitants, can they really form a cohesive nation ? An interesting article by Sandhya Jain.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/142679/Land-of-religious-persecution.html
Comment by K.Harapriya | December 12, 2008
Just stumbled on this: Demolished once for all: Aryan Invasion Theory
Read the full article here
Comment by B Shantanu | January 4, 2009