Motivations behind selecting the name 'India' in 1947

[Pagla Dashu]

interpolation: a message (spoken or written) that is introduced or inserted

So you're saying it's all made-up, despite being in the official translation?

I give up. Because if I don't, I run a very real and serious risk of my head spontaneously exploding.

 

[ajtr]

Actually i think Patel and nehru wanted to tease jinnah so they chose india name.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You don't need to believe wiki. You can read the official version which is even more offensive than the wiki version.

"'Shalya said, "These, O Karna, are ravings that thou utterest regarding the foe. As regards myself without a 1,000 Karnas I am able to vanquish the foe in battle.'"

"Sanjaya continued, 'Unto the ruler of Madras, of harsh features, who was saying such disagreeable things unto Karna, the latter once more said words that were twice bitter.

"'Karna said, "Listen with devoted attention to this, O ruler of the Madras, that was heard by me while it was recited in the presence of Dhritarashtra. In Dhritarashtra's abode the brahmanas used to narrate the accounts of diverse delightful regions and many kings of ancient times. A foremost one among brahmanas, venerable in years while reciting old histories, said these words, blaming the Vahikas and Madrakas, 'One should always avoid the Vahikas, those impure people that are out of the pale of virtue, and that live away from the Himavat and the Ganga and Sarasvati and Yamuna and Kurukshetra and the Sindhu and its five tributary rivers. I remember from the days of my youth that a slaughter-ground for kine and a space for storing intoxicating spirits always distinguish the entrances of the abodes of the (Vahika) kings. On some very secret mission I had to live among the Vahikas. In consequence of such residence the conduct of these people is well known to me. There is a town of the name of Sakala, a river of the name of Apaga, and a clan of the Vahikas known by the name of the Jarttikas. The practices of these people are very censurable. They drink the liquor called Gauda, and eat fried barley with it. They also eat beef with garlic. They also eat cakes of flour mixed with meat, and boiled rice that is bought from others. Of righteous practices they have none. Their women, intoxicated with drink and divested of robes, laugh and dance outside the walls of the houses in cities, without garlands and unguents, singing while drunk obscene songs of diverse kinds that are as musical as the bray of the *** or the bleat of the camel. In intercourse they are absolutely without any restraint, and in all other matters they act as they like. Maddened with drink, they call upon one another, using many endearing epithets. Addressing many drunken exclamations to their husbands and lords, the fallen women among the Vahikas, without observing restrictions even on sacred days, give themselves up to dancing. One of those wicked Vahikas,--one that is, that lived amongst those arrogant women,--who happened to live for some days in Kurujangala, burst out with cheerless heart, saying, "Alas, that (Vahika) maiden of large proportions, dressed in thin blankets, is thinking of me,--her Vahika lover--that is now passing his days in Kurujangala, at the hour of her going to bed." Crossing the Sutlej and the delightful Iravati, and arriving at my own country, when shall I cast my eyes upon those beautiful women with thick frontal bones, with blazing circlets of red arsenic on their foreheads, with streaks of jet black collyrium on their eyes, and their beautiful forms attired in blankets and skins and themselves uttering shrill cries! When shall I be happy, in the company of those intoxicated ladies amid the music of drums and kettle-drums and conchs sweet as the cries of ***** and camels and mules! When shall I be amongst those ladies eating cakes of flour and meat and balls of pounded barley mixed with skimmed milk, in the forests, having many pleasant paths of Sami and Pilu and Karira! When shall I, amid my own countrymen, mustering in strength on the high-roads, fall upon passengers, and snatching their robes and attires beat them repeatedly! What man is there that would willingly dwell, even for a moment amongst the Vahikas that are so fallen and wicked, and so depraved in their practises?' Even thus did that brahmana describe the Vahikas of base behaviour, a sixth of whose merits and demerits is thine, O Shalya. Having said this, that pious brahmana began once more to say what I am about to repeat respecting the wicked Vahikas. Listen to what I say, 'In the large and populous town of Sakala, a Rakshasa woman used to sing on every fourteenth day of the dark fortnight, in accompaniment with a drum, "When shall I next sing the songs of the Vahikas in this Sakala town, having gorged myself with beef and drunk the Gauda liquor? When shall I again, decked in ornaments, and with those maidens and ladies of large proportions, gorge upon a large number of sheep and large quantities of pork and beef and the meat of fowls and ***** and camels? They who do not eat sheep live in vain!"' Even thus, O Shalya, the young and old, among the inhabitants of Sakala, intoxicated with spirits, sing and cry. How can virtue be met with among such a people? Thou shouldst know this. I must, however, speak again to thee about what another brahmana had said unto us in the Kuru court, 'There where forests of Pilus stand, and those five rivers flow, viz., the Satadru, the Vipasa, the Iravati, the Candrabhaga, and the Vitasa and which have the Sindhu for their sixth, there in those regions removed from the Himavat, are the countries called by the name of the Arattas. Those regions are without virtue and religion. No one should go thither. The gods, the pitris, and the brahmanas, never accept gifts from those that are fallen, or those that are begotten by Shudras on the girls of other castes, or the Vahikas who never perform sacrifices and are exceedingly irreligious.' That learned brahmana had also said in the Kuru court, 'The Vahikas, without any feelings of revulsion, eat of wooden vessels having deep stomachs and earthen plates and vessels that have been licked by dogs and that are stained with pounded barley and other corn. The Vahikas drink the milk of sheep and camels and ***** and eat curds and other preparations from those different kinds of milk. Those degraded people number many bastards among them. There is no food and no milk that they do not take. The Aratta-Vahikas that are steeped in ignorance, should be avoided.' Thou shouldst know this, O Shalya. I must, however, again speak to thee about what another brahmana had said unto me in the Kuru court, 'How can one go to heaven, having drunk milk in the town called Yugandhara, and resided in the place called Acyutasthala, and bathed in the spot called Bhutilaya? There where the five rivers flow just after issuing from the mountains, there among the Aratta-Vahikas, no respectable person should dwell even for two days. There are two Pishacas named Vahi and Hika in the river Vipasa. The Vahikas are the offspring of those two Pishacas. They are not creatures created by the Creator. Being of such low origin, how can they be conversant with the duties ordained in the scriptures? The Karashakas, the Mahishakas, the Kalingas, the Keralas, the Karkotakas, the Virakas, and other peoples of no religion, one should always avoid.' Even thus did a Rakshasa woman of gigantic hips speak unto a brahmana who on a certain occasion went to that country for bathing in a sacred water and passed a single night there. The regions are called by the name of Arattas. The people residing there are called the Vahikas. The lowest of brahmanas also are residing there from very remote times. They are without the Veda and without knowledge, without sacrifice and without the power to assist at other's sacrifices. They are all fallen and many amongst them have been begotten by Shudras upon other peoples' girls. The gods never accept any gifts from them. The Prasthalas, the Madras, the Gandharas, the Arattas, those called Khasas, the Vasatis, the Sindhus and the Sauviras are almost as blamable in their practices.'"
The Mahabharata, Book 8: Karna Parva: Section 44

Is this translation incorrect also?

No, this translation is not incorrect. Nor was the earlier translation incorrect. It was not about translation at all, but about context.

The mistake that is apparent is to assume that all parts of the epic are of the same age. Unlike the holy book that you are presumably used to, which permits of one and only one meaning, this source, the Mahabharata, is firstly NOT a holy book but an epic. If examples of epics from other cultures are needed, Shah-nameh by Firdausi is an example, or Homer's Iliad or Odyssey. Homer's works are now suspected to have been written by several hands; the Mahabharata is known to have been written by many hands. The difference in the Sanskrit used is vast; there are clear traces of centuries having elapsed in the usages between one section and another.

This reflects scholarly opinion; the reason for warning you (and others) against Wikipedia, as opposed to historically accurate analysis written by professional historians, is that these issues are frequently not mentioned, or are mentioned in passing in Wikipedia, and are difficult for the layman to detect. Which is what has happened in the present case.

The difficulty with using this passage is simply that later sections have been interpolated, and they have been interpolated, if one detects them as interpolations, for a purpose. In this case, as has been explained again and again, it is clearly the interpolation of a late period in history, possibly during the Gupta period, when the priesthood was located in middle India, in the present day Oudh and Bihar, and had a major propaganda objective of discrediting Brahmins from other points of the settlements of the incoming tribesmen, in order to secure for themselves a greater share of the fruits of priesthood - land, cows, money.

This passage disparages the Punjab and points further to the north and west for a purpose, for this purpose. It also disparages the original food habits and the original social norms and practices of the steppe tribesmen, in order to uphold the new social order that post-Vedic Hinduism sought to bring in, precisely with the support of those who were writing these passages.

The passage means everything in the context of these struggles, and means nothing as far as the objective of proving the people of the north-west alien is concerned.

This, and similar reasons, is precisely why in my original post, I had cautioned against using epics as sources of anthropological or soiological evidence. The study of these texts is a long and elaborate one, and some have spent entire lives on understanding them and their ramifications. It is not something to be acquired with a quick read of Wikipedia, or a first reading of the text itself.

 

[RVS_108]

The language of the IVC isn't known.


Ancient Indian history from between 2,000 and 5,000 years ago all occurred in what is now Pakistan. The Greeks did not realize modern day India existed until much later. So how can Ancient Indian history refer to the history of modern day India?


Some people might have known about the existence of Ancient Bharat. It's possible, but they didn't record it too well.


Bharat existed but much of the history of Ancient India was saved by the Greeks. They didn't even know of any land east of the Indus River.

So Bharati cities under the sea?

Ancient India and Ancient Egypt relation 5000+yrs ago

Peter Von Bohlen (1796-1840) German Indologist, compared India with ancient Egypt. He thought there was a cultural connection between the two in ancient times.

(source: German Indologists: Biographies of Scholars in Indian Studies writing in German - By Valentine Stache-Rosen. p.15-16).

In his book, Empire of the Soul: Some Journeys in India, Paul William Roberts, states:

" Recent research and scholarship make it increasingly possible to believe that the Vedic era was the lost civilization whose legacy the Egyptians and the Indians inherited. There must have been one. There are too many similarities between hieroglyphic texts and Vedic ones, these in turn echoed in somewhat diluted form and a confused fashion by the authors of Babylonian texts and the Old Testament."

(source: Empire of the Soul: Some Journeys in India - By Paul William Roberts p. 300).

It is believed that the Dravidians from India went to Egypt and laid the foundation of its civilization there. the Egyptians themselves had the tradition that they originally came from the South, from a land called Punt, which an historian of the West, Dr. H.R. Hall, thought referred to some part of India.

The Indus Valley civilization is, according to Sir John Marshall who was in charge of the excavations, the oldest of all civilizations unearthed (c. 4000 B.C.) It is older than the Sumerian and it is believed by many that the latter was a branch of the former.

(source: The Bhagvad Gita: A Scripture for the Future - Translation and Commentary by Sachindra K. Majumdar p. 28).

Adolf Erman (1854-1937) author of Life in ancient Egypt and A handbook of Egyptian religion, says that the persons who were responsible for a highly developed Egyptian civilization were from Punt, an Asiatic country, a description of which is unveiled by this scholar from the old legends - a distant country washed by the great seas, full of valleys, incense, balsum, precious metals and stones; rich in animals, cheetahs, panthers, dog-headed apes and long tailed monkeys, winged creatures with strange feathers to fly up to the boughs of wonderful trees, especially the incense tree and the coconut trees.

Dr. Erman further says that analyzing the Egyptian legends makes it clear that from Punt the heavenly beings headed by Amen, Horus and Hather, passed into the Nile valley...To this same country belongs that idol of Bes, the ancient figure of the deity in the Land of Punt.

M A Murray author of Legends of Ancient Egypt rightly observes that as a race the Egyptians are more Asiatic than African. He cites the type 'P' as depicted by Hatshepsut's artists as his support.

(source: The Aryan Hoax: That Dupes The Indians - By Paramesh Choudhary p. 225).

Klaus K. Klostermaier, in his book A Survey of Hinduism p. 18 says:

"For several centuries a lively commerce developed between the ancient Mediterranean world and India, particularly the ports on the Western coast. The most famous of these ports was Sopara, not far from modern Bombay, which was recently renamed Mumbai. Present day Cranganore in Kerala, identified with the ancient Muziris, claims to have had trade contacts with Ancient Egypt under Queen Hatsheput, who sent five ships to obtain spices, as well as with ancient Israel during King Soloman's reign. Apparently, the contact did not break off after Egypt was conquered by Greece and later by Rome.






India - Yaksha (dwarf) image discovered in cave 2nd century BC. Egypt Bes. depicted as a deformed dwarf. 3rd century BC.


Louis Jacolliot (1837-1890), who worked in French India as a government official and was at one time President of the Court in Chandranagar, translated numerous Vedic hymns, the Manusmriti, and the Tamil work, Kural. This French savant and author of La Bible Dans L'Inde says:

"With such congruence before us, no one, I imagine, will appear to contest the purely Hindu origin of Egypt, unless to suggest that: "And who tells you that it was not Indian that copied Egypt? Any of you require that this affirmation shall be refuted by proofs leaving no room for even a shadow of doubt?

"To be quite logical, then deprive India of the Sanskrit, that language which formed all other; but show me in India a leaf of papyrus, a columnar inscription, a temple bas relief tending to prove Egyptian birth."

(source: Hinduism in the Space Age - by E. Vedavyas p.117).

Heinrich Karl Brugsch agrees with this view and writes in his History of Egypt that,

"We have a right to more than suspect that India, eight thousand years ago, sent a colony of emigrants who carried their arts and high civilization into what is now known as Egypt." The Egyptians came, according to their records, from a mysterious land (now known to lie on the shores of the Indian Ocean)."

Col. Henry Steel Olcott, a former president of the Theosophical Society, who explained in a March, 1881 edition of The Theosophist (page 123) that:

"We have a right to more than suspect that India, eight thousand years ago, sent a colony of emigrants who carried their arts and high civilization into what is now known to us as Egypt...This is what Bengsch Bey, the modern as well as the most trusted Egyptologer and antiquarian says on the origin of the old Egyptians. Regarding these as a branch of the Caucasian family having a close affinity with the Indo-Germanic races, he insists that they 'migrated from India before historic memory, and crossed that bridge of nations, the Isthus of Suez, to find a new fatherland on the banks of the Nile."


The Egyptians came, according to their own records, from a mysterious land...on the shore of the Indian Ocean, the sacred Punt; the original home of their gods...who followed thence after their people who had abandoned them to the valley of the Nile, led by Amon, Hor and Hathor. This region was the Egyptian 'Land of the Gods,' Pa-Nuter, in old Egyptian, or Holyland, and now proved beyond any doubt to have been quite a different place from the Holyland of Sinai. By the pictorial hieroglyphic inscription found on the walls of the temple of the Queen Haslitop at Der-el-babri, we see that this Punt can be no other than India. For many ages the Egyptians traded with their old homes, and the reference here made by them to the names of the Princes of Punt and its fauna and flora, especially the nonmenclature of various precious woods to be found but in India, leave us scarcely room for the smallest doubt that the old civilization of Egypt is the direct outcome of that the older India."

(source: Theosophist for March 1881 p. 123).



A representation of the physical characteristics of Ita, wife of the chief of Punt - People of Punt carrying baskets of myrrh.

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 32).




River Goddess Ganga, Rameshvara Caves. Ellora. Hapi, god of the River Nile. Temple of Abydos, Egypt.

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 8 - 9).

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 70 - 71).

 

[RVS_108]

The Persian Connection


F. Max Muller speaks of the colonization of Persia by the Hindus. Discussing the word 'Arya', he says: "But it was more faithfully preserved by the Zoroastrians, who migrated from India to the North-west and whose religion has been preserved to us in the Zind Avesta, though in fragments only. He again says: "The Zoroastrians were a colony from Northern India."

(source: Science of Language - By Max Muller p. 242-253).

Arnold Hermann Ludwig Heeran says: "In point of fact that Zind is derived from the Sanskrit, and a passage to have descended from the Hindus of the second or warrior caste."

(source: Historical researches into the politics, intercourse, and trade of the Carthaginians, Ethiopians, and Egyptians - By A. H. Heeren Volume II p. 220).

Sir William Jones writes: "I was not a little surprised to find that out of words in Du Perron's Zind Dictionary, six or seven were pure Sanskrit."

(source: Sir William Jones' Works Volume I p. 82-82).






h o m e


i n d i a a n d e g y p t


c o n t e n t s

* Quotes
o 1-20
o 21-40
o 41-60
o 61-80
o 81-100
o 101-120
o 121-140
o 141-160
o 161-180
o 181-200
o 201-220
o 221-250
o 251-270
o 271-300
o 301-320
o 321-340
o 341-360
o 361-380
o 381-400
o 401-420
o 421-440
o 441-460
o Thoughts
* Basics
o Introduction
o Symbolism
o Scriptures
o Nature Worship
o Hindu Art
o Culture - I
o Culture - II
o Education
o Music
* Science
o Cosmology
o Advanced Concepts
o Vimanas
o War In Ancient India
o Sanskrit
o Yantras
o Yoga
* History
o Dwaraka
o India and Egypt
o India and China
o Suvarnabhumi Greater India
o Sacred Angkor I
o Sacred Angkor II
o Sacred Angkor III
o Sacred Angkor IV
o Pacific Waves
o Seafaring
o India and Greece
o Influence
o Islamic Onslaught
o European Imperialism
* Social
o Caste System
o Conversion
o Aryan Invasion Theory
o Women In Hinduism
o Revivalists
o Indologists
* Glimpses
o Glimpses XXIV
o Glimpses XXIII
o Glimpses XXII
o Glimpses XXI
o Glimpses XX
o Glimpses XIX
o Glimpses XVIII
o Glimpses XVII
o Glimpses XVI
o Glimpses XV
o Glimpses XIV
o Glimpses XIII
o Glimpses XII
o Glimpses XI
o Glimpses X
o Glimpses IX
o Glimpses VIII
o Glimpses VII
o Glimpses VI
o Glimpses V
o Glimpses IV
o Glimpses III
o Glimpses II
o Glimpses I
* Other
o Guest Book
o Old Guest Book
o Visitor Emails
o What's New
o 10 Year Anniversary
o Featured At
o Articles
o Images
o Links
o Recommended Books



Neither historical events nor cross-cultural currents can explain the unique parallels in the myths and imagery of ancient Egypt and India. Walafrid Strabo (c. 809–849) German scholar has said: "The lotus flower, sacred to Buddha and to Osiris, has five petals which symbolizes the four limbs and the head; the five senses; the five digits; and like the pyramid, the four parts of the compass and the zenith. Other esoteric meanings abound: for myths are seldom simple, and never irresponsible."

Indian contacts with the Western world date back to prehistoric times. Trade relations, preceded by the migration of peoples, inevitably developed into cultural relations. Evidence of Indian contact with the ancient civilizations to her west, however is certain. Knobbed pottery vases came to Sumer from India and so did cotton. In the Akkadian tongue, Indian cotton was expressed by ideographs meaning "vegetable cloth." Assurbanipal (668-626 B.C) cultivated Indian plants including the "wool-bearing trees" of India.

According to the Skandha Purana, Egypt (Africa) was known as Sancha-dvipa continent mentioned in Sir Willliams Jones' dissertation on Egypt. At Alexandria, in Egypt, Indian scholars were a common sight: they are mentioned both by Dio Chrysostom (c. 100 A.D.) and by Clement (c. 200 A.D.) Indirect contact between ancient India and Egypt through Mesopotamia is generally admitted, but evidence of a direct relationship between the two is at best fragmentary. Peter Von Bohlen (1796-1840) German Indologist, compared India with ancient Egypt. He thought there was a cultural connection between the two in ancient times. There are elements of folk art, language, and rural culture of Bengal which have an affinity with their Egyptian counterparts and which have not been explained satisfactorily in terms of Aryan, Mongolian, or Dravidian influences. There are similarities between place names in Bengal and Egypt and recently an Egyptian scholar, El Mansouri, has pointed out that in both Egypt and India the worship of cow, sun, snake, and river are common.

Recently, more definitive evidence suggesting contact between India and Egypt has become available. A terracotta mummy from Lothal vaguely resembles an Egyptian mummy and a similar terracotta mummy is found also at Mohenjodaro. In this context it is of interest to note that the Egyptian mummies are said to have been wrapped in Indian muslin. Characters similar to those on the Indus seals have also been found on tablets excavated from Easter Island.

Of all the Egyptian objects and motifs indicating some contact between India and Egypt during the Indus Valley period, "the cord pattern occurring in a copper tablet in the Indus Valley and on three Egyptian seals is the most striking link between the two countries. Gordon Childe has said, "In other words, in the third millennium B.C. India was already in a position to contribute to the building up of the cultural tradition that constitutes our spiritual heritage as she notoriously has done since the time of Alexander."



Introduction
The Lotus and the River
Cultural Contacts with Egypt
The Sun King and Dasharatha
The Persian Connection
Links to Ancient Egypt
Conclusion

***

Introduction

Peter Von Bohlen (1796-1840) German Indologist, compared India with ancient Egypt. He thought there was a cultural connection between the two in ancient times.

(source: German Indologists: Biographies of Scholars in Indian Studies writing in German - By Valentine Stache-Rosen. p.15-16).

In his book, Empire of the Soul: Some Journeys in India, Paul William Roberts, states:

" Recent research and scholarship make it increasingly possible to believe that the Vedic era was the lost civilization whose legacy the Egyptians and the Indians inherited. There must have been one. There are too many similarities between hieroglyphic texts and Vedic ones, these in turn echoed in somewhat diluted form and a confused fashion by the authors of Babylonian texts and the Old Testament."

(source: Empire of the Soul: Some Journeys in India - By Paul William Roberts p. 300).

It is believed that the Dravidians from India went to Egypt and laid the foundation of its civilization there. the Egyptians themselves had the tradition that they originally came from the South, from a land called Punt, which an historian of the West, Dr. H.R. Hall, thought referred to some part of India.

The Indus Valley civilization is, according to Sir John Marshall who was in charge of the excavations, the oldest of all civilizations unearthed (c. 4000 B.C.) It is older than the Sumerian and it is believed by many that the latter was a branch of the former.

(source: The Bhagvad Gita: A Scripture for the Future - Translation and Commentary by Sachindra K. Majumdar p. 28).

Adolf Erman (1854-1937) author of Life in ancient Egypt and A handbook of Egyptian religion, says that the persons who were responsible for a highly developed Egyptian civilization were from Punt, an Asiatic country, a description of which is unveiled by this scholar from the old legends - a distant country washed by the great seas, full of valleys, incense, balsum, precious metals and stones; rich in animals, cheetahs, panthers, dog-headed apes and long tailed monkeys, winged creatures with strange feathers to fly up to the boughs of wonderful trees, especially the incense tree and the coconut trees.

Dr. Erman further says that analyzing the Egyptian legends makes it clear that from Punt the heavenly beings headed by Amen, Horus and Hather, passed into the Nile valley...To this same country belongs that idol of Bes, the ancient figure of the deity in the Land of Punt.

M A Murray author of Legends of Ancient Egypt rightly observes that as a race the Egyptians are more Asiatic than African. He cites the type 'P' as depicted by Hatshepsut's artists as his support.

(source: The Aryan Hoax: That Dupes The Indians - By Paramesh Choudhary p. 225).

Klaus K. Klostermaier, in his book A Survey of Hinduism p. 18 says:

"For several centuries a lively commerce developed between the ancient Mediterranean world and India, particularly the ports on the Western coast. The most famous of these ports was Sopara, not far from modern Bombay, which was recently renamed Mumbai. Present day Cranganore in Kerala, identified with the ancient Muziris, claims to have had trade contacts with Ancient Egypt under Queen Hatsheput, who sent five ships to obtain spices, as well as with ancient Israel during King Soloman's reign. Apparently, the contact did not break off after Egypt was conquered by Greece and later by Rome.





India - Yaksha (dwarf) image discovered in cave 2nd century BC. Egypt Bes. depicted as a deformed dwarf. 3rd century BC.

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 70 - 71).

For more refer to chapter on Greater India: Suvarnabhumi and Sacred Angkor

***

Max Muller had also observed that the mythology of Egyptians (and also that of the Greeks and Assyrians) is wholly founded on Vedic traditions. Eusebius, a Greek writer, has also recorded that the early Ethiopians emigrated from the river Indus and first settled in the vicinity of Egypt.

In an essay entitled On Egypt from the Ancient Book of the Hindus (Asiatic Researchers Vol. III, 1792), British Lt. Colonel Wilford gave abundant evidence proving that ancient Indians colonized and settled in Egypt. The British explorer John Hanning Speke, who in 1862 discovered the source of the Nile in Lake Victoria, acknowledged that the Egyptians themselves didn't have the slightest knowledge of where the Nile's source was. However, Lt. Colonel Wilford's description of the Hindus' intimate acquaintance with ancient Egypt led Speke to Ripon Falls, at the edge of Lake Victoria.

Louis Jacolliot (1837-1890), who worked in French India as a government official and was at one time President of the Court in Chandranagar, translated numerous Vedic hymns, the Manusmriti, and the Tamil work, Kural. This French savant and author of La Bible Dans L'Inde says:

"With such congruence before us, no one, I imagine, will appear to contest the purely Hindu origin of Egypt, unless to suggest that: "And who tells you that it was not Indian that copied Egypt? Any of you require that this affirmation shall be refuted by proofs leaving no room for even a shadow of doubt?

"To be quite logical, then deprive India of the Sanskrit, that language which formed all other; but show me in India a leaf of papyrus, a columnar inscription, a temple bas relief tending to prove Egyptian birth."

(source: Hinduism in the Space Age - by E. Vedavyas p.117).

Heinrich Karl Brugsch agrees with this view and writes in his History of Egypt that,

"We have a right to more than suspect that India, eight thousand years ago, sent a colony of emigrants who carried their arts and high civilization into what is now known as Egypt." The Egyptians came, according to their records, from a mysterious land (now known to lie on the shores of the Indian Ocean)."

Col. Henry Steel Olcott, a former president of the Theosophical Society, who explained in a March, 1881 edition of The Theosophist (page 123) that:

"We have a right to more than suspect that India, eight thousand years ago, sent a colony of emigrants who carried their arts and high civilization into what is now known to us as Egypt...This is what Bengsch Bey, the modern as well as the most trusted Egyptologer and antiquarian says on the origin of the old Egyptians. Regarding these as a branch of the Caucasian family having a close affinity with the Indo-Germanic races, he insists that they 'migrated from India before historic memory, and crossed that bridge of nations, the Isthus of Suez, to find a new fatherland on the banks of the Nile."

The Egyptians came, according to their own records, from a mysterious land...on the shore of the Indian Ocean, the sacred Punt; the original home of their gods...who followed thence after their people who had abandoned them to the valley of the Nile, led by Amon, Hor and Hathor. This region was the Egyptian 'Land of the Gods,' Pa-Nuter, in old Egyptian, or Holyland, and now proved beyond any doubt to have been quite a different place from the Holyland of Sinai. By the pictorial hieroglyphic inscription found on the walls of the temple of the Queen Haslitop at Der-el-babri, we see that this Punt can be no other than India. For many ages the Egyptians traded with their old homes, and the reference here made by them to the names of the Princes of Punt and its fauna and flora, especially the nonmenclature of various precious woods to be found but in India, leave us scarcely room for the smallest doubt that the old civilization of Egypt is the direct outcome of that the older India."

(source: Theosophist for March 1881 p. 123).



A representation of the physical characteristics of Ita, wife of the chief of Punt - People of Punt carrying baskets of myrrh.

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 32).

Watch Lost / Submerged city of Dwaraka – The Learning Channel video

***

Edward Pococke (1604–1691) English Orientalist says: "At the mouths of the Indus dwell a seafaring people, active, ingenious, and enterprising as when, ages subsequent to this great movement.....these people coast along the shores of Mekran, traverse the mouth of the Persian Gulf, and again adhering to the sea-board of Oman, Hadramant, and Yeman (the Eastern Arabia), they sail up the Red Sea; and again ascending mighty stream that fertilizes a land of wonders, found the kingdom of Egypt, Nubia and Abyssinia. These are the same stock that, centuries subsequently to this colonization, spread the blessings of civilization over Hellas and her islands."

(source: India in Greece - By Edward Pococke p. 42).

Arnold Hermann Ludwig Heeren (1760-1842) an Egyptologist has observed: "It is perfectly agreeable to Hindu manners that colonies from India, i.e., Banian families should have passed over Africa, and carried with them their industry, and perhaps also their religious worship." "Whatever weight may be attached to Indian tradition and the express testimony of Eusebius confirming the report of migrations from the banks of the Indus into Egypt, there is certainly nothing improbable in the event itself, as a desire of gain would have formed a sufficient inducement."

(source: Historical Researches - Heeran p. 309).

Ethiopia, as is universally admitted now, was colonized by the Hindus. Sir William Jones says: "Ethiopia and Hindustan were possessed or colonized by the same extraordinary race."

(source: Asiatic Researches - volume I p. 426).

Louis Jacolliot has written:

“Egypt received from India, by Manes or Manu, its social institutions and laws, which resulted in division of the people into four castes, and placing the priest in the first rank; in the second, kings; then traders and artisans; and last in the social scale, the proletaire – the menial almost a slave.”

Manu – Manes – Minos – Moses

A philosopher gives political and religious institutions to India and named Manu. The Egyptian legislator receives the name of Manes.

A Cretan visits Egypt to study the institutions with which he desired to endow his country, and history preserves his memory under the name of Minos.

Lastly, the liberation of the servile caste of He brews founds a new society and is named Moses.

Manu, Manes, Minos, Moses – these four names overshadow the entire ancient world, they appear at the cradles of four different peoples to play the same role.

Let us beware, the times of Brahminism, of Sacerdotalism, of Levitism, in India, in Egypt, in Judes, presents nothing to compare with the flames of Inquisition, the Vandois massacres, or St. Bartholomew’s resound with Te Deum of exultation.

(source: Bible in India: Hindoo Origin of Hebrew and Christian Revelation p 60 - 67 and 125).

Philostratus introduces the Brahman Iarchus by stating to his auditor that the Ethiopians were originally an Indian race compelled to leave India for the impurity contracted by slaying a certain monarch to whom they owed allegiance."

Two ancient civilizations, contemporaneous, both growing along the banks of rivers which flow down from mountains, through desert. Both rivers support crocodiles and both people worship river gods and crocodiles and worship cows and have a wonderfully developed cosmogony. Both have a form of caste system. Both have contributed immensely to world culture in almost every field. Surely they must have interacted despite the vast geographical distances involved. There is evidence to suggest contact between the two from around BCE 3000 with the findings of Indian muslin, cotton and dhania (coriander) in Egypt. After about the third century BCE, during the time of Ptolemy Euergetes an Indian sailor was found shipwrecked on the coast of the Red Sea. He was taken to Alexandria where, in exchange for hospitality, he agreed to show the Ptolemy's men a direct sea route to India across the Indian Ocean. Thus began a most profitable period of contact between these two nations. During Emperor Ashoka's reign ambassadors were exchanged. Contact continued until Egypt came under Roman Law. After a short hiatus renewed ventures were undertaken now bigger and powerful markets of Rome clamoring for goods. Although trade was the reason for exchange many ideas that influenced each other's art and iconography also passed back and forth. There is a large body of evidence which documents the close relationships between these two countries. There has always been evidence to suggest indirect means of contact between these two.

"It is testified by Herdotus, Plato, Salon, Pythagoras, and Philostratus that the religion of Egypt proceeded from India....It is testified by Neibuhr, Valentia, Champollian and Weddington that the temples of upper Egypt are of greater antiquity than those of lower Egypt...that consequently the religion of Egypt, according to the testimony of those monuments....came from India...The chronicles found in the temples of Abydos and Sais and which have been transmitted by Josephus, Julius Africanus, and Eusebius, all testify that the religious system of the Egyptians proceeded from India."

"We have Hindu chronologies (besides those of the Puranas concerning the Yuga) which go still further back in time than the Tables of the Egyptian kings according to Manetho."

There was intimate relations between India and Egypt. It is pointed out that in the processions of Ptolemy Philadelphus (265-246 BCE) were to be seen Indian women, Indian hunting dogs, Indian cows, and Indian spices.

According to the Jewish chronicles, there was a sea voyage to the East in the time of Soloman (c. 800 BCE). and many articles were brought from there. The use of the Indian names for merchandise raises a strong presumption in favor of their Indian origin. The word 'Sindhu' found in the library of Assurbanipal, is used in the sense of Indian cotton. The Hebrew Karpas is derived from the Sanskrit Karpassa.

One of the Jataka stories makes a reference to a trading voyage to the kingdom of Baveru and scholars have interpreted it as the Indian form of Babylon. This points to trade between India and Babylon. The Boghz koi inscriptions of the 14th century BCE. contain the names of such deities as Mitra, Varuna, Indra etc. These names indicate that there was a very close contact between India and Western Asia before the 14th century BCE. There are imported Indian iron, and steel, and Indian cotton cloth; the broad cloth called monache and that called sagmatogene, and girdles, and coats of skin and mallow-colored cloth, and a few muslins, and colored lac.

Gustav Oppert (1836-1908) born in Hamburg, Germany, he taught Sanskrit and comparative linguistics at the Presidency College, Madras for 21 years. He was the Telugu translator to the Government and Curator, Government Oriental Manuscript Library. He wrote a book Die Gottheiten der Indier ("The Gods of the Indians") in 1905.

In his book Oppert discussed the chief gods of the Aryans and he compares Aditi with Egyptian Isis and the Babylonian Ea.

(source: German Indologists: Biographies of Scholars in Indian Studies writing in German - By Valentine Stache-Rosen. p.81-82).

We are not completely in the dark on the question of Indian influence on Greece. Speaking of ascetic practices in the West, Professor Sir Flinders Petrie (1853-1942) British archaeologist and Egyptologist, author of Egypt and Israel (1911) observes:

"The presence of a large body of Indian troops in the Persian army in Greece in 480 B.C. shows how far west the Indian connections were carried; and the discovery of modeled heads of Indians at Memphis, of about the fifth century B.C. shows that Indians were living there for trade. Hence there is no difficulty in regarding India as the source of the entirely new ideal of asceticism in the West."

(source: Eastern Religions & Western Thought - By S. Radhakrishnan p. 150).

He feels that the doctrine of rebirth, favored by keeping all bodily senses in abeyance, and brought to pass by driving out the twelve inner torments by their antitheses, was accepted in Egypt under the Indian influence.

(source: Religious Life in Egypt - By W. M Flinders Petrie p. 211).

Friedrich Wilhelm, Freiherr von Bissing (1873-1956) wrote:

"The land of Punt in the Egyptian ethnological traditions has been identified by the scholars with the Malabar coast of Deccan. From this land ebony, and other rich woods, incense, balsam, precious metals, etc. used to be imported into Egypt."

(source: Prehistoricsche Topfen aus Indien and Aegypten - By Friedrich Wilhelm, Freiherr von Bissing. Chapter VIII ).

The Egyptians similarly called their ancient land Puanit (land of Panis (poenis or traders) in Egyptian : Word corrupted to a meaningless Punt) and before that, Amenti. Puanit can be reached leading off the Red Sea (South-east direction) to India [specifically East India, since Egyptians had more in common culturally with East India , theologically similar cat headed goddess Shashti, ancient references to embalming and afterlife in the area and the unmistakable 'bengali' accent in Egyptian (v becomes b, a becomes o or u (Eg Vena becomes Benu)] and Amenti should be Indonesia. The polynesians both in Madagascar and in Fiji seem to trace their origins to Indonesia. Indonesia is also geographically central to almost all ancient temple-building cultures, barring Europe

Top of Page

The Lotus and the River

The flower so prolific in the imagery of both India and Egypt, grows out of the waters and opens its petals to be warmed by the sun: to be fertilized. From the earliest imagery in stone at Sanchi, of the first century BC in India, the lotus is associated with Sri, the goddess of fertility, who is later invoked as Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth and abundance - being worshipped by Buddhists, Jains, and Hindus alike. The lotus is held in each hand by Surya, signifying the fertilizing powers of the sun as he travels through the universe.

In Egypt, the blue lotus appears in the earliest wall paintings of the VI Dynasty at the pyramids of Saqqara and in all funerary stelae. They are offered to the deceased, and held in the hand as thought they possess the power to revitalize them: to bring the deceased back to life. Carved out of blue lapis, along with the golden falcon and the sun that are the symbols of the god Horus, the lotus appears among the funerary treasures from the tomb of Tutankhamen.

The lotus then, becomes a leitmotiv, a symbol most apt since its links the waters with the sun, the earth to sky - signifying fertility and regeneration in both Egypt and India. For, it is the seed of the plant which spells out the cycle of birth-decay-death and rebirth that forms the essential pattern of belief in these two riverine and agricultural societies. In India and Egypt, the rivers Saraswati and Ganga and the Nile have brought sustenance to the land and nourished these civilizations which have survived five millennia. Both these rivers, the Ganga and the Nile, are personified and worshipped. They provide the dramatic backdrop against which myths and indeed created, to explain the topographic conditions of the land.



Lotus in full bloom. Railing pillar in stupa, Sanchi Gajalakshmi seated on Lotus. Kalaghat painting

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 4).

Watch Scientific verification of Vedic knowledge

***

From its source in the Himalayas to the Bay of Bengal, the Ganga flows some two thousand five hundred kilometers, through the rich deltaic region which is known as Aryavarta, in the most densely populated area of India. Puranic myths recount the divine origins of Ganga, as she fell from heaven to earth in response to penance performed by the sage Bhagiratha: to bring the powers of water to an earth parched for over a thousand years. At the seventh century seaport of Mahabalipuram in south India, this epic theme is entirely carved out of a granite rock spanning almost fifty feet. A natural cleft in the rock allows the rain water to pour down in great ******** - as though this were the descent of a mighty river. Besides this cleft are carved the serpentine forms of the naga devatas (snake divinities), the sun and the moon, the gandharvas and kinnaras (celestial beings), the hunters and animals of the forest - all of them rejoicing in this great event where the divine rive is celebrated as the savior of all mankind.

Here is a spectacular instance of the way in which myth is used to relate man to the environment. In this myth one senses an acute awareness of the ecological balance which needs to be maintained: of the vapors of the sea rising to the sky through heat, described in the myth as tapas, and then falling back to earth as the divine river, to flow down through the matted locks of Lord Shiva, on to the Himalayas, to flow back into the ocean.



River Goddess Ganga, Rameshvara Caves. Ellora. Hapi, god of the River Nile. Temple of Abydos, Egypt.

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 8 - 9).

***

As in India, so in Egypt, the river is personified in human form. A sandstone relief from the temple of Rameses II at Abydos depicts Hapi, god of the Nile, holding a pair of blue lotus stalks in his hands; suspended from the god's right arm is the ankh, the symbol of life. Unlike the Ganga, the blue god of the Nile is male, but with one female breast to symbolize his role as nourisher - releasing the waters each year to provide sustenance to mankind.

The main presiding deity of the Egyptian pantheon is Osiris, like Yama, god of the dead, whose story of life, death and regeneration has been transmitted to us in great detail by Plutarch.

Some extraordinary parallels with the Osirian myth are found among the myths and images of India. Lord Vishnu lied recumbent on the bed of the ocean asleep, as indeed Osiris lied prostate and dead on a bier.

The Hindi word for cow means also "ray of illumination," and in Egyptian lore a cow is sometimes depicted as the source of light in the sky.

***

The Puranas, Nile and Lake Amara

Significant also is the fact that Lieutenant Speake, when planning his discovery of the source of the Nile, secured his best information from a map reconstructed out of Puranas. (Journal, pp. 27, 77, 216; Wilford, in Asiatic Researches, III).

It traced the course of the river, the "Great Krishna," through Cusha-dvipa, from a great lake in Chandristhan, "Country of the Moon," which it gave the correct position in relation to the Zanzibar islands. The name was from the native Unya-muezi, having the same meaning; and the map correctly mentioned another native name, Amara, applied to the district bordering Lake Victoria Nyanza.

"All our previous information," says Speake, "concerning the hydrography of these regions, originated with the ancient Hindus, who told it to the priests of the Nile; and all these busy Egyptian geographers, who disseminated their knowledge with a view to be famous for their long-sightedness, in solving the mystery which enshrouded the source of their holy river, were so many hypothetical humbugs. The Hindu traders had a firm basis to stand upon through their intercourse with the Abyssinians."

(source: Periplus of the Erythrean Sea - W.H. Schoff p. 229-230).

The Puranas have a remarkable connection with one of the most important discoveries of the 19th century. In 1858, John Hanning Speke (1827-1864) – Speke was commissioned in the British Indian Army in 1844 – made the discovery that Lake Victoria was the source of the River Nile in Africa. Speke wrote that to some Indian Pundits (Hindu scholars) the Nile was known as Nila, and also as Kaali. Nila means blue and Kaali means dark – both apt descriptions for the Nile near its source. These are mentioned in several Puranas including the Bhavishaya.

This went against the conventional wisdom, for Lake Victoria was unknown at the time. Sir Richard Burton, the leader of the Nile expedition, had identified Lake Tangyanika as the source. Speke, however, following upon the advice of a Benares (Varansi) Pundit, insisted that the real source was a much large lake that lay to the north. Following this advice Speke went on to discover Victoria. The Pundit had also told him that the real source were twin peaks as Somagiri, ‘Soma’ in Sanskrit stands for moon and ‘giri’ means peak, and Somagiri therefore are none other than the fabled Mountains of the Moon in Central Africa! The Pundit must have known all this. He published his book Journal of the Discovery of the Source of the Nile in 1863.

(source: Nostradamus and Beyond – N S Rajaram p. 60 - 67).

Colonel Rigby now gave me a most interesting paper, with a map attached to it, about the Nile and the Mountains of the Moon. It was written by Lieutenant Wilford, from the "Purans" of the Ancient Hindus. As it exemplifies, to a certain extent, the supposition I formerly arrived at concerning the Mountains of the Moon being associated with the country of the Moon, I would fain draw the attention of the reader of my travels to the volume of the "Asiatic Researches" in which it was published. It is remarkable that the Hindus have christened the source of the Nile Amara, which is the name of a country at the north-east corner of the Victoria N'yanza. This, I think, shows clearly, that the ancient Hindus must have had some kind of communication with both the northern and southern ends of the Victoria N'yanza.

(source: Journal of the Discovery of The Source of the Nile - http:/www.capitalnet.com/~jcbyers/Speke/nile-chap01.htm).

Top of Page

Cultural Contacts with Egypt

All through the ages the peoples of India have had active intercourse with the other peoples of the world. Since the days of Mohenjo daro culture, the Hindus have never lived in an alleged "splendid isolation." It is generally assumed that internationalism or cosmopolitism is a very recent phenomenon in human affairs. As a matter of fact, however, culture has ever been international.

The dawn of human civilization finds the Hindus as captains of industry and entrepreneurs of commerce. They were in touch with the Pharaohs of Egypt. The mummies of the Egyptians were wrapped in muslin which was imported from India. Hindu trade gave to the land of the Nile ivory, gold, spices, tamarind-wood, sandal-wood, monkeys, and other characteristic Indian plants and animals. It is also believed that the textile craftsmen of Egypt dyed their cloth with Hindu indigo. Hindu ships brought the Indian commodities to the Arabian ports, or to the Land of Punt; and from there these were transported to Luxor, Karnak and Memphis.

Hindu commerce with the land of the Euphrates was more intimate and direct. As early as about 3000 B.C. the Hindus supplied the Chaldean city of Ur on the Euphrates with teak-wood. The Assyrians also, like the Egyptians, got their muslin from India. In fact, vegetable "wool", i.e. cotton, and wool producing plants have been some of the earliest gifts of Hindu merchants to the world. From the tenth to the sixth century B.C. the Assyro-Babylonian trade of the Hindus seems to have been very brisk. Hindus brought with them apes, elephants, cedar, teak, peacocks, tigers, rice, ivory, and other articles to Babylon, the Rome of Western Asia. It was through this Indo-Mesopotamian trade that the Athenians of the sixth century B.C. came to know of rice and peacocks.





(India) vanadevata's (wood spirit) hand issuing from tree trunk offering water - (Egypt) deceased drinking water offered by tree divinity

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 69).

***

This expansion of Hindu activity influenced the literature of the time, e.g. the Vedas and Jatakas. A cylinder seal of about 2,000 B.C. bearing cuneiform inscriptions and images of Chaldean deities have been unearthed in Central India. In Southern India has been found a Babylonian sarcophagus.

Hindu trade with the Hebrews also was considerable. Soloman (1015 B.C), King of Judaea, was a great internationalist. In order to promote the trade of his land he set up a port at the head of the right arm of the Red Sea. He made his race the medium of intercourse between Phoenicians and Hindus. The port of Ophir (in Southern India) is famous in Hebrew literature for its trade in gold under Soloman. The Books of Genesis, Kings and Ezekiel indicate the nature and amount of Hindu contact with Asia Minor. It is held by Biblical scholars that the stones in the breast plate of the high priest may have come from India. The Hindus supplied also the demand of Syria for ivory and ebony. The Hebrew word, tuki (peacock), is derived from Tamil (South Indian) tokei, and ahalin (aloe) from aghil.

Top of Page

The Sun King and Dasharatha

Subhash Kak has observed: "A sad consequence of the racist historiography of the 19th century Indologists and their successors is the neglect of India's interaction with Africa. Cyril A Hromnik's Indo-Africa : towards a new understanding of the history of sub-Saharan Africa (1981) is the only book on the Indian contribution to the history of sub-Saharan Africa that I am aware of, but it is just an exploratory study.

The Sun King and Dasharatha - Two historical persons with Indic connections -- one from North Mesopotamia and the other from Egypt.

The Sun King Akhenaten of Egypt (ruled 1352-1336 BC according to the mainstream view) was the son-in-law to Dasharatha, the Mitanni king of North Syria, through the queen, Kiya. (The name Dasharatha is spelled Tushratta in the Hittite cuneiform script, which does not distinguish between 'd' and 't' very well. Some have suggested that the Sanskrit original is Tvesharatha, “having splendid chariots.&#8221 Letters exchanged between Akhenaten and Dasharatha have been found in Amarna in Egypt and other evidence comes from the tombs of the period that have been discovered in excellent condition.

The Mitanni, who worshiped Vedic gods, belonged to an Indic kingdom that was connected by marriage across several generations to the Egyptian 18th dynasty to which Akhenaten belonged. The first Mitanni king was Sutarna I (“good sun&#8221. He was followed by Paratarna I (“great sun&#8221, Parashukshatra (“ruler with axe&#8221, Saukshatra (“son of Sukshatra, the good ruler&#8221, Paratarna II, Artatama or Ritadhama (“abiding in cosmic law&#8221, Sutarna II, Dasharatha, and finally Mativaja (Matiwazza, “whose wealth is prayer&#8221 during whose lifetime the Mitanni state appears to have become a vassal to Assyria.

But how could an Indic kingdom be so far from India, near Egypt? After catastrophic earthquakes dried up the Sarasvati river around 1900 BC, many groups of Indic people started moving West. We see Kassites, a somewhat shadowy aristocracy with Indic names and worshiping Surya and the Maruts, in Western Iran about 1800 BC. They captured power in Babylon in 1600 BC, which they were to rule for over 500 years.

The Mitanni ruled northern Mesopotamia (including Syria) for about 300 years, starting 1600 BC, out of their capital of Vasukhani. (For Mitanni names, I give standard Sanskrit spellings rather than the form that we find in inscriptions in the inadequate cuneiform script, such as Wassukkani for Vasukhani, “a mine of wealth.&#8221 Their warriors were called marya, which is the proper Sanskrit term for it.

In a treaty between the Hittites and the Mitanni, Indic deities Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatya (Ashvins) are invoked. A text by a Mitannian named Kikkuli uses words such as aika (eka, one), tera (tri, three), panza (pancha, five), satta (sapta, seven), na (nava, nine), vartana (vartana, round). Another text has babru (babhru, brown), parita (palita, grey), and pinkara (pingala, red). Their chief festival was the celebration of vishuva (solstice) very much like in India. It is not only the kings who had Sanskrit names; a large number of other Sanskrit names have been unearthed in the records from the area.

The Vedic presence via the Mitanni in Egypt and the Near East occurs several centuries before the exodus of the Jews. This presence is sure to have left its mark in various customs, traditions, and beliefs. It may be that this encounter explains uncanny similarities in mythology and ritual, such as circumambulation around a rock or the use of a rosary of 108 beads.

(source: The Sun King and Dasharatha - By Subhash Kak sulekha.com).

The Sphinxes of India

In Indian art and culture the existence and presence of the sphinx as a mythological being has so far gone unnoticed and unrecognized. But through many years of research I have found that the sphinx plays a significant role in the arts and traditions of many temples in India. And not only in the art, but also in ritual and legend.

(source: The Sphinxes of India - By Raja Deekshitar - Swaveda.com).

***

India's Contact with the West

H. R. Hall writes in his book, The Ancient History of the Near East (London, 1913, p. 74): “There is no doubt that the Indus must have been one of the oldest centers of human civilization, and it seems natural to consider that the strange non-Semitic and non-Aryan people who came from the east to civilize the west was of Indian origin, particularly when we see to what point the Sumerians looked like Indians in appearance.”

The Egyptians attributed an eastern origin to their culture, starting that they had come from the East by sea, from the land of “Punt”. Maritime communications and trading from the mouths of the Indus to the south of Arabia and as far as the Egyptians coast – very important during the early period of Egypt – had always existed. The fact that the Egyptians had built a canal from the Nile to the Red Sea implies a considerable volume of trade toward the south and east. The center of sea trade between India and the Mediterranean appears to have been south of Arabia and Socotra (probably the Egyptian Pas-enka), the Greek Dioscorida, called Sukhadara dvipa (the Happy Isle) by the Indians.



By the pictorial hieroglyphic inscription found on the walls of the temple of the Queen Haslitop at Der-el-babri, we see that this Punt can be no other than India. "It is testified by Herdotus, Plato, Salon, Pythagoras, and Philostratus that the religion of Egypt proceeded from India. "

The land of Punt in the Egyptian ethnological traditions has been identified by the scholars with the Malabar coast of Deccan. From this land ebony, and other rich woods, incense, balsam, precious metals, etc. used to be imported into Egypt."

(image source: Bold Voyages and Great Explorers: The Quest for India - By Bjorn Landstrom).

***

The geographical sections of the Puranas (Ancient Chronicles of India) mentions Mecca among the holy places, under the name of Makheshvara, together with its black stone as an emblem of the god Shiva.

The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, written in the first century tells of the founding of the city of Endaemon, or modern Aden: “In the early days of the city when the voyage was not yet made from India to Egypt, and when they did not dare to sail from Egypt to the ports across the ocean (those of India), but all came together at this place, it received the cargoes from both countries.” The Periplus indicates that Endaemon had been founded by Indian merchants, the Minas, whom Strabo calls Minaeans. Pliny speaks of the Minaeans as the most ancient of trading peoples and mentions relations between the Minaeans and King Minos of Crete. The prophet Ezekiel relates that their trading expeditions reached as far as the Phoenician city of Tyre.

According to Sergi, “the Egyptians and all other Hamitic peoples came out of Asia,” while according to Haddon, “at the beginning of history, some Asians came to Egypt, first from the south, eventually bringing with them bronze and probably also the plough and wheat.”

In the seventh century, St. Isidore made a summary in his Encyclopedia of knowledge derived from ancient Greek and Latin authors, many of whose works have now disappeared. He also speaks of “Ethiopians” in his Etymologiarium (IX.2.128): “They came in ancient times from the River Indus, established themselves in Egypt between the Nile and the sea, towards the south, in the equatorial regions. They became three nations: the Hesperians to the west, the Garamantes in Tripolitania, and the Indians in the east. (The Hesperians” are the ancient inhabitants of Spain; “Garamantes” can be connected to Karama “city in Dravidian); and “the Indians” refers to the inhabitants of Ethiopia, who were also mistaken in ancient literature for the inhabitants of India.”

Between the 6th and the first millennium B.C.E., relations between India and the Near East are evident. Precious stones – amazonite – coming from Nilgiri in southern India have been found at Ur prior to the Jemder Nasr period (3000 B.C.E). Indian seals have been found in Bahrain and in Mesopotamia in pre-Sargonic levels (2500 B.C.E). Traces of Indian cotton have been found, and there are archaeological indications of sea trade with India in the Larsa period (2170 to 1950 B.C.E). The beams of the Temple of the Moon, at Ur of the Chaldees, and those of the palace of Nebuchadnezzar (6th century B.C.E.) were of teak and cedarwood coming from Malabar in southern India.

(source: A Brief History of India - By Alain Danielou p. 12 - 20).

Top of Page

The Persian Connection

F. Max Muller speaks of the colonization of Persia by the Hindus. Discussing the word 'Arya', he says: "But it was more faithfully preserved by the Zoroastrians, who migrated from India to the North-west and whose religion has been preserved to us in the Zind Avesta, though in fragments only. He again says: "The Zoroastrians were a colony from Northern India."

(source: Science of Language - By Max Muller p. 242-253).

Arnold Hermann Ludwig Heeran says: "In point of fact that Zind is derived from the Sanskrit, and a passage to have descended from the Hindus of the second or warrior caste."

(source: Historical researches into the politics, intercourse, and trade of the Carthaginians, Ethiopians, and Egyptians - By A. H. Heeren Volume II p. 220).

Sir William Jones writes: "I was not a little surprised to find that out of words in Du Perron's Zind Dictionary, six or seven were pure Sanskrit."

(source: Sir William Jones' Works Volume I p. 82-82).





(India) A terracotta solar plaque illustrating solar boat (Egypt) - solar boat

(image source: India and Egypt - edited by Saryu Doshi p. 80-81).

***

Mr Haug, in an interesting essay on the origin of Zoroastrian religion, compares it with Brahminism, and points out the originally-close connection between Brahminical and the Zoroastrian religions, customs and observances. After comparing names of divine beings, names and legends of heroes, sacrificial rites, religious observances, domestic rites, and cosmographical opinions that occur both in the Vedic and Avasta writings, he says: "In the Vedas as well as in the older portions of the Zind-Avesta (see the Gathas), there are sufficient traces to be discovered that the Zoroastrian religion arose out of a vital struggle against a certain form of Brahminical religion had assumed at a certain early period.

After contrasting the names of the Hindu gods and the Zoroastrian deities, he continues: "These facts throw some light upon the age which that great religious struggle took place, the consequence of which was the entire separation of the Ancient Iranians from the Brahmins and the foundation of the Zoroastrian religion. It must have occurred when Indra was the chief god of Hinduism."

(source: Essays on the Parsees - By Haug p. 288).



Ancient Indian Towns found under the sea:
Introduction: Ancient structures, under water and on land, discovered

Ancient structural remains of some significance have been discovered at Dwaraka, under water and on land, by the Underwater Archaeology Wing (UAW) of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). Alok Tripathi, Superintending Archaeologist, UAW, said the ancient underwater structures found in the Arabian Sea were yet to be identified. "We have to find out what they are. They are fragments. I would not like to call them a wall or a temple. They are part of some structure," said Dr. Tripathi, himself a trained diver.

Thirty copper coins were also found in the excavation area. The structures found on land belonged to the medieval period. "We have also found 30 copper coins. We are cleaning them. After we finish cleaning them, we can give their date," he said.

Dwaraka is a coastal town in Jamnagar district of Gujarat. Traditionally, modern Dwaraka is identified with Dvaraka or Dvaravati, mentioned in the Mahabharata as Krishna 's city. Dwaraka was a port, and some scholars have identified it with the island of Barka mentioned in the Periplus of Erythrean Sea. Ancient Dwaraka sank in sea and hence is an important archaeological site.

The first archaeological excavations at Dwaraka were done by the Deccan College , Pune and the Department of Archaeology, Government of Gujarat, in 1963 under the direction of H.D. Sankalia. It revealed artefacts many centuries old.

The ASI conducted a second round of excavations in 1979 under S.R. Rao's direction. He found a distinct pottery known as lustrous red ware, which could be more than 3,000 years old. Based on the results of these excavations, the search for the sunken city in the Arabian Sea began in 1981. Scientists and archaeologists have continually worked on the site for 20 years.

The UAW began excavations at Dwaraka again from January 2007. Dr. Tripathi said: "To study the antiquity of the site in a holistic manner, excavations are being conducted simultaneously both on land [close to the Dwarakadhish temple] and undersea so that finds from both the places can be co-related and analysed scientifically."

The objective of the excavation is to know the antiquity of the site, based on material evidence. In the offshore excavation, the ASI's trained underwater archaeologists and the divers of the Navy searched the sunken structural remains. The finds were studied and documented.

On land, the excavation is being done in the forecourt of the Dwarakadhish temple. Students from Gwalior , Lucknow , Pune, Vadodara, Varanasi and Bikaner are helping ASI archaeologists. In the forecourt, old structures including a circular one have been found. A small cache of 30 copper coins was discovered.

(source: Significant finds at Dwaraka - By T.S. Subramanian - The Hindu February 23, 2007)
Scientific Verification of Vedic Knowledge

 

[roadrunner]

No, this translation is not incorrect. Nor was the earlier translation incorrect. It was not about translation at all, but about context.

The mistake that is apparent is to assume that all parts of the epic are of the same age.

It makes no difference whether all parts of the epic were written in 1 day or over 400 years. They are all part of the same book whether it was written 400 years before or not. Until a section is discarded, it is part of that book.

Unlike the holy book that you are presumably used to, which permits of one and only one meaning, this source, the Mahabharata, is firstly NOT a holy book but an epic. If examples of epics from other cultures are needed, Shah-nameh by Firdausi is an example, or Homer's Iliad or Odyssey. Homer's works are now suspected to have been written by several hands; the Mahabharata is known to have been written by many hands. The difference in the Sanskrit used is vast; there are clear traces of centuries having elapsed in the usages between one section and another.

I disagree with Homer's Iliad since it is nothing to do with religion, but can be ascribed to Ancient Greek culture. The Firdausi one looks to be an equal example. The Mahabharata is to Hinduism what the Shahnameh is to Zoroastrianism. Both these books are central in defining Hindu and Zoroastrian culture.

You claim the Mahabharat is not a Holy Book, but an epic. Why do you say this? It is both a Holy Book and an epic, or a Holy Epic. Can you tell me what you think of these statements?

"Hinduism does not possess a single holy book like Bible in Christianity and Quran in Islamic Dharma. Hinduism consists of several holy books... prime of which are the sacred Bhagavad Gita and Ramayana. All depends upon the journey of life... if one has a spiritual inclination... the foremost of all holy books of Hinduism is Bhagavad Gita.

The sacred Bhagavad Gita is part of Mahabharata... a holy epic of Hinduism! The doctrine of Bhagavad Gita is a sure shot method for reaching God Almighty. Assimilating the wisdom contained in the holy book Bhagavad Gita of Hinduism human beings finally gained enlightenment (kaivalya jnana) and salvation (moksha)."
Hinduism holy book | Important Books and Writings of hinduism

This reflects scholarly opinion; the reason for warning you (and others) against Wikipedia, as opposed to historically accurate analysis written by professional historians, is that these issues are frequently not mentioned, or are mentioned in passing in Wikipedia, and are difficult for the layman to detect. Which is what has happened in the present case.

I don't understand why you're bringing up professional historians. They're not under discussion at the moment. It's the content of the Mahabharata. You've said the content is accurate. You've also said it has been written by several authors over 400 years, and so what? It is still the Mahabharata.

The difficulty with using this passage is simply that later sections have been interpolated, and they have been interpolated, if one detects them as interpolations, for a purpose. In this case, as has been explained again and again, it is clearly the interpolation of a late period in history, possibly during the Gupta period, when the priesthood was located in middle India, in the present day Oudh and Bihar, and had a major propaganda objective of discrediting Brahmins from other points of the settlements of the incoming tribesmen, in order to secure for themselves a greater share of the fruits of priesthood - land, cows, money.

It doesn't matter if it's been added in later or not. That is the official translation of the major Holy Epic of Hinduism. Whether it was written during the Gupta period or not is irrelevant. The fact is it is part of the Mahabharata.

This passage disparages the Punjab and points further to the north and west for a purpose, for this purpose. It also disparages the original food habits and the original social norms and practices of the steppe tribesmen, in order to uphold the new social order that post-Vedic Hinduism sought to bring in, precisely with the support of those who were writing these passages.

Cultural war. But it's a fundamental book of Hinduism and so is a fundamental passage.

The passage means everything in the context of these struggles, and means nothing as far as the objective of proving the people of the north-west alien is concerned.

It shows that fundamentally Hinduism was historically opposed to a Pakistani area. Whether this would have changed if they had followed later Hinduism, or whether it's part of Hindu belief regardless of whether Pakistan would be Hindu or not doesn't change that Hinduism was historically opposed to the people in the Pakistani area.

Some Hindu fanatics hold this passage (like the rest of the Mahabharata) very closely.

This, and similar reasons, is precisely why in my original post, I had cautioned against using epics as sources of anthropological or soiological evidence. The study of these texts is a long and elaborate one, and some have spent entire lives on understanding them and their ramifications. It is not something to be acquired with a quick read of Wikipedia, or a first reading of the text itself.

This is an old argument. "you cannot understand it". I can read, i can think, and until you logically show me why I'm incorrect, I would say I'm correct.

 

[RVS_108]

The modern India is a continuation of Ancient India
cuz Ancient India was alive even in invader's rule in India like Islamic Rule in India or British Raj in India
so now i wanna show u Vedic(ancient Indian) influence not only in Islamic Arts(&Architecture) but also in Greco-Romanaic and Ancient Egyptians
Check this out ....by Stephen Knapp
Photographic Evidence of Vedic Influence

So this proves tht Ancient India still exists in a fullform which is why everybody says India is a continuation of Ancient India

 

[Joe Shearer]

The language of the IVC isn't known.

You are to be congratulated. At least there is one fact on which we are agreed. If we both persist, another might turn up, and then a third, and a fourth, and so on. However, I am not holding my breath, given what you have written below.

Ancient Indian history from between 2,000 and 5,000 years ago all occurred in what is now Pakistan. The Greeks did not realize modern day India existed until much later. So how can Ancient Indian history refer to the history of modern day India?

To be quite accurate, leave alone the ancient Greeks, even the British didn't realise that modern day India existed until they had partitioned the country. Before that, what existed was a combination of British India, which emphatically did not map on to the present Republic of India, and the princely states under the suzerainty of the Crown.

We must be accurate in our usage of these terms to make any sense.

Secondly, it is astonishing to read that Ancient Indian history between 2,000 to 5,000 years ago, occurred solely in what is now Pakistan. Let us look at a short list of possible headings: the rise of the Mahajanapadas; the rise of Magadha to supremacy among these Mahajanapadas; the birth of the Buddha; the birth of Mahavira Jain; the spread of Buddhism; the spread of Jainism; the Maurya Empire - and further south, a complete civilisation flourishing, in extensive links with Europe and the Mediterranean, about which there seems to be no knowledge reflected in your statement.

If, on the other hand, you mean that the ancient Greeks did not know about the existence of any land mass other than what is contained in modern-day Pakistan, that is a statement of breath-taking ignorance.

Since you are apparently unable to access records of any value other than Wikipedia, I have tried to draw my examples from Wikipedia from this point onwards, in spite of the inaccuracy and the grave defects in analysis, and have added my own comments, marked as such, so that both the corrections are apparent, and that they are my corrections and not Wikipedia's original text is also apparent.

The first extract is from Plutarch's life of Alexander:

As for the Macedonians, however, their struggle with Porus blunted their courage and stayed their further advance into India. For having had all they could do to repulse an enemy who mustered only twenty thousand infantry and two thousand horse, they violently opposed Alexander when he insisted on crossing the river Ganges also, the width of which, as they learned, was thirty-two furlongs, its depth a hundred fathoms, while its banks on the further side were covered with multitudes of men-at‑arms and horsemen and elephants. For they were told that the kings of the Ganderites[1] and Praesii[2] were awaiting them with eighty thousand horsemen, two hundred thousand footmen, eight thousand chariots, and six thousand fighting elephants. And there was no boasting in these reports. For Androcottus[3], who reigned there not long afterwards, made a present to Seleucus of five hundred elephants, and with an army of six hundred thousand men overran and subdued all India.

[1] Gangaridae: the Greek term for the Ganges Basin;
[2] Prachii: the Greek term for the end of the Ganges Basin, the land of the East, Prachya;
[3] Chandragupta Maurya: corrupted originally to Sandracottus, later in Plutarch to Andracottus.

B. Then there are the reports of Megasthenes, ambassador of Seleucus to the Maurya court at Pataliputra, in Bihar approximately on the site of modern Patna, which were rich and detailed in their accounts of India outside the portion that is today Pakistan. He was succeeded by Deimachus and Dionysius, and there was extensive Greek trade with northern India, demonstrated by the widespread availability of Greek pottery remnants of the period throughout northern India.

C. There is the evidence of the Roman trade with India which centred on Muziris, or Cranganore in South India. Those who have followed the history of Indo-European trade and other relations will be aware of the strong trade relations maintained, and of the extensive stocks of Roman coins found at Arikkamedu. It was about this ruinous trade with India, including Bengal, and South East Asia, specifically what the Europeans called the Golden Chersonese, or Thailand, that Roman commentators complained, saying that their welath was being sucked away into India.

D. The most exhaustive account of sea routes and trade routes into India, and indirectly a source through which we know of the extensive knowledge of India with the ancient Europeans, is the seminal Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. This work has to be read to be believed, as the wealth of information it has about India - other than what we are being asked to believe was the limit of their knowledge, the Indus Valley - is astonishing.

There are too many points on the west coast and the east coast of India - but not the Ceylonese coast - to make the in-depth knowledge of India as we know it quite clear.

A clarification: although the actual date of the manuscript, and the political situation that it describes is of the 1st century AD, the knowledge of the coastline and the trading relations, rules and regulations are obviously the product of centuries of trade. We have evidence of these trade links in coin hoards and in literary references already, but each piece of evidence works to strengthen the entire structure of dating and of assigning a time-frame.

Some people might have known about the existence of Ancient Bharat. It's possible, but they didn't record it too well.

Astonishing statement, considering the evidence to the contrary. We can only ascribe this to a lamentable lack of exposure to history.

To put it plainly, it is only that your ignorance of the existence of Ancient Bharat, about which you seem to know nothing, that gets in the way of your analysis.

Bharat existed but much of the history of Ancient India was saved by the Greeks. They didn't even know of any land east of the Indus River.

Just for the sake of argument, they knew of the Gangaridae, the Prasii and of the Icthyophagae - Gangetic Plains, Bihar and Bengal, respectively.

So Bharati cities under the sea?

Yes, more than one. You may - or may not - have heard or read about the excavations of Poompuhara and parts around, including, a little further north, around the sunken temple of Mahabalipuram. There are also more sites which simply cannot be taken up due to the shortage of staff and funds.

All this is quite stupid.

I agree. Perhaps you might like to read a couple of text books on Indian history before re-joining this discussion. Your contribution so far has been less than illuminating.

 

[LaBong]

Bharat existed but much of the history of Ancient India was saved by the Greeks. They didn't even know of any land east of the Indus River.

Quite contrary, the main reason of Greeks not venturing into India anymore after annexing Punjab was they probably knew an exaggerated account of Gangaridae and Magadha empires. Alex didn't have a strong force left after facing Purus and they were afraid of the might of Eastern empires(rightfully so, as proved by Seleucus's defeat to Chandragupta Mourya just a few years after).

 

[ajtr]

Quite contrary, the main reason of Greeks not venturing into India anymore after annexing Punjab was they probably knew an exaggerated account of Gangaridae and Magadha empires. Alex didn't have a strong force left after facing Purus and they were afraid of the might of Eastern empires(rightfully so, as proved by Seleucus's defeat to Chandragupta Mourya just a few years after).

Infact Greeks knew about the land east of indus remember chandragupta murya married Selecus daughter helen.

The advent of the Mauryans brought them into conflict next with the Greek General Seleucus I Nicator, who had inherited both Alexander's Asian holdings and his Empire-building dreams. These, Chandragupta shattered in 303 B.C. The resulting treaty gave the loser 500 war-elephants and granted to the victorious Changragupta the Seleucid Provinces of Trans-Indus (Afghanistan), Seleucus's daughter Helen in marriage, and the future Court presence of the Seleucid Ambassador Megasthenes. The latter's fascinating account of his tenure, 'Indika', has survived in fragments down the centuries.

Mauryan Empire - Indian History

 

[LaBong]

The advent of the Mauryans brought them into conflict next with the Greek General Seleucus I Nicator, who had inherited both Alexander's Asian holdings and his Empire-building dreams. These, Chandragupta shattered in 303 B.C. The resulting treaty gave the loser 500 war-elephants and granted to the victorious Changragupta the Seleucid Provinces of Trans-Indus (Afghanistan), Seleucus's daughter Helen in marriage, and the future Court presence of the Seleucid Ambassador Megasthenes. The latter's fascinating account of his tenure, 'Indika', has survived in fragments down the centuries.

True. And please notice the bold part. Despite the main purpose of Megasthenes being visiting Pataliputra(roughly present day Patna, Bihar), he quite strangely named his book as Indika, not Mouryia/Magadhi/Bharat or something like that.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It makes no difference whether all parts of the epic were written in 1 day or over 400 years. They are all part of the same book whether it was written 400 years before or not. Until a section is discarded, it is part of that book.

Certainly, they are part of the same book. Unfortunately, there is no one version of the book. The closest version to the authentic, by common agreement, is the Bhandarkar institute's recension. The institute would be the first to agree that it cannot claim that its version is infallible.

As of today, it is indisputably a part of the epic. That is not at stake or under dispute.

As you have quoted a section of the book, it has been sought to explain what the section means, and why it may have been introduced, much after the earlier portions, with a specific motive - the denigration of residents of the older inhabited areas of the Indo-Aryan incoming settlers.

I disagree with Homer's Iliad since it is nothing to do with religion, but can be ascribed to Ancient Greek culture. The Firdausi one looks to be an equal example. The Mahabharata is to Hinduism what the Shahnameh is to Zoroastrianism. Both these books are central in defining Hindu and Zoroastrian culture.

Culture, but not religion.

Just as a Zoroastrian priest would be shocked by your assertion that the Shahnameh defines anything other than the outlines of the Iranian culture at the time of the Zoroastrian religion prevailing, a Hindu priest would refuse to override other religious books on the basis of the Mahabharata.

The Mahabharata was a story, the story of the royal family of the Kurus, who ruled in the Punjab and to its east. Its popularity led to a forest of parasites hanging on to it and seeking to use it as a vehicle. Some tried to insert passages damaging to their professional rivals, priests of other locations and sub-sects; some tried to use it to promote a particular cult, the cult of Krishna, who was raised from his position as a statesman and advisor to kings to an appearance of divinity on earth. All these have been proved, through thorough and detailed linguistic analysis, to be later interpolations.

Regarding your repeated assertion that this is the 'official' translation and that this is an 'official' holy book, neither is true; there is no official translation, since nobody has the authority to hold one existing version (there are several) more authentic than others, nor has anybody any authority to proclaim any book to be superior to the Vedas. Not in canonical Hinduism, at least; there are millions of sects and sub-sects with stranger beliefs, and using each of their belief-systems and their respective holy books is quite useless for the purposes of historical analysis.

Only an insertion in the Mahabharata, widely acknowledged by linguists and historians as an insertion of a much later date, has a religious message. It was introduced into a popular epic so that it would have a wide circulation, but has not the sanctity or the authority of the Vedas.

You claim the Mahabharat is not a Holy Book, but an epic. Why do you say this? It is both a Holy Book and an epic, or a Holy Epic. Can you tell me what you think of these statements?

No. The Holy Books are considered to be the Vedas, the appendages to the Vedas, the Aranyakas, Upanishads and Vedangas, and the Puranas. The one that has crept into popular belief due to the strength and power of its message, but was not originally a part of the Holy Books, is a single composition called the Bhagavad Gita, which was introduced into a popular, secular, epic, and is today considered a holy book.

To an historian, none of these count, except to the extent that, for instance, the Shahnameh counts - as sources of lateral evidence, to be backed up by historically accurate sources before acceptance.

Incidentally, this is the first time that I have encountered a Holy Epic. What is this animal? Where did you encounter the concept? Or is it of your own coinage, as seems likely?

"Hinduism does not possess a single holy book like Bible in Christianity and Quran in Islamic Dharma. Hinduism consists of several holy books... prime of which are the sacred Bhagavad Gita and Ramayana. All depends upon the journey of life... if one has a spiritual inclination... the foremost of all holy books of Hinduism is Bhagavad Gita.

The sacred Bhagavad Gita is part of Mahabharata... a holy epic of Hinduism! The doctrine of Bhagavad Gita is a sure shot method for reaching God Almighty. Assimilating the wisdom contained in the holy book Bhagavad Gita of Hinduism human beings finally gained enlightenment (kaivalya jnana) and salvation (moksha)."
Hinduism holy book | Important Books and Writings of hinduism

This is just a point of view. Even a popular point of view. As you will know from the example of the worship of tombs and of pirs, a popular point of view is not the theologically correct point of view. Neither the Ramayana nor the Mahabharata is a holy book; they are important cultural artefacts, epics, and have tremendous cultural weight. They may even have current religious weight. They obviously have no historical weight, unless supported by independent historical sources, acceptable to professional historians, and in any case, they have no relevance before their dates of composition.

In this case, the Mahabharata, it had no relevance before 400 BC, and relations between tribes and settlements prior to that are not reflected in its passages any way.

I don't understand why you're bringing up professional historians. They're not under discussion at the moment. It's the content of the Mahabharata. You've said the content is accurate. You've also said it has been written by several authors over 400 years, and so what? It is still the Mahabharata.

Certainly it is the Mahabharata. So what? It is not a homogeneous document, it is a story written by many hands, and one should come to historical or sociological conclusions based on it as definitively as one should come to historical or sociological conclusions based on the Tilism Hoshruba.

I have said that the translation is accurate, not the contents. The contents of a story cannot be accurate, since it depends on the imagination of an individual human being, in this case, a number of human beings. Please check my exact statement and do not distort statements.

It doesn't matter if it's been added in later or not. That is the official translation of the major Holy Epic of Hinduism. Whether it was written during the Gupta period or not is irrelevant. The fact is it is part of the Mahabharata.

It is, on the contrary, hugely relevant if the passages have been written earlier or later, as social conditions and the appreciation of different parts of the country were radically different in different points of time.

Second, I repeat, there is no official translation. There cannot be. There can only be one which is accepted by a large number of scholars, and it is always open to other, equally learned scholars to insist that they have a better version.

Cultural war. But it's a fundamental book of Hinduism and so is a fundamental passage.

No. It is neither a fundamental book of Hinduism, nor is the mischief making of a priest out to corner a greater share of the priest-offering sufficient historical evidence what you are setting out to prove.

It shows that fundamentally Hinduism was historically opposed to a Pakistani area. Whether this would have changed if they had followed later Hinduism, or whether it's part of Hindu belief regardless of whether Pakistan would be Hindu or not doesn't change that Hinduism was historically opposed to the people in the Pakistani area.

Hinduism has not, cannot have been opposed, historically or otherwise - we will come to that later - to a Pakistani area, particularly one which did not exist till centuries later. Not because it did not exist until later, but because Hinduism is not a bloc, it has sects and sub-sects, and even among Brahmins, there was tremendous competition, and a product of this competition, backbiting.

You are mistaken in talking about later Hinduism and earlier Hinduism in this context, as the hatred was of one group of priests against another. Later priests, seeking greater market-share, spread these slanders against earlier priests, and also in that doing bad-mouthed the region as being unholy and inauspicious. That included culture as well as language; the holiest of the Hindu books, the Rg Veda, talks of slaughtering animals, including animals that later Hinduism considered sacred.

Finally, I find it difficult to believe that you acknowledge that these passages, this book is drawn from epics, whether or not you call it holy books, and are being used to draw historical conclusions.

Historical conclusions can be drawn from historical proofs and authenticated sources only. Period. Using a myth to come to fanciful historical conclusions is totally without value. Except in spats between amateur groups such as this forum. It may satisfy a few desperate to score easy points over others, it satisfies no historical criteria, it is temporally inaccurate, and it is a complete misreading of the text, a misreading due to taking views of 400 AD and applying it to the whole period before.

Some Hindu fanatics hold this passage (like the rest of the Mahabharata) very closely.

And so?

This is an old argument. "you cannot understand it". I can read, i can think, and until you logically show me why I'm incorrect, I would say I'm correct.

It is evident that you can read, it is evident that you can think, and why it is not possible for the rest of the logical conviction to follow is difficult to say. Possibly because you have a point to make and do not wished to be moved from that by any logic or reason.

That cannot be helped.

You have displayed not the least attempt to distinguish between historically acceptable source and other, between what was said and written in 1700 BC and what was written in 400 AD, and have no knowledge of historical facts which a first-year undergraduate of history could appraise us in seconds.

Let us not pretend that you are in here to be convinced. Anything that does not bear out your fiction about Hindus hating Pakistanis historically will not pass your filters.

While you are at it, you might like to ponder over how the large masses of outsiders, such as the Sakas, the Scythians reported as Parama Kambojas in the Mahabharata, the Pallavas, north-east Iranians, and the Yueh-chi, the Kushana, were converted to Hinduism, if Hinduism had such abiding hatred for the residents of the lands that are today Pakistan. You might like to look into the origin of the Rajput clans which are divided into the Sun clan, the Moon clan and the Fire clan. A little study of these facts might bring home to you that far from being hostile to people from so-called Pakistan-in-the-past, Hindus, or rather, Hindu priests have been more than accommodating in bringing these strange people into the fold. All were converted, peculiar behaviour if they had been hated people of a hated land.

 

[coolk06]

Thanks. The first and foremost thing is....pakisthan is the name given to a part of India.The people of that part aren't pure natives of that land but..they have come from other parts of the world and they claim that
they are from that land.Only Hindu culture is there around sindhu ....and
it's not a relegion , it's a life style.There are several things which can be debated over this issue..where this forum isn't enough.

 

[roadrunner]

The modern India is a continuation of Ancient India
cuz Ancient India was alive even in invader's rule in India like Islamic Rule in India or British Raj in India
so now i wanna show u Vedic(ancient Indian) influence not only in Islamic Arts(&Architecture) but also in Greco-Romanaic and Ancient Egyptians
Check this out ....by Stephen Knapp
Photographic Evidence of Vedic Influence

So this proves tht Ancient India still exists in a fullform which is why everybody says India is a continuation of Ancient India

You've not understood the argument at all. Until you do, there's no point in quoting lots of irrelevant stuff

 

[roadrunner]

Secondly, it is astonishing to read that Ancient Indian history between 2,000 to 5,000 years ago, occurred solely in what is now Pakistan. Let us look at a short list of possible headings: the rise of the Mahajanapadas; the rise of Magadha to supremacy among these Mahajanapadas; the birth of the Buddha; the birth of Mahavira Jain; the spread of Buddhism; the spread of Jainism; the Maurya Empire - and further south, a complete civilisation flourishing, in extensive links with Europe and the Mediterranean, about which there seems to be no knowledge reflected in your statement.

When we refer to Ancient Indian History, we think of things like the Indus Valley Civilization, or certain Mathematics and Astronomy, or certain other civilizations. All these important parts of Ancient Indian History are not part of modern day India, they are part of modern day Pakistan's history.

Indeed the Mauryan Empire did exist, but the powerhouse of the Mauryan Empire was in the northwest of the subcontinent. It certainly is something shared between India and Pakistan, but it really is an irrelevant Empire in global history. The Magada certainly did exist, and this was wholly a part of the history of modern day India, and not Pakistan. You can see the pattern here I hope.

And Buddhism was developed to a greater extent in what is now Pakistan. Buddhists generally were persecuted in India, but all the important Buddhist Laws and customs came about in the land mass of what is now Pakistan. Swat is one of the most important historical Buddhist centers in the world, and various places in Afghanistan.