The nature of scholarship in Indology

"To (William) Jones and to the many other European scholars, India owes a deep debt of gratitude for the rediscovery of her past literature... At last he (William Jones) had seemingly discovered the key to just colonial government in the Orient, for which the Indian people people should forever love and be grateful to Europe."

That was the first Prime Minister of independent modern India, Jawaharlal Nehru, in his book "The Discovery of India" paying tribute to British colonizers who wrote on Indian literature. Nehru, of course, was the product of British education and had famously declared, on more than one occasion, he was more an Englishman than an Indian. Macaulay would have applauded at that for Nehru is a prime example of his success in engineering a class of Indian people who would be completely detached from India (see this post for more on that).

To understand the nature of this scholarship, let us go back in time and try to trace it. Some of the earliest foreign records on India can be found in writings of early Greek ambassadors to India. Writings of Megasthenes (350 – 290 BC) are a rich source of such records from the Hellenistic period. His writings recorded India in great detail during the Maurayan period (see previous post on this). The general nature of writings on India began to change during the 1400-1500s AD. This was the time when Europeans began coming to India. On hearing of the rich trade possibilities, European ships began making way to India. By then Christianity had come to Europe and was in full force. Men on these ships to India were not immune to Christianity. This in evident from the writings of the time.

One of the earliest such Europeans was Filippo Sasetti, a Jesuit missionary from Italy. Upon landing in India he saw people different from his own. Indian culture and way of life too was very different for Sasetti. His letters back to his Church are some of the earliest records of that time. He first noticed some similarities between some Indian words to European words. He also writes of it taking 6-7 years for Indian people to learn the dead language (Sanskrit).

Then came Roberto de Nobili, another Italian Jesuit missionary. He took the duty to spread Christianity seriously. So seriously in fact that he was not above using unscrupulous tactics. He realized the heathens of India were not easy to convert. He struck up a plan to disguise himself as a Bramhan, calling himself "Sanyasi from Rome" to spread the word of his one true lord. He even forged a book called "Azur veda" and tried to sell it as the lost veda to Indians. Thus continued the Jesuit campaign in India with forgery and writing about India despite of lack of proper training in local culture or the language which captured ancient Indian knowledge, Sanskrit.

The European Jesuit missionary began colonizing India from Goa and some south Indian sea ports. The Britishers too took to it. They established East India Company and soon began consolidating their hold over India. Some of the earliest British colonizers too tried to learn ancient Indian languages. The trouble for all these European colonizers was that Sanskrit was no longer spoken. It was only alive in the oral recitations of the Bramhans handed down to successive generations through verbal training. Try as they might they did not have much luck in gaining access to this Indian knowledge. That did not deter them from trying to come up with a dictionary of Sanskrit words. In the absence of proper training and expert guidance, the quality of such dictionaries can only be doubtful. With the help of such imperfect tools, British colonizers tried to copy any ancient Indian knowledge they could. These hand written manuscripts began landing in Europe which gave birth to a lucrative new industry of Oriental studies.

One such student of Oriental studies was William Jones. He came from a humble background and wanted to improve his situation. After much effort managed to get employed by East India Company. In Kolkatta he founded "Asiatic Society" to publish ancient Indian literature. But he never managed to get any native Indian with authority in Sanskrit or ancient Indian knowledge. He simply recruited lower rung from the East India Company and directed them to send dispatches from ground of what they saw, heard from the locals. These dispatches found their way into annual publications of the "Asiatic Society".

Then came Friedrich Max Muller. Like William Jones, he too came from a humble background in Germany. He got employed by the East India Company in London and like Jones, he too took to the lucrative industry of translating Sanskrit manuscripts copied by hand and brought to England by British colonizers. Muller was employed by Thomas Babington Macaulay and would later invent the "Aryan Invasion Theory".

Translating Sanskrit was lucrative because East India Company would print them and pay only those papers that would be published. There was no one of authority to verify these publications. All other ancient languages were already worked upon by earlier scholars. Sanskrit was yet unexplored and each of these Jesuit scholars sensed an opportunity to be the first to do so. Their lack of training, knowledge of the languages they worked on, unfamiliarity of the culture they wrote of, indeed with no one to question, critique them, did not deter them from positioning themselves as foremost scholars in Indology and enjoying all benefits accruing from it. They established an entire industry by writing favourably about each other thus forming an exclusive club of Indologists.

Later scholars, historians eulogised them in writing their biographies, books on them. Through the years quite a few inventions slipped in. And with the passage of time became established truths. The unquestioning adoption of poor scholarship of early European Jesuits on India is evident when modern day scholars, historians rely on their work without scrutiny. This is surprising especially since they insist on "scientific study of history". The Indian History Congress - the largest professional body of it's kind in South Asia consisting of over 9000 members - says it's objective is "promotion and encouragement of the scientific study of Indian history". Some of it's past General Presidents include Romila Thapar and K N Panikkar who insist on "scientific temperament in history scholarship". How then fabrications like "Aryan Invasion Theory" have slipped past this scientific analysis is a mystery. As are curious explanations for Mughal excesses on Indians. Or how can William Jones, Max Muller attain scholarship in Sanskrit when in fact they did not even understand the language? How could they have attained scholarship in Sanskrit when it took Indians 6-7 years of training in the language no longer spoken in India? Why does Romila Thapar's self admitted lack of knowledge in Sanskrit not stop her from perpetuating dubious history? Why does K N Pannikar devise innovative explanations for Mughal excesses? Simply because that is the established norm in Indology. Their sources, the people they greatly admire have themselves devised such questionable ways of scholarship. Their history is based on such questionable construct. And of course there is an even bigger reason for this dubious scholarship. Nehru himself established this practice as seen in the beginning.

(With references from Lies With Long Legs by Prodosh Aich)

Cultural clones - the engineering

Continuing the cultural clones series of posts, in the previous two posts here and here, we saw the stark difference between the early Greek accounts of India in the BC era and the later Jesuit accounts in the AD era. Where Greek records lacked all the general toxicity associated with Christian writers, the Jesuit records were full of it. When the Jesuits landed on Indian shores they brought with them land grabbing, Bible selling, pagan hatred in plenty. There was power struggle among the various European Jesuits, but eventually the British ones prevailed. Having subjugated enough of the pagans, they soon began to consolidate and plan for their continued hold over the land.

Many British Jesuits tried their hand at further gaining and consolidating their influence over the pagans. They tried selling Christianity in various ways but none had any noteworthy success. Then came Thomas Babington Macaulay who first landed in Calcutta to serve in the "Supreme Council of India" that the East India Company had established. He realised, to successfully indoctrinate the Indians, he needed a much granular program. He needed to come up with a plan to program a class of people who would be from among the Indians but only in physical appearance. In all other respects they would resemble every bit the Englishmen. He came up with a draft program for education in colonised India. It was adopted by the council on March 7, 1835. This plan can be found in his "Minute on Indian Education". The gist of the plan was -

"We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions we govern; a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect."

He carried out this plan with great zeal. We can see it going very well in this letter to his father on Oct 12, 1836 -

"Our English schools are flourishing wonderfully. We find it difficult, at some places impossible, to provide instruction for all who want it. At the single town of Hoogley fourteen hunderd boys are learning English. The effect of this education on the Hindoos is prodigious. No Hindoo who has received an English education ever continues to be sincerely attached to his religion. Some continue to profess it as a matter of policy. But many profess themselves pure Deists, and some embrace Christianity. The case with Mahometans is very different. The best educated Mahometan continues often to be Mahometan still. The reason is plain. The Hindoo religion is so extravagantly absurd that it is impossible to teach a boy astronomy, geography, natural history, without completely destroying the hold which that religion has on his mind. But the Mahometan religion belongs to a better family. It has very much in common with Christianity; and even where it is more absurd, it is reasonable compared with Hindooism. It is my firm belief that, if our plan of education is followed up, there will not be a single idolater among respectable classes in Bengal thirty years hence. And this will be effected without any efforts to proselytise, without the smallest interference with religious liberty, merely by natural operation of knowledge and reflection. I heartily rejoice in this prospect." (Emphasis added.)

Thus Thomas Babington Macaulay, a Jesuit British coloniser, laid the foundation to engineer a class of cultural clones from among the Indians that would continue to govern India for their colonial overlords. It is this plan that has effected many a cultural clone we see insisting on dominating all opinion making, indeed anything of significance in India. It should not come as a surprise to anyone that Jawaharlal Nehru was a product of this very same cultural cloning program. Having gone through it, Nehru furthered the plan to continue generating more of them. The unwashed masses could not be allowed to have their say in their very own land.

(References also from "Lies With Long Legs" by Prodosh Aich.)

Cultural clones - change in narrative

In the previous post we saw how India was viewed and recorded in the pre-Christian times. Innuendo and agenda were completely missing from such records. However when we turn to read records from the AD era, especially by the early jesuits who landed on India's shores in the 1500s, the narrative changes.

The early European "traders" set off from their shores towards India on hearing of the riches that could be made. The heavy Christian influence of the time meant there were a large number of Church going Chrisists in the crew. And almost every good Chrisist felt obliged to write back to his Church of what he saw in far off lands that still hadn't bowed to Christ. It is these records that form the bulk of western records on India from the 1500 onwards. Where early Greek ambassadors were color blind, Jesuits saw "black" people in India. Where Megasthenes recorded Indian culture with interest, Jesuits saw the "wrong" religion.

Being the good soldiers of Christ, the Jesuits couldn't run away from their duty of bringing the word of the one true lord to heathens of India. One such committed soldier was Roberto de Nobili of Italy. Nobili wrote extensively during his stay in India. He soon realized that all India knowledge was captured into Sanskrit, an ancient language no longer spoken by Indians. He also realized that the custody of this knowledge was the exclusive domain of the Bramhins and worst of all, this knowledge was not written, but was handed down verbally. A smart Jesuit, Nobili realized he had to befriend the Bramhins if he wanted to gain access to that knowledge. But he had little luck. He did see the status Bramhins enjoyed because they preserved ancient Indian knowledge.

He soon struck upon an idea to sell himself as a Bramhin to hoodwink the locals into thinking he too was a Bramhin so he could sell them Christianity. He began to dress like one, tried to get himself in Bramhin circles, he claimed to be a "sanyasi from Rome". He even wrote a book and tried to sell it as the "Azur Veda", one of the lost Vedas.

So having landed in India as "traders", the Jesuits soon got to their real work, selling Christianity. They employed every trick they could think of. "Traders" soon began snatching land from locals beginning with Goa and south Indian ports. Chruch building ensued, inquistion followed.

European accounts of India on the AD era were recorded by Jesuits whose eyes and minds were colored by their religion. Next, we will see the plan to engineer cultural clones.

Cultural clones - the beginning

Alexander hit a snag in his world conquest when he could not penetrate far into India. Suffering serious setbacks, he had to retreat. He died at 32. Soon after that his empire was divided up by one of his generals, Diadochs. Later, Seleukos I Nikator (358-261 BC) set up his dynasty between Syria to the Hindukush mountains that bordered India. He entered into a peace treaty with Chandragupta Maurya which involved exchanging ambassadors. One of them was Megasthenes.

Megasthenes (350-290 BC), by all accounts was highly educated and had experience in administration. He travelled in India far and wide and recorded every aspect of India he could in the 11 or so years he was here. Sadly most of his works have not survived in the original. However a lot of it has been preserved and reproduced in the Hellenic accounts. Because of his authentic and first hand accounts, it was natural for Megasthenes to be the source for most of the Hellenic writings on India. Diamachos succeeded Megasthenes as ambassador who did his won writing on India.

These early accounts by the Greeks show their curiosity, their interest in observing and studying India. The writings covered flora, fauna, geography, peoples, administrations, military, culture, customs, food and much more. Everything they saw, they recorded in vivid detail. One can actually picture what everyday life was like in the Mauryan period. The freedom they had in traveling, observing and recording India indicates the wonderful working conditions they operated under without bother.

The richness and depth of the writings is indeed remarkable. However, what is even more striking is the complete lack of innuendo. This was the BC era, pre-Christian times. None of the "missions" were born yet. The writings come across as purely objective, observational in nature. There were no comparisons. There were no judgements passed. They were chronicles of educated ambassadors who were not sent on "missions" to India, who were not under any pressure to carry out some "good work", who were not under any pressure to produce weekly, monthly, annual reports or accounts to promote interests. (to be continued...)

In the next post we shall see the change in narrative, who changed it, what changed it, how did it get coloured.

And now, blind men can rape!

A majority of the nun rape cases are very peculiar in nature and this one (Orissa nun rape case) is no exception. The usual drill is allege rape, prop up a "victim" nun, get a cahoot media to sensationalize the story, hold talk shows condemning the majority community and claim threat to India's secularism.

But, as investigations throw light on the matter, truth, it turns out, is usually on the contrary. This inconvenience always begets silence. Apparently, secularism cannot be under threat now.

A BJP MLA from Baliguda, Orissa has claimed that one of the suspects arrested by the Orissa police is a blind man. So now, the blind can rape. This is one curious case. It began with the nun alleging rape, a pliable media ran this story, then the nun went underground, refused to co-operate with the police, refused to come back to Orissa, the courts had to step in and order the nun to co-operate, next the nun claims a Hindu man saved her from being raped and now the police have arrested a blind man as one of the suspects. And since the inconvenient facts began to emerge, the "conscientious" media has ignored to cover it. You would think that rational minds would apply the same yardstick in passing judgements, but then we are talking of secularism in the Indian context.

Inconvenience begets silence

Objectivity was never the media's forte, particularly the Indian national electronic news media. Upon seeing a possibility to malign Hindus, most of the 'secular' media houses and the self appointed conscience keepers invariably jump the gun. While Islamic violence is treated with deference by the same entities. We are advised to try and 'understand' their (imagined) 'grievances'. Clearly, the majority never needs to be understood, they can never have any grievance. Or even if they did, it can never be justified.

Reams of columns and hours of videos are produced when any incidence has a supposed Hindu link. The editors of the 'secular' media can hardly wait until the investigations are complete and truth established. If they did, it wouldn't be sensational. After all, where is the fun in indicting Jihadi terrorists or sleazy Christian priests who seem unable to keep their pants on? That would be stating the obvious. TRPs would not jump with such coverage. However, almost all such attempts to 'explain' Jihad or rabid evangelism have only yielded lemons. And yet, the media has not learnt.

Sister Abhaya was murdered 16 years ago. There were any number of attempts by the powers to cover it up. Yet, it turns out, the truth is tougher to bury. And now, two Christian priests and a sister have been arrested in connection to the case. Soul searching questions are not being asked. Fact finding teams are not being sent.

The Orissa nun, who was allegedly raped, got more coverage when Hindus were the alleged aggressors. However, as investigations progress, facts seem to suggest something else. The secular media's reaction? Silence. That's the standard hit-and-run ploy followed by them.

The editors of the 'secular' national media never pontificate the Muslims and their leaders to treat their women with respect and dignity. To respect the law of the land and to integrate with the nation. On the contrary, Mullahs that claim being ISI agents, seek to convert India into a Dar-ul-Islam, leaders that sing in Pakistan's glory, shout anti-India slogans are defended. And yet, it is the Hindus that must introspect.

The Sadhvi Pragya Thakur case is a more recent glaring example of the media's lopsided coverage. While terrorism could never be 'green' or 'Islamic', 'Hindu terrorism' or 'Saffron terror' is suddenly in vogue, so much so, that the mission to link terrorism to Hinduism has now continued unabated for about a month. Curiously, no other blast case received so much coverage. News reports of every other blasts died out after a day or so. But this new 'Hindu terror' story has outlasted every major news item, even the Chandrayaan-1 (which ought to have received the maximum coverage).

Even about a month's worth of effort in linking Hindus to terrorism has only resulted in incoherent theories, contradictory findings and inconvenient truths. While a Muslim terrorist who has no qualms taking innocent lives has all the human rights protection in the world. The same are not accorded to a Hindu 'suspect'. That too a woman no less. None of the usual activists have uttered anything so far. The National Commission for Women (NCW) too is guilty of inaction, especially now when the Sadhvi has alleged ill treatment by the Mumbai Anti Terror Squad (ATS). The affidavit makes for gut wrenching reading. However, that has failed to move Girija Vyas (President, NCW), the human rights activists and the usual concerned citizenry.

The media, who on days when the ATS did not have any leaks would cook up their own, too is guilty of being silent on the affidavit. Such a revelation demands equal coverage. So does the glaring violations of ATS in handling the case. But, it is inconvenient for a media who has bet heavily against the nation.

Hit and run

Claim being oppressed by the Hindus, fabricate bogeys to that effect, repeat them until they can be stated as facts and then perpetuate this victimhood. This modus operandi is being followed for decades now to portray Hindus as persecutors of the minorities and is a standard ploy used by the JNU, Macaulay, Marxist type journos. And it continues.

The nun who claimed being raped in Kandhamal is first, not co-operating with the investigative authorities, which is against what the courts directed her, and second, she is continuing making statements to the press and media about her victimhood. Rape victims are generally very reluctant to speak to anyone and suffer severe mental stress. But this nun shows hardly any signs of being a typical rape victim. If she indeed suffered that horrendous crime, then, having the truth on her side, there was no reason for her to act so elusive. Perhaps there is something to hide that compels her to act the way she has been.

The catholic priest, who claimed being assaulted on, too is playing hard to get. The priest is conveniently lodged in Kerala, undergoing Ayurvedic treatment and apparently this is reason why he cannot be back in Orissa. Neat! If justice is what they seek, it is only logical that they should be co-operating with the authorities in bringing the perpetrators to justice. But this is all lost on the "concerned" citizenry and the media personalities with "searching" questions to the establishment and the Hindus. It seems that the nun and the priest could never be wrong, but everyone else would.

Claim being victimized and go AWOL, leaving the burden of proof on others while never bothering to present any support to their claim.

All the concerns, soul searching questions, televised debates and human rights abuse issues were never raised when, for instance, these happened -

11 year old Nazmeen burnt by neighbour - The neighbour, whom Nazmeen called grandpa, actually tried to rape her according to this report.

John Thattunkal adopted a mature woman for "Spiritual refreshment" - Perhaps the Bible and the cross did not not provide what he sought.

Religion of love?

Recently, the offices of Telgu daily 'Sakshi' were attacked by Christists. The reason being, 'Sakshi's' Sunday edition carried a picture of Jesus carrying beer and holding a cigarette in his hands. This got the Christists worked up and the next thing they did was attack the publisher's offices. Incidentally, this daily is owned by people closely related to the Chief Minister Y. Samuel R. Reddy.

I wonder why does this incident sound familiar? Looks like the people of 'Religion of Love' took cues from their cousins in 'Religion of Peace'. They are eerily similar. And they claim Hinduism is bad!

So when you think of it, Christianity and Islam are not that different. Both are equally aggressive and demanding (and they get what they want too, thanks to our dhimmi leaders). So much for claiming persecution!

Christianity any different than Islam?

Well now Pope Benedict XVI has himself asserted that Jesus Christ has called for conversion of all nations to Christianity. Apparently the Christists have 'indisputable right and duty to convert anyone to Christianity' just because the Gospels says so.

And Islam says, convert all non believers for that alone is the true word of God.

If the scepticism about Jesus & Bible is any Indication - it's increasing & growing in credibility - provides proof that it's all a hoax. And the 'Word of God' as claimed by the Prophet of Islam when actually read makes little sense leading us to believe that it was the work of a seventh century semi-intelligent man. All this leaves the two beliefs to merely a cult.

So what's the difference between the two? Only that the Islamists blow up non believers & the Christists trick people into their belief. But the Christists aren't non-violent at all, all their violence in India exposes their evil core behind the 'benevolent' facade.

Mischief to malign Hinduism

Hinduism is attacked everyday. Some videos on youtube & some blogs are actively trying to malign Hinduism. Hindu Gods & customs are often made fun of. I wonder why? Do they think Gods & customs in other religions can’t be funny? But that is not the point.

Hinduism has given so much to the world. Contributions range in a variety of fields like science, mathematics, astronomy, medicine, health, arts, literature etc. The contributions are numerous. Far too many than any other religion. Even the fact that the world is round can be seen from the carvings on some of the oldest Hindu temples. It is also the most tolerant & liberal of all religions encouraging asking questions. It also encourages self realization. Some of the other popular religions viz. Christianity & Islam ask you to follow their holy books & discourage questioning it. So which one is better then?

But when you read the criticism or watch the videos criticizing Hinduism you realize that, they arise from either ignorance or deliberate intent to show it in bad light. Where these criticisms fail is not realizing the shortcomings in their own religions. As a matter of fact, Hinduism has been in existence for well over 5000 years now & is still thriving, despite all the hatred against it. Even the religious heads of Christianity & Islam shun those who criticize it calling them either a satan or the enemy of their faith. If you believe you faith is superior, then why this insecurity? Why be so defensive? Hinduism has never sought to actively convert people. We know for a fact the Christianity & Islam actively seek this. This is evident from all the conversions happening in India. The missionaries that are involved in conversions often use social work as guise. If you genuinely believe in the betterment of society, why seek to convert? Why not just do your good work? Isn’t this preached in Hinduism? Just do good work & expect nothing in return?

We all know that the various Hindu religious centers & groups are greatly involved in social betterment. The examples are numerous to cite, some prominent ones are Bhagwan Satya Sai Baba, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar just to name two examples. They have been involved in the social betterment without any hidden agenda (conversions or criticizing other religions). So why the hatred towards Hindus? We all know that people of various religions were (& are) allowed to practice their faith in India, even during the time of Kings. How else do you explain the flourishing of all religions in India? Isn’t this an example of being an open, welcoming & tolerant society where the majority is Hindus? Contrast this with Islamic countries & you’ll see the difference. Even in the USA you’ll come across missionaries encouraging you to adopt Christ.

The RSS is often vilified & is called a terrorist group. It is also said to be the Hindu equivalent of Jehadi groups. What is the proof to this claim? Do they seek conversion? Do they build bombs? Do they carry out suicide bombings? Do they run fundamentalist religious schools (like madrasas)? Do they kill people for not being Hindus? On the contrary, it’s contributions to the nation have been immense & to everyone, regardless of one’s religion. It is the first group to send help during any calamity, natural or otherwise, it has helped countless Hindus, Muslims & Sikhs during the partition, the volunteers put their lives at grave risk in doing so. Why are all these contributions overlooked? What’s wrong when it asks people to love their country?

Even the ancient Indian epics, Ramayana & Mahabharata are discredited as mythologies. How exactly are these myths? These were written by sages of the time & are an account of life & times of the characters in these epics. Is it not mischievous to call them mythologies when the Ten Commandments or the Bible or the Koran are accepted as facts? And in the case of Koran, followers of Islam claim it was handed over by Allah himself. Nobody seems to refute these claims, but conveniently discredit Indian epics.

It’d be better if people did not criticize any religion without understanding it. The Hindu bashers would themselves a favor by trying to understand Hinduism first & then comment on it.

Related post: Is Hinduism really bad?

How is converting to Christianity better?

The selling point used by the missionaries is that Christianity is better. Jesus loves all. But how exactly is it better when they still have caste wars within. Read this (via Sandeep).

Were there supposed to be 'Dalit' Christians & 'Upper-class' Christians? Forgive my ignorance. If this continues post conversion, how is Christianity different than the Indic religions? The missionaries have targeted these very caste differences to sell their faith. If squabbles continue, it isn't much different, is it?