Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Indigenous Aryans? A new myth in making!


Image result for aryans

There is a serious problem with the migration theorists, no matter whether they are Indigenous Aryan or Aryan Migration Theorists. Both use the same data drawing convenient inferences from literary, archeological or genetics. After the publication of an article in Hindu, indigenous Aryan theorists have come forward to refute Tony Joseph’s claim that the Indo-Aryans entered India from the west. Both, A.L. Chavda1 and Anil Kumar Suri have tried to disprove Tony Joseph while pushing forth Indigenous Aryan Theory. They not only use genetic pieces of evidence in their favor by sheer misinterpretation or even lies but drag literary evidence to prove that the Vedas were authored by the indigenous Aryans and were composed on the banks of the now defunct Ghaggar River to which they identify with Vedic Sarasvati.

Before getting into their concocted and misinterpreted genetic evidence, let us first take stock of Chavda’s other arguments those he has forwarded in favor of the Indigenous Aryan Theory.

Chavda boldly claims that the family that conquered the world…originated in India. He also carelessly claims that remote ancestor of the R1a family lived in India 15,450 years ago. He does not forget to inform the caste of the origin…and yes, it is Brahmin. He goes further to use the mythical mother of demons, Danu, and her children, the Danava clan to tell us how the Danavas were defeated and banished by Devas and that they ended up in Ireland!  

He, to prove his theory, tells us the various river names those are closely related with the Mother River Goddess Danu, such as Danube, Don, Dnieper and few others. These river names are derived from the Rig Vedic Sanskrit root Danu. Danu, in Sanskrit, meant fluid or drop. In Old Persian Danu meant river. Hence the river names could have been derived from the Persian Danu or Vedic Danu because, anyway, they were close inhabitants.

In Rig Veda Danu was the mother of Vritra, an Asur and not Danavas. Danu also is another name of Soma in Rig Veda. (Rig. 10.43.7) It is used in many senses like cloud, rain, drops, giver etc. and she is not evil but is praised at many places. 

The relationship between Danu and Danavas is not clear in the Rig Veda. It is far later literature she has been shown as the consort of Kashyap and mother of Danavas. There is none relationship between her name and her being as any River Goddess. In India, there is no river named after Danu. What rivers we have related to her name are all flow from Central Asia and Europe.

Had Aryans been originated in India and Danavas being a clan of Indo-Aryans as claimed by Chavda, why there is not a single river named after mythical Danu, though her name survived in the literature adorning different character? How large was the population of the Danavas to spread and settle over a large part of Eurasia? And why except river names and Irish mythological story, there is no trace of the Danavas in any literature except mention of Danu in Avesta?

This is the contrast that rather tells us that the mythological Vedic stories flowed in India from the west, i.e. Iran and were not originated in India. Danu-Danava relationship was developed in far later course of the time. The original enmity was between Devas and Asuras, the people of opposing faiths and we get series of the stories of the wars fought between Deva and Asuras, i.e. Vedic Aryans and Zoroastrians those took place in ancient Iran and not in India.

Chavda has forwarded this myth to prove migration of the Indo-Aryan clan named Danava from India is completely flawed and so is his other so-called genetic evidence.

He has cited a report 2 to make out his claim that the oldest example of the haplogroup R1a is found in India and it is 15, 450 years old! First of all author of the paper informs that the sub-group Z93 of R1a is ancient, not R1a. We have the proofs that the R1a-M417 subclade diversified into Z282 and Z93 about circa 5,800 years ago.3 R1a is as old as 22,000 or 25,000 years old.

Now, when Z93 was not evolved at all during the time claimed, how it can be claimed Z93 existed 15,450 years ago? Isn't it a blatant lie and misrepresentation of the research to anyhow prove the baseless theory?

This makes Chavda’s story a most concocted and a lie to mislead the people to the Indigenous Aryan Theory! Aryans, if they existed cannot be proved indigenous using the genetics or any other source, may it be archeology or literary!

Why they blatantly lie or misinterpret the proofs? The only reason is they want to claim authorship of the Indus-Ghaggar civilization and prove the Vedics, and that too Brahmins among them were superior of all those even reached Europe to spread their language and culture! This is albeit supremacist, racial approach which is dangerous to the good science

(In next article we will discuss the article of Anil Kumar Suri and another article by Mr. A. L. Chavda.)

Ref: 


And


2. https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/the-major-ychromosome-haplotype-xi--haplogroup-r1a-in-eurasia-2161-1041-1000150.pdf


Monday, June 26, 2017

Inhuman act!


 


The shame too would now be ashamed with the dastardly inhuman acts committed by the insane mob on a local train in Haryana. 17-year-old Hafiz Junaid was stabbed to death on the accusation that he was carrying beef in his bag! Prior to that Junaid and his relatives, those he accompanied were taunted of being anti-national and beef eaters, their caps were thrown away and beards grabbed. 

Akhlakh to Junaid is a heinous journey that this Modi government has coursed. Anti-Muslim sentiments are being infuriated purposely. RSS has been doing the same for decades and now they have their government to make any laws and turn the ordinary people to the beastly mob. Their Vedic ideology loaded with fascism, propagated by Golvalkar Guruji and others are being brought in the practice that makes the Muslims secondary citizens and if possible kill them under any pretext. This is happening. The ordinary people who do not understand what they are doing are falling to the evilous minds.

Everybody knows that the once Vedics were beef eaters. They performed cow sacrifices named Gomedh, Shulagava etc. and ate the beef in sacred sacrifices. The beef was not only in their diet but was a ceremonious food to be served to the honorable guests. No matter they deny this now by forcibly deriving misinterpreted meanings, but the facts cannot be overlooked. It is not the problem that once they eat beef, the problem is they are making the issue of Cow and beef a fanatic issue to the level that the humanity shall ashamed.

Junaid was just a kid. Now the arrested accused states that he was under influence. We do not know whether here exists any justice or not. The social fabric of India has been torn apart. The ghosts of Vedic fanatism are haunting us. They are not Hindu. They have Vedic religion but mischievously are using the term Hindu to rule over Hindus too! RSS was never a Hindu organization. All that RSS always preached is all about Vedas and greatness of the Smritis and their dictated social order of inequality. After Muslims, their target will be Hindus. Hindus are not understanding it very well. They should! They must study what disastrous ideology they have been preaching and now bringing to the practice!

Hindus had nothing to do with the Vedas. They never read them or were allowed even to listen. The simple thing is they never belonged to the Vedic religion.


The cruelty that fills human mind to act insane is the product of the ideology that is dangerous to the human being. A kid couldn’t have been even touched, false accusations wouldn’t have been thrown, and first of all the Gomata wouldn’t have been made sacred over human life! No laws can enforce what to eat and what not. This simply is theocratic dictatorial governance. The insane mobs are bound to act inhuman when the sentiment is infuriated. The situation demands serious introspection by the political heads of the country. Where they are leading the country? Why should the anti-democrats influence the democracy? The frustration that Junaid's killing has brought is immense. We are drowning in an ocean of inhuman surrounding. Alas! 

Friday, June 23, 2017

Let us not let this happen!

Image result for swarna bharat party

The liberalism is not just about making a society monetarily better off. It is just not about the ideology that wants to lead to a free and just society. It is not just about the minimizing government controls so that the individuals can make their own decisions about the self and the society. It is all about making the whole society capable of governing itself. Other things are just sane output of the whole exercise.

Every individual must be free that makes the whole society free. They need not any Big Brother watching and herding them to the destination he feels better. A bunch of the people in governments cannot govern the aspirations of every individual. They want to make whole society a tailored garment that will not agitate and earn the means of the living in the given limited scope of their choice.

It is the wrong assumption of the critiques that the individuals are not capable of taking their own political, economic or social decisions. They think that the free markets inevitably bring exploitation. “Public sorting public problems” seems impossible to them. Rather the critiques forward a bold question, if people are so capable of making their own economic decisions, then why are they so incapable of making political or social ones?

The answer to the last question is easy. The people are not incapable of making social or political decisions simply because the system the governance creates does not allow people making the decision and acting upon it! There is no freedom. So this is a worthless argument. Social history does not support this claim. When we look back at the history of India we find that the people were better off when the Kings did not interfere much in social and economic life. We find many roads and public places were built by the people after collecting the donations. The guilds led in the construction of most of the public works. It is not correct that the individuals are incapable of taking social decisions and acting on them. The kings too financially contributed to such works but it too was mandatory. Lands were not forcibly acquired by the rulers but were bought at market price. We have many copper plate inscriptions those records such transactions. The right to property was acknowledged by the government. In short, the people were capable enough to make their own economic decisions. Though we have scattered information on the economic and social affairs of the pre-medieval era, they are enough to indicate the economic and social freedom people enjoyed. It reflects in the literature right from Hal Satvahana’s Gatha Saptashati to various plays and poetry till post-Gupta era. The literature mirrors the social conditions and aspirations of the individuals that were far better than medieval era when the political and religious tyranny begun to plague social fabric of India. Rather the decision making on behalf of the people by the new creed of feudal lords made people hapless. The rulers and religious bosses added to the difficulties by withdrawing their right to decide on economic and social conduct. The contrast is significant if looked at carefully.

So, it is incorrect assumption that the individuals are incapable of making social and economic decisions. The every individual knows to differentiate between good and bad. In his primordial nomadic past also he knew his social obligations without someone forcing upon him. The foundation of the criticism is the lack of confidence in the human being. Just because there are few bad elements in the society, under the pretext of controlling them, the socialists and others want to control the entire society thus depriving the individuals of using their own wisdom in taking the decisions related to his and societies wellbeing.

This makes no society better. It obstructs free thinking, expressions and efforts to achieve economic goals. If free, individual becomes more responsible. In the society loaded with restrictions, individuals and so the society tends to become corrupt, lazy and irresponsible to social obligations. The public property always is attacked first in any agitation. The sense of collective ownership, when governed by few, is impossible to occur. Human tendency is the people do not like paying indirectly to any public work. There cannot be a sense of emotional attachment towards such activities that might have been introduced by the government for public good and their interest. The free society can take far better care of it.

It is not about capitalism. It is about making the human being free from the external political forces that force the human being to roam in an artificial restrictive campus. That restricts human capability to explore not only knowledge but the life of his choice. Economic gains are just outcome of the freedom, but considering them the foremost objective of the liberals is an imagined accusation of the leftist wing. Liberals are far more humanists than others. The every individual is a liberal by nature but the system makes him the slave and forces him to jump in a bottomless crevasse of tyrant system.

Let us not let this happen!


Wednesday, June 21, 2017

History of Classical Liberalism in India

 Image result for artisan guilds india
It is a mistake that we credit the western world as founders of  the classical liberalism. Liberalism is not unknown to India in politics, economics and social life if we carefully study the socio-economic history of the country. Though Western Liberalism evolved in Europe in 18th century, we find it was not just a thought but was already practically applied in India far back from 6th century BC. Not that the journey of the liberal thought was easier. We find the Indian history is full of the conflicts between liberalism and anti-liberal ideas not only on philosophical grounds but on political, economic and social grounds. However, we find liberal thought survived for the period of over one and half millennium! 

Western historians mostly have used Sanskrit literature and that too limited to Vedic stream to look back in Indian social and political history which has marred their overall understanding about the classical liberal thought of India. However, both the thoughts existed though the classical liberalism was thrown on backfoot during the medeveal era to survive in very limited aspects. Rather, the decline of Indian economics can be directly related to the slackened liberal ideas those were thriving in the earlier epoch.

Philosophically, the Tantra sources, those are not just religious books of the Non-Vedic masses but they also deal with agriculture, chemistry, metallurgy, agriculture and physical science etc. The scholars like Dr. Sudhakar Deshmukh admits that the tantras not only advocated social equality and freedom but the science of behavior also. The Tantras less talk about the yonder world after death but the practical worldly affairs. The materialistic philosophy of the Tantras is associated with occultism and hence it was most popular among Indian masses. The Tantras propagated absolute freedom not only in their rituals but in daily social life as well. It embraced all paths of the life and offered social liberalism as an ultimate source of happiness. The literature like kamashastra and temples like Khajuraho exhibits the degree of freedom of expression enjoyed by the people of those times. lMany kings were followers and patrons of the Tantra tradition.   

Apart from Tantra sources, we have Charvaka, a pioneering liberal of pre-Buddhist era who turned his thought to a massive movement that gained so much so popularirty that his sect was later known as “Lokayata”, i.e. the Sect of the People. He was defamed by the Vedic scholars so much so that they called him evil and destroyed the literature belonging to his sect when they became prominent. We have remains of his thought in form of the excerpts wherever his (or his sect's) thoughts were felt necessary to condemn and deny by his opponents. His thoughts are not only liberal because he denied Vedas and its ritualistic nature but he proposed first the liberty of human being while earning the livelihood and gave importance to the pleasures. Unlike other philosophers, he gave prominence to the desire and personal economics of the individual to live the life happily and he called it true “Liberation.” He denied any kind of restrictions imposed by other forces and proclaimed “liberty is salvation”.

While choosing the pleasures, Charvaka warned, they should not bring pain as a consequences to any. Choice of morality Charvaka left on the individuals. Liberty to him was total lack of exploitation of any. He also denied the artificial divisions of the society. He disproved the concept of chastity forced upon the women and allowed the same freedom that was afforded to the men. He accepted the importance of the king because he was one who held the power and was a real entity unlike of imaginary Gods.

Charvakas above and other thoughts on religion were felt dangerous by the Vedic scholars and even Buddhists. Lord Buddha in the Vinayapitaka had forbidden the Buddhist monks to occupy with Lokayat doctrine.  (India's Past:A survey of Her Literatures, languages and Antiquities By Arthur Anthony Macdonell, page 158) 

However, in Buddha's time the economy was already functioning on materialistic thought that was propagated by the tantras and Charvaka. 

Since this doctrine was so much so popular in all probabilities the polical powers too possibly would have been influenced by it. Arthashastra of Kautilya has given the importance to the Lokayata doctrine while enumerating the sciences in the beginning chapter of the Arthashstra. This will reveal that the Charvaka doctrine was considered by the political powers important to learn before Vedas. Kautilya implies that the base of the state should be materialistic philosophy and he found it in Lokayata and Sankhya School.

Since to Kautilya, the base of the State was materialistic philosophy as proposed by Charvaka doctrine, we find he did not make it applicable to the people. Though we are not sure of the time of Kautilya and looking at the small hypothetical kingdom that he kept in his mind while writing his book. We are not sure whether he really knew the empires. However he has covered almost all the economic activities of his times. Contrary to the Charvaka thought Kautiliyan state works on the strict controls and state monopolies. For example mining, salt, weaving, prostitution were controlled by the state. His tax policy is filled up with discriminatory elements.  We can say that kautilya, while respecting Charvaka and Sankhya materialistic doctrine for the benefit of the state, he did not offer the same liberty for the benefit of the citizens.

However, we are not sure whether his hypothetical policies were adopted by the kings. The socio-economic history of India reveals otherwise. For example, we come across the guild system that managed the overall economy of the states without much interference of the State. Though we do get scattered information from ancient literature, copper-plate inscriptions and numismatics it is enough to show how liberal was the economy then.

Guild System

All the students of Indian history are aware of the caste (occupational) guilds, called as “Shreni” or “Nigam” those used to operate like present Chamber of Commerce or trade/manufacturers associations. These guilds would manufacture the specialty articles, conduct internal, interstate and foreign trade. Nigams were allowed to issue
coins too, which are found in excavations from Gandhar to south India. Rather in Janpada era till Gupta era the issuance authority of the coins were the guilds. Every guild had their own unique trademark associated with the symbol of their kingdom (janpada) or Gana’s. (Republics) Rather Shrenis were economic, socio-political dominant segment of ancient India that survived till 12th century AD.

Let us first understand what Shrenis were. Every Shreni was an association of artisans, merchants or traders. The traders and artisans engaged in the trade or manufacturing of the specific articles or goods would form their Shreni. People residing in the same area and engaged in the same occupation naturally cooperated with one another to achieve common goals. The Shreni of artisans existed for a particular group of persons engaged in the same vocation. There is mention in various scriptures and various epigraphs that there were Shrenis of the artisans like blacksmiths, goldsmiths, weavers, carpenters, bamboo-craftsmen, cobblers, makers of ivory articles, metal workers, miners, Jaggary producers, potters and so many other professions. The Shreni system secured rights of the producers and traders thus offering them the freedom to produce without any interference from the Royal houses.

The merchants and craftsmen needed allied services like transportation also. Goods used to be transported by bullock carts, loaded on the backs of the oxen or donkeys or ships. The destinations could be far off. For example, Al Masudi informs us how goods were brought to Cheul harbour loaded on thousands of oxen. Some transporters were transporting speciality goods, such as salt, food grains, wood etc. Other services included security providers to the inland caravans. Variety of service based occupations too emerged during this vast span of time to meet the needs of the craftsmen and merchants. Such service providers too formed their own guilds.

Romila Thapar informs us that "The ancient sources frequently refer to the system of guilds which began in the early Buddhist period and continued through the Mauryan period. ….Topography aided their development, in as much as particular areas of a city were generally inhabited by all tradesmen of a certain craft. Tradesmen's villages were also known, where one particular craft manufacturing was centred, largely due to the easy availability of raw material.”

It appears that the State just facilitated the economic activities instead of controlling it. We can see that the principle of the Classical Liberalism was very much in practice that demands lesser government controls. It were the guilds  (Shreni) who regulated the manufacturing standards, trade, ethical codes for the member artisans, prices of the crafts, quantity and quality, training to the artisans etc. which could ensure smooth and timely production. The major duty of the Guild President (Adhayksha, Shreshthi or Jyetthaka ) was to represent the guild in the Royal Courts for any grievances about taxation or any other matter related with the supplies. The Guild would work as an assembly where specific problems related to their member artisans or business could be discussed and solved. If any criminal/unethical elements regarding the service or manufacture detected, the Guild could fine or banish the member artisan from the guild. The verdicts of the Shreni could not be challenged even in the Royal courts. Every Shreni had a respectable status in the society and in the Royal houses and normally no decision in connection with the production or trade of the crafts would be taken without consulting Shreni’s.

Unlike later “Independent Village System”, till tenth century AD manufacturing was almost centralized. This was ideal system to make mass productions of the articles or metals. From Jataka we know about the villages of bamboo Craftsmen (Burud) and other such 36 villages dedicated to mass manufacturing of specific goods. In Maharashtra, from copper plates and rock inscriptions, we know about the villages of the Cobblers, Jaggary makers, Weavers etc. The artisans, specialized in certain crafts,  together would form Shreni, elect their President and other office bearers to represent them to protect their professional interests and account keeping as Craft guilds would provide loans or accept deposits from the member craftsmen and the public.

Merchant guilds would distribute the goods in local markets as well export in the other regions or foreign countries without much hindrance. Craftsmen could sell their goods individually as well through the guild. Especially Merchant Guilds had the authority to mint the coins and issue them. All the coins we have from the 6th Century BC onward were issued by the merchant Guilds and not the king. Mauryan kings too didn't issue their coins. In a way, Merchant and craft guilds were the backbone of Indian economic stability and prosperity. There are instances where we find that the Guilds even lent the King in the time of distress.

The post of the President (Shreshthi or Jyetthaka) of the guild was not hereditary. There are instances where the Shreshthi’s have been removed by the member artisans or merchants. Moreover, it seems that the mobility from one profession to another was frequent. It was because the vocational training was made available by the Guilds to meet needs of the additional workforce. The people who wanted to raise their economic status by entering into more flourishing businesses could get easy training and thus entry. Even local artisans would travel far afar in search for better opportunities. Depending on the demand, supplies of the raw material or political unrest, there could be rise and fall in all or the selective occupations. The craftsmen either would acquire other vocational training and change the profession by joining another guild or try to sustain in wait of the better days.

Guilds would donate to the temples or Buddhist or Jain sanctuaries. Mathura inscription 
(2nd century AD) refers to the two permanent endowments of 550 silver coins each with two guilds to feed Brahmins and the poor from out of the interest money. 
A Nashik Inscriptions (2nd century AD) records the endowment of 2000 karshapanas at the rate of one percent (per month) with a weavers' guild for providing cloth to bhikshus and 1000 karshapanas at the rate of 0.75 percent (per month) with another weavers' guild for serving light meals to them. Apart from these more epigraphs and inscriptions are mentioned as evidence in this regard. In addition to this the guilds engaged in works of Charity as well. Guilds worked to alleviate distress and undertook works of piety and charity as a matter of duty. They were expected to use part of their profits for preservation and maintenance of assembly halls, watersheds, shrines, tanks and gardens, as also for helping widows, the poor and destitute. We have epigraphical proofs from Maharashtra that shows the craftsmen, like cobbler, Potter, Ploughmen (Halik) etc. have donated in an individual capacity to build arches or water tanks for the Buddhist caves. This would mean that the artisans were in prosperous financial conditions.

So much so was the power of the craft and merchant guilds that Kautilya advises King that he should ensure that the heads of the guilds are not united. However, there is no evidence that the guilds ever tried to capture the political power, but they maintained their dominant position in the politics.

The position of the guild can be explained in different five stages doweling from 600 B.C. to 1200 A.D. in the perspective of socio-economic environment of ancient India.
I.                   Pre-Mouryan Period (600 – 320 B.C.)
II.                Mouryan Period (320 -200 B.C.)
III.             Post-Mouryan Period (200 B.C. -300 A.D.)
IV.            Gupta Period (300 - 600 A.D.)
V.                Early Medieval Period (600 – 1200 A.D.)

In these eras Guilds transformed, prospered, declined and vanished from the socio-economic scene. Roots of the Guild or Shreni system can be traced back to Indus era, for it was a manufacturing and trading community. From the Indus seals we can guess that the seals were meant to inform the origin and name of the goods and the price. The later coins of Mahajanpada era too were incorporated certain information in symbolic form, such as, the name of the mint, issuing guild etc. As Indus civilization declined, the guild structure of those times too must have been disintegrated, becoming less powerful and local. Later we come across Mahajanpada era or pre-Mauryan period when Guilds seem to have come into the prominence and continued to be dominant till the end of Gupta period.

However, Post-Mouryan Period (200 B.C. -300 A.D.) saw a stiff rise in the Guild system in Indian economic scenario. Santanu Mahapatra in his essay states that-
“ In this period north-western and western part of India controlled by the Indo-Greeks, Sakas, Kushanas, and Parthians. The Mourya Empire disintegrated into a number of kingdoms and tribal republics. This led to the slackening of state control over administration and economy and the guilds assumed more power and influence that developed the closer commercial contact with the Roman Empire. The discovery of the north-eastern monsoon, ascribed to Hippalus, in C. 46 A.D. gave impetus to mid-sea voyage, reducing the time of journey, minimizing the danger of piracy and also obviating the need of the service of middlemen in Indo-Roman trade. Then Indian mercantile activity also extended to central Asia and China. India was the main exporter of the luxury items to the Roman Empire and earned huge profits. A large number of coins of this period those of the Indo-Greeks, Sakas, Parthians, Kushanas, indigenous rulers and tribal republics, cities and guilds have been found, some in hoards. It indicates a greater circulation of money-economy and fairly advancement of trade and commerce, in which guilds must have played a significant role. ‘Milindapanho’ (ed. Trenckner, 1880) refers to a number of occupational guilds, their number being much greater than the early period.” 

In the Gupta era too, guilds, whether merchant or craft, remained prominent, but it seems that the authority to issue coins was withdrawn. We do not find coins issued by the guilds during Gupta era. Rather banking activities, accepting deposits and advancing loans, of the guilds gradually shifted towards select temples. Though the artisans and merchants, along with farmers were prosperous in this era too, foundation of the guilds started weakening. Post-Gupta era saw the rise of feudal lords and various independent powers, thereby disturbing the political stability that India had enjoyed even under foreign rule. Constant conflicts between regional rulers made it difficult to smoothly operate  the trade. 
Later, we find series of Islamic invasions in North-west India causing further political instability and disturbance in trade and commerce. “As a consequence, people’s confidence in these institutions must have waned. There prosperity and affluence an account of which they commanded social status must also have diminished. Thus political upheaval exercised its worst effect on the guild organization.” thus states P. C. Jain.  In a way, Samantas or feudal lords gradually became more dominant for the need of the time to fight out aggression. It diminished the earlier social status of the Guilds and their economy. Also, the taxation structure was changed putting a heavy burden on the craftsmen, merchants and so the guilds. 

“Arthuna inscription of Parmara Camundaraja, dated 1079 A.D, also gives a list of taxes levied on different trade and crafts. On the account of these taxes, the guilds of merchants and traders were losing prosperity in the preceding centuries. This prevailed from their donations which clearly give the impression that they were poorer. To keep up their old reputation of donations and defraying there expenses views of a region federated themselves and pooled their resources” so informs us Mr. Mahapatra. 

By the tenth century AD the guild system witnessed a tremendous decline in the trade, which naturally hampered production of all the crafts. In a way, it was like the situation of great recession. Craftsmen soon started deserting their centralised workplaces. This was the exact situation which had caused the decline of the Indus Civilization. But political instability, constant wars within local rulers and Islamic aggressors were not the only reason behind the disintegration of the Guild system. Another series of natural calamities begun in 11th Century AD…and that were famines. We will discuss the circumstances that led India to the destitution.  

We can see from the above that the economy in practice was liberal with least control of the State. The traders and craftsmen enjoyed enough freedom to get engaged in the production and trading activity of the choice. They fulfilled the social obligations applying their own mind. During this era, they were taxed minimally as compared to taxation that overburdened the economic activities and caused heavy decline under Islamic rule. The rise of the anti-liberal ideas coincided the political upheaval causing further damage to the economy and social structure. The social mobility, unlike it is thought, was quite high. The professions (castes) could be changed easily if an individual sensed prospectus in other activities.  

To sum up:-

1.     The roots of Indian socio-economic doctrine was based on the foundation of the liberal philosophy of tantras and Charvaka.
2.     The artisans, traders and the farmers enjoyed freedom and hence they could prosper and in turn made India a “Golden Sparrow”.
3.     Banking and minting was not owned or controlled by the State but the Guilds, a private sector! A classical liberal would have desired the same in the modern times.
4.     The explosion of art and literature in India belongs to this era only which suggests that the liberal economy opens many ways to the human creativity.
5.     Indian dark age that begins in early medieval era directly coincides with the fall of liberal economy.
6.     India needs revival of the classical liberalism in modern sense which again shall make India prosperous to unbounded levels!
  
-Sanjay Sonawani


 (To be contd.) 

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

Sarasvati Warriors are bound to fail!

 Image result for aryans dna

No matter what branch of the science they use, whether archaeology, scriptural, linguistics or genetics, there are two sides standing opposite of each other to prove Aryan migration or no migration using the same data. They just have to either misinterpret, distort or fake the extant proofs  Why so? And what could be the truth?

Indo-Aryan migration theory proponents were the westerners those wanted to pull back their history far back in order to prove the whites were superior. Since the Aryan term came forth from Rig Veda, they had to add Vedics to in the Aryan fold to make out their theory. Horses and Chariots became the centre of their fancy as Rig Vedic Aryans rode chariots driven by the domesticated horses, they were fair, tall, blue eyed and with golden hair were made heroes out of the fancied idea of a superior race!

The theory of Aryan origin has taken so much so turns and twists that it is highly difficult to understand its course. When Aryan Race Theory got defamed, thanks to Hitler, they came forth with linguistic theory supported by archaeology. The main attention was focused on the horse-chariot burials. It was utterly forgotten that though Vedic Aryans performed horse sacrifices it was not their custom to bury the dead men with horses and chariots. The people of ancient times roaming in the territories of Pontiac Stepps and nearby areas used domesticated horses because they were still pastoralists and horses available in these regions. 

The horses make no tribe superior in warfare and language. Still, horse-chariot issue and the burials became a significant basis to draw the migration maps for IE proponents. They forgot that the technologies do spread by many ways including religious concepts. There is no necessary need for physical migration of the people. Vedic religion finds no parallel in the so-called IE world except for Avesta. Elsewhere we do not find so much so affinity in linguistic and religious similarity. They had migrated to India, yes, but their number was too a small to cause any genetic impact on the huge populations here. 

IE language group is not caused by the demographic migrations. It has no biological connection as suggested by Talageri. Genetics does not confirm the language spoken by the people. Genetical proofs do not indicate the migrations but show the affinity with the geological and geographical features wherever so-called IE languages are spoken. The regional markers do derive from the geological features of the land where human being lived for generations. The geology and mineral distribution of the landmass decide general psychology and languages of the people. Rather human genetics is influenced by these physical factors and none else.

ANI (Ancestral North Indians) and ASI (Ancestral South Indians) DNA variation belongs to the geological construction of both the regions. They vary in great degree. You may refer to geological reports and can see clearly what demarcates ANI and ASI. The same thing applies to the South Asia and most of the Europe where we find the whole land mass have similar geological features and hence the languages spoken in these regions find some or other general similarities or affinity. The similarities in the mix of DNA elements like R1a and others in varied percentage is most likely is owed to the geological and geographical factors. It does not prove the migrations but the degree of impact of the geological factors on the DNA. Rather R1a Haplogroup is not the migration marker but is a geographical marker which is influenced by the geology of the region the person in question lived.

Indus civilisation had trade connections with the Semitics from for at the least 1500 years. Through the vast course of the time, North-Western Indians and Iraqi people’s DNA too should find some affinities to count on. But the geneticists are silent on this part. Indians have traveled for the trade not only taking sea route but the land route that courses through Iran. The men must have come in the intimate contacts with the women of society delving in the en route regions in question. The DNA results would be stronger to suggest an Indo-Semitic connection but it is not yet looked for! 

However, the linguists like Graziadio Ascoli was first to scientifically advocate this relationship in 1943 though it was proposed first by Richard Lepsius in 1836! However, this discussion was limited to the relationship between Semitic and Indo-European languages. The similarities are not negligible. However, the supremacist European scholars kept on their research limited to find the original homeland of the mysterious Indo-Europeans and their movements in different parts of the globe. However, R1a is not traceable in the Semitic populations. Their geology is quite different! 

The haplogroup was first identified in the 24000-year-old remains of so-called Malta boy from Altai region. It is assumed that R1a probably branched from R1* after last glacial maximum. Geneticists assume that place of the origin of R1a is Central Asia and Southern Russia and from there they migrated to Europe and elsewhere. Based on this insignificant raw material various scholars have used genetical data to assume the periods when the migrations took place.  

It also is claimed that the European Neolithic farmers genome miss the R1a in the European autosmal admixture. Hence it is claimed that R1a did not come to Europe with Neolithic farmers only propagated from Eastern Europe. However, the fact that geneticists admit is that modern Sardinians also lack this admixture! Did they check geological features of Sardinia?

Ancient DNA testing has confirmed the presence of haplogroup R1a1a in samples from the Corded Ware culture in Germany (2600 BCE), from Tocharian mummies (2000 BCE) in Northwest China, from Kurgan burials (circa 1600 BCE) from the Andronovo culture in southern Russia and southern Siberia, as well as from a variety of Iron-age sites from Russia, Siberia, Mongolia and Central Asia. New found skeletal remains also have been examined.

Now, the billion dollar question is, the Indo-European migrators that possessed R1a  could migrate to the difficult terrains of Europe and North India, but why they did not migrate, even in small branches, to North Africa and South India? What prohibited their journey to these lands that could influence their superior language and culture over the local populace?

Why there is no Indo-Semitic haplotype has been traced so far when all probabilities there was relationship over the millenniums between the Indians and the North Africans and interaction of Central Asian populations with both as well?

I think, the genetics too, like linguistics has been misused. Both the parties to the debate, i.e. indigenous Aryan Theory proponents and Aryan Migration Theorists are misusing the data and using the same to make out their rustic theories. I have proposed first time the relationship between geology and the language. I am sure and will prove that there is corelationship between certain percentages of genetic markers and the local geology and geography. Geology of the regions does impact the chemistry of the human body (and genetic structures) living for generations moulding their psychology and so the material expressions through language and culture. The overall geology of Eurasia is a single plate though is filled up with different geological features those mark the individual linguistic boundaries as well though the basic structure remains moreover common to varying degree. There are other factors as well that influence the genetic structures of the people with regions but we will discuss this in great detail in the next installment.

Trying to find caste dynamics from genomic data is a foolish adventure. Trying to prove migrations of the people speaking some hypothetical language too is misleading and is not a good science. Using the same data attempting to prove the Aryans were indigenous is another falsity studded with supremacist approach. The migrations are the fact and will remain a trend in future as well. The M17 distribution or R1a is not a product of the migrations but it is natural development caused by the geological features of the lands people live in.

We haven't been told what was the population of so-called PIE speakers. We are not told how many so-called Indo-Aryans entered India. Nor it is considered how many migrated out from India from its local stock. It is not considered the formation of R1a or other admixture might have related to some other unknown and yet inexplicable phenomena. Why Indo-Semitic gene flow is not traceable when in all probability it should form a major genetic structure of the North-Indians and Middle –East populations along with the Iranians and Afghans!

It appears that the racial war fought on academic grounds has reached to the despicable proportions. They misused the linguistics, archaeology and now using the baby science that is called genomics!

-Sanjay Sonawani


Saturday, June 17, 2017

Ceaseless Search for the Aryans!


Image result for genetics aryan issue


 I came across the article published in The Hindu “How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate” by Tony Joseph.

The wonder is they have still embraced the outdated term like Aryans. The well-known fact is the invention of farming cannot be attributed to a single source. We have the oldest archaeological proof from Zagros mountains dating back to 10000 years BC. In fact, no civilisation ever develops in isolation. There are always exchanges between the civilisations along with the independent innovations and inventions and language forms a majority part of any culture.


 When we speak of the ancient past, genetics as a modern tool being used to understand our ancestry, many times give conflicting results for the samples we have are very scarce and that too contaminated by the onslaught of nature. Not more than 101 skeletons have been genetically examined so far and yet the geneticist's can make any claim to explain riddles of the ancient history.


 For example, their report published in The Hindu boldly affirms that sometime around 2000 BC -1500 BC Indo-European language speakers did stream in India with their distinct culture and Sanskrit language! A major unanswered question is, how genetics told these experts which language they spoke and what material culture they really lived from their genes?  The report is fake on many counts when it claims the migration was negated by the research so far, as two major recent reports have dealt with the very issue of the PIE migration through genetics and had conveniently confirmed the migrations of the PIE speakers’, contrary to the claim made by The Hindu.


 A large team led by Morten E Alentoft examined about 101 sampled ancient individuals from Europe and Central Asia. They also used the archeological evidence of chariot burials (2000-1800 BC) to find the migration pattern. The report relies on the hypothesis of the linguists that ‘the spread of Indo-European languages must have required migration combined with social or demographic dominance and this expansion has been supported by archweologists pointing to striking similarities in the archeological record across western Eurasia during the third millennium BC. The genomic evidence for the spread of the Yamnaya people from the Pontic-caspian Steppe to both northern Europe and Central Asia during the early Bronze Age corresponds well with the hypothesized expansion of the IE languages.'  (You may read this report on https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7555/full/nature14507.html)


The report appeared in “Science” (Feb. 15) is based on the research of a large team of geneticists led by David Reich and Iosif Lazaridis of Harward Medical School. The DNA samples suggest that the Yamnaya people (DNA obtained from 4 skeletons) could have moved from Steppes 4500 years ago. This paper claims to have connected two far-flunged material cultures to specific genetic signatures. The report states that the team says they spoke a form of Indo-European language. Earlier it was considered that the origins of PIE were 6000 years ago. To meet this gap, hypothetically, it is being proposed that this may be secondary migration!


 It is also agreed by the genetic scientists that they cannot tell the language of people from their DNA's. I have read the original report and it is admitted that they cannot tell for sure the ancestry of the original PIE speakers of Bronze Age because this was not the independent culture but was an admixture of East European or Caucasus hunter-gatherers and near eastern people. So, genetically too, Yamna people were blending of three distinct ancestries. Hence, if at all PIE existed, its origin cannot be attributed to the archaic skeletons from which the DNA’s were extracted to make a big claim.

 

Migrations is a historical fact around the globe for many reasons, but it is a bold claim that the movement of the certain group of the people belonging to some hypothetical culture destroyed or impacted heavily the languages and cultures of the old inhabitants of the regions unless they could outnumber them. Also attributing migrations of about 4500 years ago to the invention of the agriculture is a farfetched lie because the invention of the agriculture dates back to not less than 10000 BC. Also one cannot credit ceratin group of the people for any invention that changed the face of the mankind.


 It is a fact that the Vedic religion and its original adherents entered India sometime around 1000 BC but their number was not as high to outnumber local inhabitants. The scriptural proofs indicate that the cultural and linguistic traits of India influenced the Vedic religion and language of the migrant's. Indo-European language theory is renaming of old Aryan race theory and European supremacist approach still works hard by their ceaseless misrepresentation of the Genomic analysis to make out over and again their theory!


 Comparison of the modern and ancient DNA cannot tell the story of the mankind because DNA samples are too a few and prone to give conflicting results as they have in recent past. Still, the report of Hindu theoretically considers there were two groups, one that was came to India tens of thousand years ago and other came to India 4,000 to 3,500 years ago. This second group is claimed to be Indo-Aryan when there is no proof what were DNA’s of the Indo-Aryans because genetics do not tell us racial or linguistic traits.

The author of this article published in Hindu, Tony Joseph, however, cautions us to treat population genetic models with caution because it works on the assumption which may be wrong or limited to the scope of their study!  The main assumption that those migrated about 4,000 to 3,500 years ago were speakers of the Indo-Europen language is such a baseless and unscientific assumption that the whole conjecture falls apart. 


The issue of the ancient humanities is complex. Origin of the languages cannot be attributed to any special group of the people. Geology might be playing the significant role in the origin of different languages. The spread of the cultures do not necessarily require demographic migrations. Migrations do not impact local cultures to the extent of erasing their language and cultures. The issue is actually overrated by the people who are in search of hypothetical Superman! 

Friday, June 16, 2017

Vedic fanaticism on rise!

Image result for khajuraho

The irony is the people who do not know Hindu religion, its heritage, and cultural ethos are asking for “Hindu Rashtra”! These same Vedicised people see obscenity in the sculptures of Khajuraho.  These are the same people who do not understand even the meaning of secularism but want it to be removed from the preamble of the constitution! These are the same people who thrash or kill the innocents on the issue of the cows who once upon a time consumed beef as a religious routine! It clearly indicates that the Vedic community now under the disguise of the Hindu religion is up to destroying Hindu religion itself!

In Hindu tradition, sex is considered to be the most sacred act. Female sexual organs are worshiped since millenniums throughout the country. Lord Shiva is the highest worshiped God by Hindus in his phallic form in his eternal union with Devi. Shivalinga has been a symbol of the creation of the universe. Hindu Dharmashastras (Tantras) elaborates sanctity of the sexual act. Male-female equality has been the base of the Hindu philosophy. “Kamshastra” of Vatsyayana is a first scientific treaty in the world that deals with the healthy sex and love. None had thought that erotic or obscene text except these Vedic morons. They want to ban the sale of the book in Khajuraho complex!

Khajuraho is Shiva temple! Many artistic sculptures, depicting sexual activities, marvel the spectators coming from all over the world. It is a World Heritage site that shows what a freedom Indians enjoyed when Vedicism had not infected the Hindus. “Vasantotsava” (spring festival) used to be celebrated by the youngsters together and many love affairs and marriages would emerge from it. It was the Hindu tradition nourished by the Hindus that always exploded with full vigor of liveliness. They have been true seculars! 

Being secular is the soul of the Hindu society.

 These Vedic morons know not what being secular is! Secularism is related with the freedom of material and spiritual life of the people. It has nothing to do with the religion.

Vedic religion is restrictive. It tries to bind human life in the strict commands of their Smritis. Women are deprived of their freedom. They are deprived of sensuous joy. They want males too should be abided by the inhuman religious commands. They want society be divided. . It doesn’t understand the meaning of the human liberty! The dictatorship of religion over the State (King) is commanded in every Smriti. The kind of State Vedic religion seeks is dangerous to the human society.

Now, bolstered by their political victory, the fanatic outfits are gathering to demand “Hindu Rashtra”! No. It is not the Hindu Rashtra they want! They want “Vedic Rashtra” where religion will be supreme over the State. Golvalkar Guruji had sown the seed of this Vedic concept in which other religions have no place! Using term Hindu is a fraud! Hindus should be aware of this and should see independently their own religious heritage and traditions! They should not fall prey to their ulterior schemes. No…do not get deceived by the word ‘Hindu’. They are not Hindus!


They will again enslave you by their art of deception!