Video: Aryan Migration and the Vedic Age

 

4500-year-old DNA from Rakhigarhi reveals evidence that will unsettle Hindutva nationalists

Genetic studies prove one more time that the Aryans came from the central Asian steppes. This study from Rakhigiri, Haryana must be told to the Ghar Vapasi gangs as their ancestral homes lie somewhere near the Ural Mountains. The Rakhigiri study too confirms the Harapan inhabitants as the ancestors of the dark skinned Dravidian population. Nothing to do with the Arayan story. See the report in India Today:

https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/cover-story/story/20180910-rakhigarhi-dna-study-findings-indus-valley-civilisation-1327247-2018-08-31

India: Why does Hindutva perceive a mortal danger from the Aryan Migration Theory?

scroll.in - 27 June 2017

Blood nationalism: Why does Hindutva perceive a mortal danger from the Aryan Migration Theory?

In its racial view of nationalism, any hint of foreignness is a fatal flaw that erases the difference between Hindus, Muslims and Christians

by Shoaib Daniyal

There are very few cultures in which the phrase “genetic study” could lead to a frisson of excitement coursing through society. We, in India, must count ourselves as lucky for living in one.
On June 16, senior journalist Tony Joseph wrote an article in the Hindu, based on a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal, that “put all of the recent discoveries together into a tight and coherent history of migrations into India” to arrive at the conclusion that the DNA evidence supported the Aryan Migration Theory: a scenario where Indo-European speakers (earlier called “Aryans”), speaking early forms of Sanskrit, streamed into north-west India around 4,000 years back.
Jospeh’s article caused a storm in Hindutva circles, as tweets, status messages and articles were feverishly typed out in order to refute it. Just one right-wing website, Swarajya.com had – as of Monday – attempted as many as three rebuttals to Joseph’s piece.

https://t.co/86VyISSJuy

But why was there so much brouhaha over a dry theory of human migration dating back 4,000 years?
Why did so many right-wingers think it relevant to Indian politics in 2017?
And why did they feel that disproving the migration – which geneticist Razib Khan wrote was now so certain that “anyone with at least moderate thinking capacity, whose mind isn’t poisoned by extreme bias, has to agree” with “no ifs no buts” – was so crucial to their politics?

A kinship of blood

The answer lies in the way Hindutva defines nationalism as jus sanguinis – right of blood– rather than other (more common) version that sees it as delineated by geography – jus soli, right of soil.
Originally Indian nationalism – as seen broadly by the Gandhian Congress – was one defined by geography. Anyone born within the borders of the British Indian Empire was Indian. Yet, outside the Congress stream, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the founder of Hindutva, based his nationalism on blood. A true Indian would be one who belonged to the faiths of Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhsim and Jainism. Any faith – notably Islam and Christianity – that came from outside was a lesser sort of Indian. It did not matter if the Muslim or Christian was born in India – in the Savarkarite scheme of things, not belonging to the right group was enough to debar him from full citizenship rights. Later, Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, the highly influential second chief of the Rashtriya Swayasevak Sangh, took this blood nationalism to its logical end, comparing India to Nazi Germany, where also nationality was defined by blood. Golwalkar claimed that the “purging the country [Germany] of the Semitic Races” was a “good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by”.
How did Hindutva intellectually justify this special treatment for Hindus? It used first-come, first-served. Golwalkar claimed, “Hindus came into this land from nowhere, but are indigenous children of this soil always from time immemorial”. This supposedly in situ development of Hindus meant they had the sole claims on India and johnny-come-latelies such as Muslims and Christians would have to be happy with second-class citizenship. So vehement was this theory that the RSS’ Adivasi schools even refuse to use that word, since it literally refers to an aboriginal inhabitant. Since Hindus are the aborigines of India, as per Hindutva, Adivasis are called vanvasi, Sanskrit for “forest dweller”.

Fatal flaw

Any theory of Indo-European migration, therefore, deals a body blow to the blood nationalism of Hindutva. The ideas that formed the Hindu religion also came into India just like Islam and Christianity. Sanskrit, it seems, was preceded by the Dravidian languages as well as the Munda tongues, now spoken only by Adivasis. So genetic studies – and earlier linguistic and archeological studies – which confirm Indo-European migration aren’t a dry academic exercise: they are vital to the intellectual underpinnings of Hindutva, the ideology of India’s ruling party. Without it, there is no way to justify that Hindus on the one hand and Muslims and Christians on the other, have differing claims on India. In fact, when leading Hindutva intellectual Koenraad Elst responded to Tony Joseph, one of Elst’s issues with the article was that it was “affirming that Muslims and Christians are equally entitled to whatever India has to offer” – a preposterous idea within Hindutva nationalism.
In response to this existential challenge, Hindutva is pulling out all stops to discredit academic work behind the theory of Indo-European migration. While the genetic evidence is just coming in, linguistic and archeological evidence has existed in favour of the Aryan Migration Theory for some time now. In response, Hindutva came up with the Out of India Theory, which posits that Indo-European languages spread throughout Eurasia from India – a theory with almost no academic backing and one that Michael Witzel (a professor for Sanskrit at Harvard University in the United States) called a “Hindutva fantasy”.

Hindutva’s version of Intelligent Design

In effect, the impact of evidence behind Indo-European migration on Hindutva is very similar to that seen by American evangelical Christianity to Darwin’s theory of natural selection. Stephanie Jameson (Professor, Department of Asian Languages & Cultures, University of California, Los Angeles, United States) says, “the parallels between the Intelligent Design Issue and the Indo-Aryan Controversy are distressingly close” – both desperate measures to claw out of logical traps placed by science. Jameson calls the Out of India theory “essentially a religio-nationalistic [read: Hindutva] attack on a scholarly consensus [of Indo-European languages being bought to the subcontinent]”.
Michael Witzel also connects the claims for Out of India to today’s politics of othering Muslims and Christians:

An obvious goal is to display the “hoariness” and uniqueness of ancient-most Indian culture and its imagined importance for the rest of the world.
Against such a background, no cultural innovation and certainly no trickling in, immigration or “invasion” from the outside is allowed. Everything created by “Indian” civilisation for the past 9000 years or so, beginning with the early agriculturists of Mehrgarh in Baluchistan(!), has been local and no (major) influences from the outside can be tolerated. This, of course, would make it the oldest tradition on the planet: The Rig Veda, to recall Talageri’s [a prominant OoI supporter] words, “is the oldest and hoariest religious text of the oldest living religion in the world today: Hinduism.” Underlying these claims is the familiar Hindutva agenda that suggests that all non-Hindus are ultimately “foreign” peoples in India, and a blot on the body politic.
One culture (Vedic), one language (Sanskrit), one people: Bhårata ueber alles!
And, in spite of certain well-attested cultural influences (e.g. in astronomy!), of repeated immigrations and of actual invasions – from the Old Persians and Greeks to the Huns, Turks and Moghuls and the interaction and acculturation that all such political developments brought with them.
In other words, history is written with an ulterior motive in mind, that of “nation building.” Facts count little, dates nothing!

India: Hindutva historians totally deserve to be read (Mihir S Sharma)

Business Standard - July 21, 2014

Mihir S Sharma: Eminently funny historians
Hindutva historians totally deserve to be read

by Mihir S Sharma


All those of us who care about books should welcome the appointment, as head of the Indian Council of Historical Research, of Yellapragada Sudarshan Rao. This is not because Prof Rao has so far distinguished himself as a writer about “history and tourism management”, which is the department of Kakatiya University in Warangal he headed before retiring to head an RSS-backed project to “write history from a nationalist perspective and popularise Sanskrit”, two aims which naturally go together for the RSS.

No, we should welcome it because, hopefully, a larger number of Indians will now be exposed to the school of history – and tourism management – that Prof Rao represents. It has often been remarked that Indian humour writing is just not funny enough. With the ascent of ICHR’s Prof Rao and his fellow-travellers, the humour deficit in our literary output will unquestionably be made up.


ICHR’s Prof Rao has been unjustly castigated for a blogpost that he wrote in which he looked forward to a glorious future for the caste system, concluding thus: “The roots of positive aspects of Indian culture are so deep that the merits of ancient systems would be rejuvenated.” This unfair coverage by a biased paid media should not stop people from reading other posts on his blog. I recommend the one on how Mexican ziggurats reflect Vedic/Aryan philosophical principles, as also the one explaining how all “Hindu religious practices, customs, vratas or festivals and rites have a scientific base”. This last also includes an answer to the much-asked question: “Why are the fish and the pebbles in Ganga not attaining Moksha?”

One of the luminaries of the thankfully obsolescent “academic” establishment (henceforth referred to as “Marxists”, “Congressis”, “traitors” and ““ISI-backed intellectual mujahedin” interchangeably), Romila Thapar, has had the poor grace to call attention to the fact that Prof Rao – now the Indian government’s point man on matters historical – has not published any peer-reviewed work. As the many distinguished historians who write late-night blogposts on the internet have already pointed out, this reflects poorly not on Prof Rao, but instead on every single historian who has been peer-reviewed. I personally cannot understand why Prof Rao’s work on spiritualism and postmodernism has not been published to great acclaim by a major academic press. It begins, after all, by pointing out the unvarnished truth that “India with its unbroken civilisation since times unknown has no parallel in the world” (take that, China!) and then makes the unimpeachable point that “only the modern European concepts of nationalism and liberal democracy divided the country”.

Prof Rao, sensibly, cares nothing for these peers. Who are they to review him? His first two press releases as head of ICHR do not mention these peers, who are mainly Marxists, Congressis, or Minorities anyway. Instead, both thank his academic mentor, “Pujya Sri Mahamahopadhyaya Dr K Sivananda Murtyji”. This eminent historian is a Warangal-based homeopath and spiritual leader. Prominent among Mr Murty’s pronouncements is the sterling call for a new Constitution for Hindustan” which “should create a new Hindu nation-state which will be founded on Hindu ideals”, because, as reported by a devoted listener, “India is not ‘Bharat’ but an artificial entity based on a pseudo-secular anti-Hindu philosophy called ‘Indian Constitution’.” To our country’s eternal loss, the Marxist anti-nationals paid by the Vatican and the Saudis who dare to call themselves “eminent historians” have not permitted to be published in book form the thoughts about history summarised thus: “Our ancient India was subordinated to this newly created pseudo-secular anti-Hindu, pro-Muslim and pro-Christian Indian Republic.”

Among Mr Murty’s loudest followers is the renowned blog-reviewed historian of ancient India, astrologer David Frawley. Mr Frawley is white, which means that our patriotic nationalists are particularly desperate to hear praise from him on the subject of our glorious past. His books The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India and In Search of the Cradle of Civilisation are particularly worth reading. As the patriotic historian’s favourite source, Wikipedia, points out, eminent historian Deepak Chopra has described them as “ground-breaking” and they have been reviewed by eminent peer-reviewed historical journal Yoga Today. They argue that the earlier Vedas, which the Marxist-Missionary nexus describes as being from a pastoral society, were actually written in the Indus Valley Civilisation – sorry, the Saraswati Valley Civilisation. It provides conclusive proof, in the unquestionably Indic form of frequent assertion, that it was from India that the Aryans spread out to Iran, Central Asia, and finally Europe. Such claims are looked down on by evangelical Christian CIA agents like Chicago’s Caroline E Haskell Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions Bruce Lincoln, who describes them as "exercises in scholarship (= myth + footnotes)”. Eh, but what does he know.

If not for little-known presses like Voice of India – founded by Sita Ram Goel in 1983, a man described by Mr Frawley as “one of India’s most important thinkers in the post-independence era” – we would be tragically unaware of this wonderful stream of little books that span the genres of history, myth, humour and tourism management. Mr Goel won eminence as a historian writing books about the destruction of Hindu temples by marauding Muslims that relied exclusively on the Muslims’ own accounts of the numbers of people dead and temples destroyed. He rightly believed that contextualising such claims with the likelihood that they were warlike or poetic exaggeration was the kind of thing done by Nehru-Gandhi-loving pseudo-secular time-servers. (Such context is only necessary, according to Mr Goel’s acolytes, when studying accounts of the killing of Buddhist monks by Hindu kings.)

Mr Goel was introduced to an amazed and adoring reading public through a series on the op-ed page of The Indian Express in the 1980s, which he owed to the good offices of Arun Shourie, then editor. Mr Shourie, at least, is one scholar of history and tourism management who has done his duty by the reading public in terms of volume and volumes. Frankly, the only sad part of Mr Rao becoming India’s leading historian is that it could, instead have been Mr Shourie. The “reformist” government may not value his economic expertise, but, as befits a group of interestingly educated people, it certainly deserves his expertise as the most eminent Indian historian. And tourism manager.

mihir.sharma@bsmail.in

Announcement: 'Aryan Invasion Theory and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar' upcoming seminar at Nehru Memorial in Delhi (30 May 2016)

नेहरू स्मारक संग्रहालय एवं पुस्तकालय

तथा

सोसाइटी फॉर सोशल इम्पॉवरमेंट, दिल्ली

द्वारा

''आर्यन इन्वेज़न थिऑरी ऐण्ड बी. आर. अम्बेडकर''

विषय पर आयोजित राष्ट्रीय संगोष्ठी में आप सादर आमंत्रित हैं


दिनांक: सोमवार, 30 मई 2016

समय: प्रातः 10-00 बजे

संगोष्ठी कक्ष, प्रथम तल, पुस्तकालय भवन

नेहरू स्मारक संग्रहालय एवं पुस्तकालय

तीन मूर्ति भवन, नई दिल्ली


Nehru Memorial Museum and Library
and
Society for Social Empowerment, Delhi

invite you to a National Seminar

at 10.00 a.m. on Monday, 30 May, 2016

in the Seminar Room, First Floor, Library Building

on

‘Aryan Invasion Theory and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’

Video: Romila Thapar on the Colonial Scholarship Behind HIndu Rastra

Does it matter now if someone was an Aryan: Romila Thapar (reported by Aranya Shankar)

Indian Express

Does it matter now if someone was an Aryan: Romila Thapar
Historian Romila Thapar said that in the current context, attempts were being made to follow two directives — the rewriting of history and the “cleansing” of institutions with “cultural pollution”.

Written by Aranya Shankar | New Delhi | Published: October 2, 2015

In the backdrop of the shocking murder of Kannada scholar and rationalist M M Kalburgi, public intellectuals from various fields, under the aegis of the Indian Writers’ Forum Trust, organised a discussion on ‘Revisiting Cultural Resistance’ at the India International Centre on Thursday.

Speaking at the function chaired by writer Githa Hariharan, historian Romila Thapar said that in the current context, attempts were being made to follow two directives — the rewriting of history and the “cleansing” of institutions with “cultural pollution”.

On the rejection of the Aryan invasion theory by speakers at a seminar by Delhi University’s Sanskrit department, Thapar said the issue was “complex” but becoming “less crucial”. She also criticised the seminar’s efforts to push back the date of the creation of the Vedas. “The issue of Aryan invasion is very complex but I think the matter is becoming less and less crucial with time. Does it really matter now if someone was an Aryan? With regard to astronomy as a historical tool, I think only a historian of astronomy can comment on its reliability. Sanskritists — no matter how good their Sanskrit is — cannot determine it,” she said.

Thapar warned that in their efforts to push out “western history”, proponents of “indigenous history” were basing their theories on accounts by colonial historians. “It was James Mill whose periodisation of history into Hindu, Muslim and British periods is followed by many Hindutva ideologues. It was also theosophist Colonel Olcott who had first said that Aryans were indigenous to India,” she said.

Ambedkar University Vice-Chancellor Shyam Menon claimed that there was a “chronic tendency on the part of the State to assume control over institutes of higher learning”. “Among those who consider that the most important function of the State is to be the guardian and preserver of the social order, there is always a fear that the university, through its very nature and conduct, might unleash ideas that would be disruptive of such an order,” he said.
- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/does-it-matter-now-if-someone-was-an-aryan-romila-thapar/#sthash.aLmp9Kyi.dpuf

India: Delhi University dept stargazing to fix Veda dates

The Times of India

DU dept stargazing to fix Veda dates

THE TIMES OF INDIA NEWS SERVICE | Sep 26, 2015, 11.22 PM IST

NEW DELHI: Apparently the stars can tell when Rig Veda was composed. Delhi University's Sanskrit department is holding a three-day seminar on "Vedic Chronology" and on the first day, the department head, RC Bharadwaj, delivering the key-note address, argued that "astronomical data" and the "jyotish paramapara" (astrology) in Vedic literature furnish enough 'evidence' to support his view that Rig Veda predates the Indus Valley Civilization.

Adding to his argument, he said that Harappan culture is simply a later-Vedic one, that the movement of 'Aryan' culture was from East to West and not the other way around and all the "so-called progressive Indian historians" are wrong.

This batch of seminars, like the ones on disproving the Arya invasion theory before it, is mean to place in the mainstream academic discourse the view of Sanskrit scholars and Indian 'Indologists' - as distinguished from foreign or foreign-trained ones - that there was no invasion. Romila Thapar, naturally, came in for a lot of criticism.

Bharadwaj argued that Harappan town-planning had to be preceded by some less sophisticated version of community dwelling; that Vedic culture travelled to the West - explaining the links of language, myths and culture - following the Chinese trade routes.

While these views coincide exactly with those of the Hindu right-wing, Bharadwaj maintains his department "is not working in a specific direction." The day-one list of speakers seems to support this as Sanskrit scholar Gaya Charan Tripathi countered several of Bharadwaj's arguments, primarily the one on "astronomical data." He also gently reminded the gathering that western Indologists like William Jones also "contributed much to Indian nationalism."

India: Aryans were indigenous, Mahabharata, Ramayana historical texts, say references at exhibition

Aryans were indigenous, Mahabharata, Ramayana historical texts, say references at exhibition
The Institute of Scientific Research on Vedas on Thursday launched the ‘Unique Exhibition on Cultural Continuity from Rigveda to Robotics’ at the Akademi

Written by Aranya Shankar
New Delhi
Updated: Sep 18, 2015

Mahesh Sharma, Krishna Gopal and Sonal Mansingh at the exhibition in New Delhi on Thursday. (Source: Express photo by Amit Mehra)

An exhibition going on at the Lalit Kala Akademi provides “astronomical references and scientific evidences” which dismiss the Aryan invasion theory and argue that the Mahabharata and Ramayana are historical texts, not mythological epics.

The Institute of Scientific Research on Vedas (I-SERVE) on Thursday launched the ‘Unique Exhibition on Cultural Continuity from Rigveda to Robotics’ at the Akademi, in the presence of Culture Minister Mahesh Sharma, RSS joint general secretary Krishna Gopal and classical dancer Sonal Mansingh, who were the chief guests.

Some of the other issues explored in the exhibition are the “earliest evidence of dentistry at Mehrgarh in 7000 BC”, astronomical charts displaying the lunar eclipse at the time when “Hanumanji met Sitaji in Ashok Vatika” in 5067 BC, a solar eclipse of 3153 BC when the “Pandavas left for 13 years of exile after losing everything in a game of dice” and the identification of “63 predecessors and 59 successors of Ram”.

“Our history is at least 10,000 years old, much before Muslims and Christians arrived.We found that planetary formations mentioned in Ramayana and Mahabharata corresponded to actual formations at the time. We have also studied genealogy which proves that Aryans were indigenous,” said Saroj Bala, director, Delhi Chapter of I-SERVE.

Sonal Mansingh said she got “goosebumps” when she heard about the exhibition. “As a systematic conspiracy, scholars like Wendy Doniger have written about our ancient saints being sex maniacs to belittle us. Yet, we only read the history written by these people”.

Culture Minister Mahesh Sharma said it was important to hold such an exhibition, which was based on “scientific facts”. “The next generation may say that somebody wrote Ramayana and Mahabharata sitting in their bedrooms, so it is necessary to collect scientific basis for their historicity,” he said.

Krishna Gopal said that “Christian scholars” could not imagine history older than 4,000 years and the idea of continuity from Rig Veda till the present times was unimaginable for many. “Even Max Mueller could not go beyond 5,000 BC,” he said.

- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/aryans-were-indigenous-mahabharata-ramayana-historical-texts-exhibition/

India: ICHR debate on Aryan invasion theory cut short

The Hindu
NEW DELHI, March 28, 2015

ICHR debate on Aryan invasion theory cut short

Anita Joshua

An effort by Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) member-secretary Gopinath Ravindran to advocate the coexistence of all schools of history to keep alive the idea of a plural India during the Foundation Day lecture by American Vedic teacher David Frawley here on Friday, was cut short by some members of the gathering.

In his lecture, Dr. Frawley questioned the Aryan invasion theory and was also critical of India for not extensively teaching ancient India to its students.

“Few Indians today seem to know or take pride in their historical heritage that is one of the oldest in the world. …we find some Indian academics denigrating their own traditions, from a superficial view that does not adequately understand the background or purpose of the older teachings.”

As Prof. Ravindran questioned some of Dr. Frawley’s contentions, particularly his insistence that there was no Aryan invasion as made out by “colonial and Marxist historians,” some back-benchers in the audience protested and told the member-secretary to wrap up his address.

Referring to the Marxist school of history, Dr. Frawley said: “We are in a post-colonial/post-Marxist era because of the failure of Marxism the world over’’ and added that there was still quite a lot of it in India.

‘No one view’

In an oblique reference to this criticism of the Marxist school of history, Prof. Ravindran, before contesting Dr. Frawley’s argument on the Aryan invasion theory, said: “There is no one view of history. It is not a question of just taking the red out.’’ Arguing that all schools of history should coexist, he added: “It is important to safeguard the idea of India as a plural India. Disagreement is healthy but we should allow all strands of thought.’’

As members in the audience cut the member-secretary short, ICHR Chairman Y. Sudershan Rao stepped in to support Dr. Frawley’s contention, stating that the Aryan invasion theory is made up and not backed by archaeological evidence.

Aryans and Others (Dorothy M Figueira)

The Indian Express

Aryans and Others

Written by Dorothy M Figueira | Updated: March 13, 2015 3:08 pm

The figure of the Aryan has captivated literary imagination in both India and the West since the classical era and provides a fitting subject of inquiry for comparatists who wish to examine its cross-cultural emplotment. However, from a solely literary perspective, identifying the Aryan is a challenging task, since the texts used to delineate this figure are elusive; they function as absent authorities, often evoked but rarely cited. Moreover, the Aryan is not just the figure that historians and linguists have sought to isolate, situate and follow in its migrations, but has also been the subject of myth-making. Myths regarding the Aryan have been wielded to deconstruct identity and construct new social forms. In my book, Aryans, Jews, Brahmins: Theorising Authority through Myths of Identity, I examine how the Aryan myth is a shared myth in Europe and in India from the Enlightenment to the modern era.

My study begins by charting the initial discussions regarding the Aryan in the work of Voltaire and his quest for an Aryan urtext in the Ezour Vedam. Voltaire sought in India a sophisticated culture as far removed as possible from that of the ancient Hebrews. In this respect, ancient India provided him with an alibi in the true sense of the term, an elsewhere upon which he could superimpose his critique of the Judeo-Christian tradition.

As canonical Sanskrit texts were gradually translated into European languages and disseminated, 19th-century mythographers sought to read the history of the Aryans through their myths. Aryan India was cut to fit the Romantic ideals of a revealed monotheism and the development of a people’s unique character, and their gradual degeneration. With the appearance of Max Mueller’s edition of the Rig Veda and his voluminous commentary, the Aryans were no longer merely Europe’s distant cousins. Their textual presence finally confirmed the existence of a tradition as old as (if not older) than that of the Bible. In the West, this “discovery” of the Aryans through the Veda effectively displaced the Jews from their central position on the world stage. The Jews could now be assigned a subaltern role in history. For the remainder of the 19th century, this myth of the Aryan was employed to construct an ideal imaginary past for Europe. It fostered nationalism and, in the process, identified a mythic scapegoat in the figure of the Jew. The Jew and the Aryan would now become the operative dyad, as seen in the work of Nietzsche, Gobineau, H.S. Chamberlain, and finally in the ravings of Nazi ideologues.

At roughly the same time that the European Romantics were speculating about their imaginary Aryan ancestors, the Hindu reformer Raja Rammohan Roy was laying the foundation for the Brahmo Samaj with translations of Sanskrit scriptures into vernacular languages. In order to affect his reform, Rammohan Roy felt that this literature needed to be liberated from its Brahmin custodians. Toward this end, the raja sometimes even rewrote texts to depict an ideal Aryan past in which certain religious practices (such as idolatry and sati) did not exist. With his translations, he established rules for textual validity and corrected the excrescences that he felt had led to extreme practices. The raja’s reform strategy was subsequently emulated by Dayananda Saraswati, the founder of the Arya Samaj, who also sought to make Sanskrit canonical sources available to a wider range of believers by developing a series of interpretive strategies to extricate Vedic revelation from its hermeticism and ritualism. In order to portray the Aryans as sophisticated, Dayananda “translated” the Veda to show that they had knowledge of telegraphy and chemistry. The myth of the Aryan Golden Age promulgated by both these Hindu reform movements set the stage for the development of Hindu nationalism.

By the time of Tilak, an ideal portrait of the Aryan had been activated to foster national self-esteem. Like Dayananda, Tilak attributed to the Aryans knowledge of science and technology. As valiant survivors of an ice-age glacial catastrophe in the Arctic, the Aryans travelled from the North Pole to civilise the world. Tilak’s Aryans were so advanced that they survived this migration and brought their considerable skills (and their scriptures) to the lands they invaded. Vivekananda would further develop this theme of racial and cultural superiority. Unlike other Indian reformers, Vivekananda did not limit his campaign to the domestic front but exported it abroad. It was before Californian and Chicagoan society matrons that he detailed his vision of an Aryan future grounded in a racialist argument. In this glorification, it was clear that the Brahmin descendants of the Aryans would be the only true beneficiaries of this myth-making.

Jyotirao Phule and B.R. Ambedkar, however, recognised that these various theories needed reinterpretation in order to locate the struggles of the oppressed castes within the historical perspective of the Aryan conquest of India. Phule began by revising the Aryan invasion theory to define culture by its subculture. He turned the myth of the Aryan back upon the elite, by taking just those strengths and virtues attributed to the Aryan by Western Orientalists and Brahmin reformers and transferring them to the lower castes. Instead of appealing to an Aryan Golden Age, Phule called for the reestablishment of an alternative mythical age — a non-Aryan Golden Age during the reign of King Bali. More importantly, by challenging the myth of a utopian Indian past, he introduced the new category of reason into the discussion.

Ambedkar began his mission where Phule left off. Ambedkar started by challenging the authority of the Veda as the source of Aryan identity. He called into question its canonicity and infallibility and rejected its racial portrayal of the Aryans. He also questioned textually based social reform that clearly served the needs of the privileged, lettered castes. Ambedkar concluded that all privileged-caste Hindu speculation regarding the Aryans was nothing but a strategy devised to support Brahmin superiority, justify their overlordship over non-Brahmins and satisfy Brahmin arrogance. In their anti-Aryan polemics, both Phule and Ambedkar launched a radical attack on Hindu revivalism, codified as it was in the elite myth of the past.

Valorising the irrational in myth was (and is) symptomatic of the same disease that enables the irrational to flourish in politics. It is this “underside” of myth that my book examines: how Europeans and Indians deployed myths regarding the ancient Aryans in their various reform and nationalist projects. In both the East and the West, the resulting conclusions were, unfortunately, the same. If you did not possess Aryan blood, you could not be civilised and those peoples identified as non-Aryan “others” needed to be neutralised or even destroyed. Phule and Ambedkar saw the danger inherent in the Aryan myth, challenged it, and sought to debunk it.

If someone had told me when I was writing this book that its thesis would be relevant today, I would have been surprised. But as I assess the present situation, I am astonished by the degree to which its thesis resonates today. I never envisioned that the Aryan myth could be resuscitated so easily, as in those instances when the elected leader of a secular India discusses the genius of the ancient Indians having knowledge of plastic surgery, aeronautics and reproductive technology; or when, on a recent visit to New York, he praises the superiority of modern diasporic professional Indians. Are such recent claims to past and present Indian exceptionalism any different from those of Dayananda, Tilak, or Vivekananda? The myth of Indians inhabiting a Golden Age of technological and moral advancement is the same. It has its believers, as recent events have demonstrated. In light of this ongoing deployment of the Aryan myth, our task becomes clear. We must remember the work of Phule and Ambedkar, and look to their legatees to challenge this mythmaking and offer a counter-narrative.

Excerpted from the preface to ‘Aryans, Jews ,Brahmins’ (2015) published by Navayana. Figueira is professor of comparative literature at the University of Georgia, US.
- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/aryans-and-others/3/

India: Delhi University's Aryan Project - to fix dates of vedic literature

see original electrinic source at: http://epaper.mailtoday.in/435734/mt/Mail-Today-February-10-2015#page/11/2

David Frawley speaking at ‘Aryan Project’ by Delhi University’s Sanskrit department says 'Aryans were indigenous to India'

Mail Today

Right-wing US historian insists 'Aryans were indigenous to India'

By Heena Kausar

Published: 04:19 GMT, 25 November 2014 | Updated: 04:19 GMT, 25 November 2014 

 

Throwing his weight behind the ‘Aryan Project’ by Delhi University’s Sanskrit department, noted American scholar David Frawley said there is a need for an extensive new Vedic study, and insisted that Aryans were indigenous to India. 

“There is a need for extensive new Vedic study and research in India, including considering the mantric and yogic dimensions of Vedic knowledge,” Frawley said on Monday while giving a presentation of his findings on ‘Aryan Theory in The Light of Textual Evidences’. 

Vedic literary evidence — the largest, best preserved and most complete from the early ancient world — reflects a compilation over a long period of time by several kingdoms and dynasties, he said. 

+1

Controversial: American scholar David Frawley is a leading challenger of the 'Aryan Invasion Theory' in the study of Vedic history 

“Such a vast literature cannot exist without a civilization to produce and sustain it over the centuries.” 

“No literary evidence of Aryan invasion or migration. So called textual references to Aryan invasion/migration require changing meaning of words and taking them out of context. 

"For example, Arya was a term of respect and not about ethnicity. Dark skinned Dasyus are only forces of Avidya or darkness, not a racial metaphor,” Frawley added. 

The western born teacher in the Vedic tradition is popular for his books in which he has rejected the ‘Aryan Invasion Theory’. 

The Sanskrit department, which has started the project to prove that Aryans were indigenous to the country, will hold at least seven lectures. 

It also plans to invite national and international scholars to speak on the issue. 

The ‘Aryan Invasion Theory’ is a hotly contested one in the academic world. Noted historians like Romila Thapar and D. N. Jha support the theory, while right-wing historians claim that Aryans were indigenous to the country. 

“This debate has been there for long but we never had the Sanskrit department doing anything about it. Where were they all these years? Why all of a sudden they have come out. This shows they have a backing now. No historian takes Frawley seriously. His right-wing credentials are well known,” Jha remarked.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2847821/Right-wing-historian-Frawley-insists-Aryans-indigenous-India.html

----------------------

Mail Today

US author on board for 'Aryan project': Hindu scholar to give lecture at Delhi University

By Heena Kausar

Published: 23:18 GMT, 21 November 2014 | Updated: 01:18 GMT, 22 November 2014

+3

Professor David Frawley will deliver a lecture to counter the “Marxist and western” concept that Aryans were invaders

Delhi University’s Sanskrit Department has its task cut out: to prove that the Aryans were not aliens but indigenous people. 

Keeping that aim in mind, the department is all set to begin its controversial project, which was announced in September, and on Monday an American author will deliver a lecture to counter the “Marxist and western” concept that Aryans were invaders. 

On Monday, American author David Frawley will be the first to express his views on the multi-series ‘Aryan Project’. Frawley, founder of the American Institute of Vedic Studies, will speak on ‘Aryan Theory in The Light of Textual Evidences’ at the university. In his books, Frawley has rejected the ‘Aryan Invasion Theory’. 

Contentious issue

The ‘Aryan Invasion Theory’ is a contentious issue. Noted historians like Romila Thapar and D.N. Jha support the theory which claims that Aryans came from outside India as invaders. However, the rightwing historians reject the invasion theory, claiming Aryans were indigenous Indians who established the Saraswati Valley civilisation. 

“Frawley is one of the many speakers who have worked for several years on this topic. In his books, ‘The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India’ and ‘In Search of the Cradle of Civilization’, Frawley criticises the 19th-century racial interpretation of Indian prehistory, such as the theory of the conflict between invading Caucasoid Aryans and Dravidians,” head of Sanskrit Department Ramesh Bhardwaj told MAIL TODAY. 

Bhardwaj said the department will conduct at least seven lectures. “We are using seven tools, including textual evidence, archaeological evidences, linguistics, comparative religion, comparative folk literature and genetic mapping. We will organise seminars, workshops and talks on each of these tools. Experts from the country and abroad will come and present their works. We will compile all the evidences,” he said. 

He said the department has no funds and they will soon approach the Indian Council for Historical Research (ICHR) for conducting further research. “We have some funds but that is not enough. We will write to the university and to the ICHR for more funds,” he said. 

In September, the Sanskrit Department had announced that it will undertake research to prove that Aryans were not migrants. 

+3

The controversial project is the brainchild of Delhi University’s Sanskrit Department (Picture for representation)

The Sanskrit Department had also announced that it will undertake a thorough study of History textbooks of various state and national boards to prepare a detailed on report on representation of ‘Vedic age and Aryan culture’ in History books and suggest a revision. The report will be submitted to the HRD ministry asking them to take corrective measures. 

“Aryan culture and Vedic age is not being truly reflected in textbooks of almost all the boards, including CBSE and state boards. Only western and Marxist views are being reflected at present. We will study and make a report on what should be reflected in books. Like, the ‘Aryan Migration Theory’ is debatable. So why not give students the version of Indian historians too? We will use textual evidences and the researches done in the last 100 years,” Bhardwaj had said. 

Bhardwaj said he is aware that the move might gain political colours, but insisted that it should be looked as pure academics.

+3

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2844804/Hindu-scholar-lecture-Delhi-University.html
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

India Under the Modi Regime: Delhi University's Sanskrit dept project to prove Aryans were not foreigners

POLITICS AND NATION
DU's Sanskrit dept kickstarts project to prove Aryans were not foreigners

30 Sep, 2014, 0402 hrs IST, Ritika Chopra, ET Bureau

There's no evidence to back the claim, said renowned historian DN Jha, who specialises in ancient and medieval Indian history.
NEW DELHI: Delhi University's Sanskrit department has thrown its weight behind a project that could possibly rewrite history to fit the Sangh Parivar's view of India's past — a move that's likely to gain political colour considering the resounding victory of the Narendra Modi-led Bharatiya Janata Party in the general election.

Here's what most history books tell us — first there was the Indus Valley Civilization that flourished in places such as Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa. Then, around 3,500 years ago, this went into decline as the Aryan nomadic tribes crossed the mountains and entered India.

Sanskrit dept to rope in YS Rao

But the Hindu nationalist narrative, as espoused by the Sangh Parivar and its affiliates, disputes what they call a European-imposed narrative. They say the Aryans were an indigenous people — not migrants.

The project was announced last week by Delhi University's Sanskrit department in the presence of OP Kohli -- a BJP leader recently appointed Gujarat governor -- and vice-chancellor Dinesh Singh at an event marking 60 years of Sanskrit research. Sanskrit department head Ramesh Bharadwaj strongly denied that this was an attempt to validate a particular party line and that he was only interested in putting forward a convincing academic argument. Singh for his part has come under intense criticism for implementing a four-degree undergraduate programme that's been withdrawn after the new government was formed.

The project is unlikely to find the support of the university's history department. "This is a meaningless debate. We all now know that the entire human race can trace its ancestry back to Africa. So how does it matter whether Aryans were indigenous to our country or were outsiders? There are far more serious issues of archaeological and scientific research that need to addressed in our country," said Nayanjot Lahiri, a professor of archaeology in the history department at Delhi University.

There's no evidence to back the claim, said renowned historian DN Jha, who specialises in ancient and medieval Indian history.

"This debate is not new, but I can say that at present there is no scientific evidence to prove that Indo-Aryans were indigenous to our subcontinent. But since the political ambience in the country has changed, there will be many such attempts to prove this," said Jha, who used to be a Delhi University professor. "I have no comment to offer except that a serious historian will only dismiss such research.

Moreover, the Sanskrit department of Delhi University is not at all competent to go into such questions." The idea is to disprove the Aryan migration theory, proposed by German linguist and Sanskrit scholar Max Mueller, using scientific facts.

"There are two schools of thought as far as the origin of the Indo-Aryans is concerned. We want to collate archaeological and new scientific evidence along with the Sanskrit department's own research of ancient manuscripts and texts to prove that Indian culture was not a foreign import," said Bharadwaj, who argued that the opposite was true.

"In fact, the Aryans belonged to the subcontinent and migrated from here and influenced cultures abroad," he said.

The last NDA government had made an attempt to disprove the Aryan migration theory by changing the history textbooks in 2004, the year in which it lost the general election. Human resource development ministry officials declined to comment on the matter.

The Sanskrit department will soon seek the help of YS Rao, recently appointed head of the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) by the BJP government, to collate historical evidence. Rao did not respond to ET's calls and emails. Rao is a controversial figure, having once written in support of the caste system besides blaming Muslim rule for India's social ills.

His stand on a strongly divisive issue was made clear by his support for the contention that the Babri Masjid was built on the site of a temple.Nationalistic scholars have argued that there are several linguistic, archaeological, literary and, more recently, genetic pieces of evidence to support the belief that Aryans originated in the Indian subcontinent. The issue was one of the most hotly contested debates in Western and Indian academic circles throughout the 1990s.

Bharadwaj pointed to the pattern of similarities between ancient Sanskrit words and ancient words in classical Western languages as one of the linguistic examples of Indian influence on cultures abroad.

He also cited similarities between the architecture and culture of the Indus Valley Civilization and Mesopotamian Civilisation, the latter considered the cradle of civilization in the West.

As for genetic evidence, a study published by scientists from the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology in Hyderabad said that the origin of genetic diversity found in South Asia is much older than 3,500 years, when the Indo-Aryans were said to have begun migrating to India.

The study had appeared in the American Journal of Human Genetics in 2011. "Many phonetic laws of French language are the same as the one formulated by ancient Sanskrit grammarian Panini. The German language is also similar to Sanskrit.

So when there is so much evidence in favour of our view, then there must be an effort to bring some finality to this debate. Why should we continue teaching the European theory to our children?" Bharadwaj said.

According to Bharadwaj, the Sanskrit department will start holding workshops with different scholars in January next year in pursuit of its project.

source: http://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/dus-sanskrit-dept-kickstarts-project-to-prove-aryans-were-not-foreigners/articleshow/43838590.cms

Hindutva Jamboree in Delhi - A report in the press

The Hindu

NEW DELHI, November 26, 2010

Focus on Indian civilisation
Staff Reporter

Focussing on creating awareness in civil society about recent archaeological and historical researches and to promote understanding and relevance of Indian civilization in modern times, a seminar, “How deep are the roots of Indian civilization? An archaeological and historical perspective” was inaugurated by Ministry of Culture Secretary Jawahar Sircar here on Thursday. Organised by Draupadi Trust in collaboration with knowledge partners Archaeological Survey of India and Indian Archaeological Society and hosted by the Vivekananda International Foundation, the three-day-long seminar will include presentations by renowned scholars and archaeologists from India and abroad.

Mr. Sircar stressed the importance of a “serious study on the subject of antiquity of Indian civilisation” and urged scholars to base their research on rational, not emotional basis. He inaugurated an exhibition- “Draupadi: Shashakt- Rupa Rupeshwari”- depicting the life of Draupadi as a woman of substance.

Delivering the keynote address, former ASI Director-General Prof. B. B. Lal spoke about “postulates [that] have been distorting our vision of India's past”. Among these is the belief that the Vedas are no older than 1200 B.C. and that Vedic people were nomads. Recent excavations at sites in Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana and Gujarat and a fresh study of Vedic texts, he said, have proved that most of these postulates are “ill- founded.”

According to Prof. Lal, these excavations proved that the Rigveda is older than 2,000 BC and people of this civilisation were not nomads. Quashing the “Aryan invasion theory” he said that the Harappan civilisation did not become extinct, and C-14 dating procedures proved that Harappan and Vedic people were indigenous, not invaders or migrants.

Thursday's session focussed on the life and practices of Harappan and Vedic civilisations with presentations on scientific findings of the drainage system in north-west India with regard to river Saraswati by Central Arid Zone Research Institute's Dr. J. R. Sharma and Indian Space Research Organisation scientist Dr. Bidyut Bhadra; the geographic identification and significance of Sapta Sindhu by California State University Professor Dr. Shiva Bajpai; Harappan town planning and water harvesting by former ASI Joint Director-General Dr. R. S. Bisht; continuum in town planning and metrology in Harappan in classical India by Coimbatore scholar Dr. Michel Danino and a comparative study of the middle Asian intercultural space and the Indus civilisation by University of Bologne (Italy) Professor Maurizio Tosi. Also present was Shah Abdul Latif University (Pakistan) Vice-Chancellor Dr. Nilofar Shaikh.

Draupadi Trust Chairperson Neera Misra spoke about the need for a “holistic approach to development” and knowledge of one's civilisation being an important part of development of a nation

Hindu American Foundation objections on Michael Wood's documentary

[The Story of India is a TV series that was aired on the BBC in August and September 2007; http://www.pbs.org/thestoryofindia/]

o o o

Indian Express

Hindu group in US objects to 'The Story of India'

Agencies Posted: Jan 13, 2009 at 1828 hrs IST

New York: A US-based Hindu advocacy group has taken strong objection to historian Michael Wood's documentary ‘The Story of India,’ being telecast on public television, describing its presentation of the Aryan Migration Theory (AMT) as ‘agenda driven.’

Rejecting the theory, the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) said India has always been the cradle of Hindu civilization and there is no debate about it.

"Michael Wood clearly admires India and its people, and this shows through in his passionate depiction of India," said Sheetal Shah, HAF's Director of Development and Outreach.

"We are not seeking to discredit the 'Story of India' in its entirety, but viewers should be aware that a major error was made in the documentary that fails scrutiny and should be corrected," she said.

The Hindu advocacy group said it has received a deluge of phone calls protesting the presentation of the ‘now discredited’ theory, currently being shown on television.

The AMT theorises that in 1500 BCE pastoral tribes that came to be known as Aryans, migrated from Central Europe to Northwest India eventually dispersing indigenous people and imposing their own culture.

"This theory, that is not supported by archaeological evidence, was first posited by European Indologists and British colonialists, eventually finding support from a section of India's politically motivated linguists and historians such as Romila Thapar, and famously, controversial Harvard linguist, Michael Witzel," she said.

This theory, the HAF believes, is ‘agenda-driven’.

In his documentary, HAF says, Wood holds that the early Hindu practice of worshipping devas, or demigods representing elements, ‘somehow implies that these practices were imported from Central Asia.’

While referring ‘obliquely’ to the Aryan Migration Theory as controversial, HAF said, Wood fails to present contrary evidence that many scientists believe refutes the claim that the progenitors of Hindu civilisation came from west of the Hindu Kush mountains of Afghanistan.

"There is no debate that India was always the cradle of Hindu civilisation, and the Vedas, the Hindu's holiest scriptures, are the recorded history of our ancestors," said Suhag Shukla, HAF's Managing Director.

"We strongly oppose the insulting theory--advanced by agenda-driven activist historians -- that our rishis, the great sages who composed the Vedas, were foreign to India, and Wood does viewers a disservice in not presenting both sides of the coin, in an otherwise admirable work," he said.

The AMT is reviled by many Hindus, he said, due to its implicit proposition that a tribe of ‘Aryans’ migrated into the Indian subcontinent, subjugated an indigenous people dispersing them to South India and established a caste system where the highest castes are comprised of ‘Aryans’ in an ethno-religious apartheid system.

Communalism: A saffron assault abroad

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2301/stories/20060127000807700.htm

Frontline
Volume 23 - Issue 01, Jan. 14 - 27, 2006

COMMUNALISM

A saffron assault abroad

NALINI TANEJA

The Hindu Right's attempts to rewrite school textbooks on India and Hinduism in California meet with stiff resistance from renowned historians and scholars in the U.S. and
abroad.

THE connections between communalist political strategies and textbook revisions were explored in detail in the media when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) went about changing the syllabus of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and getting school history textbooks rewritten while in government. But few would imagine that the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS)-linked organisations were in a position to put their stamp on school textbooks in California in the United States. The partial success of the "education" wings of the Hindu Swayamsewak Sangh in getting many of their revisions approved by the Curriculum Commission (CC) of the California State Board of Education has caused a virtual "international scandal".

The State Board of Education, California, is currently engaged in approving the history/social science textbooks for grades six to eight in schools, an exercise undertaken periodically. The Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation (based in the U.S.) have used the occasion to push through "corrections" in the textbooks approved. Shiva Bajpai, who constituted the one-member ad hoc committee set up by the Board, succeeded in getting virtually all the changes requested by these organisations incorporated into the textbooks. Professor Emeritus at California State University, Northridge, and a Hindutva-leaning adviser to the Board, Bajpai was proposed as expert by the Vedic Foundation. That the Hindutva groups have not had a walkover is thanks to the vigilance and commitment of the many academics involved in Indian studies all over the world. Intervention by Professors Michael Witzel and Steve Farmer in the form of a letter, signed by 50 other scholars, presented at a public
hearing on November 9, resulted in the Board reversing its initial approval of the pro-Hindutva changes. Prof. Witzel is a well-known Indologist and has often taken up the cudgels against Hindutva ideologues such as David Frawley, N.S. Rajaram and Konrad Elst in the West.

Witzel's letter, endorsed among others by renowned Indian historians Romila Thapar, D.N. Jha and Shereen Ratnagar, to Ruth Green, President, State Board of Education, California, on behalf of "world specialists on ancient India", voicing "mainstream academic opinion in India, Pakistan, the United States, Europe, Australia, Taiwan and Japan" on the issue, is now part of a concerted campaign encompassing well-known scholars and hundreds of teachers and parents in California.

These scholars make the important point that the "corrections" proposed by the Hindu Right in the U.S. reflect political agendas discriminatory to millions of people in India, especially the minorities, `lower' castes, and women; and that such revisions have already been debated thoroughly and rejected by academics and progressive political opinion in India. Besides, they "do not reflect the views of majority of the specialists on ancient Indian history, nor of majority of the Hindus".

Asserting that "the proposed revisions are not of a scholarly, but of a religious-political nature and are primarily promoted by Hindutva supporters and non-specialist academics writing about issues far outside their areas of expertise", the scholars have called on the Board to "reject the demands by nationalist Hindu (Hindutva) groups". From India, 12 historians have written to the CC to reject the changes proposed by the RSS-linked organisations in the U.S.

Signatures opposing the sectarian changes have been pouring in by the day and the Board, now alert to the issue, has constituted a new Content Review Committee (among its members are Professors Witzel, James Heitzman and Stanley Wolpert), which has put together a list of recommendations that "allow for only such changes as meet the standards of objective scholarship".

On the other side, the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation protested the constitution of the Content Review Committee and the inclusion of Witzel on it. They launched a campaign that the "corrections" were incorporated through a proper procedure and claimed that Witzel knew little about Hinduism and ancient Indian history. They also asserted their right to represent Hindus in the U.S. and their authority to decide what is the `authentic' depiction of Hinduism and ancient Indian history.

Frantic mobilisation by Pranawa C. Deshmukh, a professor of physics at the Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai, in support of the changes suggested by the Vedic Foundation and the Hindu Education Foundation, and the pressure of a host of organisations that constitute the `parivar' in the U.S. resulted in many of the proposed changes in textbooks getting the approval despite scholarly opinion being heavily weighted against it.

The details of how this was achieved remind one of the way in which RSS-sponsored revisions of textbooks were pushed through during the BJP's tenure in power at the Centre. During the meeting for the adoption of the recommendations of the Board by the CC in the course of a public hearing on December 1 and 2, 2005, the members of the Commission actually flouted the mandate of the Education Board. Of the total 156 edits requested, the CC accepted 97 that conformed to what the Hindutva organisations had proposed.

According to Witzel, "the proceedings of the CC meetings were highly skewed, irregular and contravened the mandate given by the Board". The Board had directed that the Commission approve only edits that "improve the factual accuracy of materials". Instead, matters were so arranged that several Commissioners had already left in the afternoon of December 2, by the time this was voted on. Others abstained as they did not know about the matter at hand (but with stacks of related papers in front of them which they apparently had not read, including the letter by more than 100 U.S. professors of Indian background and others by groups of concerned Indian Americans). All were tired, and one Commissioner, Stan Metzenberg, Professor of Biology at California State University, Northridge, took the chance to push through aggressively the Vedic Foundation's agenda. "The CC redefined their mandate repeatedly, contravening the mandate of the Board that the Commission should approve only ed
its that
`improve the factual accuracy of materials'; they allowed additional changes made from the floor by Hindutvavadins to be inserted; they pushed through a sectarian agenda that redefines Indian history and Hinduism," Witzel said.

The Hindu Education Foundation appreciatively quotes Metzenburg as saying: "I've read the DNA research and there was no Aryan migration. I believe the hard evidence of DNA more than I believe historians." However, finally it had to be agreed as: "Some historians believe in the theory of an Aryan migration." He insisted that "Hindus should at least be able to recognise their own religion when they read these textbooks". In short, the textbooks must reflect popular common sense rather than strive to mould/challenge popular common sense on the basis of objective historical facts or the gains of scientific enquiry.

Witzel puts it thus: "California has been hijacked by a saffron agenda, worse by a sectarian saffron agenda. In this case, a strident Vaishnava one that excludes Shaiva, Devi, Tantric, Lingayat and other forms of Hindu worship and Darshana... The new CA [California] history textbooks will reflect that."

Going by the "corrections" approved, the word "murti" means "God" (the CC agreed to the Hindu request to change "statue" to "deity"), the translation of "brahman" is "God", and all Hindus believe in God whose name is Bhagwan.

The "corrections" demanded by the Hindutva organisations are integral to the Sangh Parivar's political agenda in India, and similar to what the BJP government was trying to do with the NCERT syllabus and textbooks in social sciences, particularly history.

For example, among the "corrections" suggested is a clear attempt to deny the integrality of the caste system in ancient India; it was proposed to delete the reference altogether in one textbook. In another, it was proposed that the picture of an untouchable be removed. In yet another book, a reference to caste system as part of Aryan society was replaced by: "During Vedic times, people were divided into different social groups (varnas) based on their capacity to undertake a particular profession." Another reference to caste is to read as: "A late hymn of the Rg Veda describes the interrelationship and interdependence of the four social classes."

On women, it was suggested that the references to gender bias in ancient India were incorrect and insulting to Hindu society. Therefore the line, "Men had many more rights than women" was to be replaced by, "Men had different duties (dharma) and rights than women. Many women were among the sages to whom the Vedas were revealed."

In another textbook, the changes included a specific addition that "the recent archaeological proofs are negating the Aryan invasion theory. The new theory suggests that Aryans were not the outsiders". Elsewhere: "They [Aryans] were part of a larger group of people historians refer to as the Indo-Europeans" is replaced with the statement: "Some historians believe the Aryans were part of a larger group of people known as the Indo-Europeans." "The Vedas came to form the major beliefs of the religion called Brahmanism" is replaced with: "The Vedas constitute the source of Hinduism." Early Aryan religion is to be replaced with references to early Hindu religion.

Still other corrections follow the familiar pattern of ante-dating the Rg Veda, confusing dates of Indus and Harappa city-based civilisations with the Vedic civilisation, conflating Brahmanical practices with Hinduism, describing the Vedas as the source and basic texts of Hinduism, denying the plurality of gods worshipped through history in favour of one God in different forms, depicting sudras as "serving all classes" and doing "labour-intensive work" rather than serving `upper' castes and so on. The current Hindutva preoccupations such as asserting the sacredness of cows, vegetarianism and the Saraswati civilisation myth have also found their way into the textbooks.

Tolerance is shown as "usual" for the time of Asoka in ancient India; the references to technology, science and mathematics in ancient India have been modified to enable suitable glorification; and negative aspects of society are either deleted or presented as cultural specificities rather than as oppressive ones.

THE moves by the Hindu Right in the U.S. are no flash in the pan. The web sites of two of the organisations spearheading the Hindutva campaign - the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation - expressly state the revision of school textbooks in the U.S. as part of their political agenda. They regularly "interact" with State Education Committees that define school curriculum, conduct seminars and training programmes for teachers and "create resources" for parents who "wish to provide such opportunities for educators in their own areas". There are fora of all kinds offering entertainment, educational services and social support to youth. Alternative social networks through bhajan mandalis, yoga centres, discussion groups, special programmes and publications devoted to children, answer the yearnings for roots and culture among immigrants. The RSS-linked organisations have penetrated all these and are creating new ones all the time. The entire effort is part of the RSS' larger goal to "educate" Hindu children brought up in the U.S. to be "good Hindus" and to "learn the truth about Indian history and culture", and ultimately to finance their "social work" in India.

Not long ago, citizens' groups in India and North America exposed the nexus between funding of charities in the West and the hate campaigns and the expansion of communal networks of the Sangh Parivar in India. Infusing hatred directly or through the educational set-up is not as easy in the U.S. as it is through the Vidya Bharati schools and the Ekal Vidyalayas in India. The strategy of the Hindu Right is different in the U.S. It does the next best thing: it creates innumerable social networks where prejudices are nurtured and fascist solutions to problems legitimised, and glories of ancient India and Hinduism rule the roost.