The Krishna Key- Ashwin Sanghi(2012)
His third book- ‘The Krishna Key’ by
Abhishek Sanghi disappoints at so many levels.
His narrative skills are pretty ordinary,
and if he is being called ‘Dan Brown of India’, then it's a big insult to the American author. With Dan Brown himself generally panned by critics for his unimaginative
style of writing, one may surmise where that leaves Abhishek Sanghi.
However in
this blog, I intend to only consider various theories floated by the author on
the supposed time period of Vedic civilization in India.
The author
pushes back the date of Vedic civilization by a couple of millennium to 3500
BCE, and the Indus Valley civilization is recast as the greatest Vedic
community on Earth.
Considering
that the consensus date for the Vedic civilization amongst historians is 1800
BCE and the Indus Valley civilization is considered pre-Vedic, this theory is interesting.
The various ‘evidences’ cited is certainly food
for thought, all right, but to consider them as conclusive proof is stretching
it a bit too far.
The Unique Alignment of Planets Theory
In the
Mahabharatha, Sage Vyasa met Dhritharashtra on the eve of the battle and warned
him of the terrible planetary omens that he had seen:-
- Conjunction
of Saturn with Aldebaran.
- Retrograde
Mars before reaching Antares.
- Lunar
eclipse near Pleiadus(or the seven sisters).
Apparently all
three astronomical events can occur simultaneously only in two possible years-
3067 BCE or 2183 BCE. However taking into consideration the month of death of
Bhishma, (Magha, which occurs after winter solstice), the only possible year is
3067 BCE.
Account
of Megasthenes
Megasthenes, the Greek ambassador in
the court of Chandragupta Maurya, made the first ever written reference to Krishna, the
mythical God.
Krishna is called Heracles in his
account, the Greek usage influenced by the term Hari.
Krishna is recorded as having lived a
hundred and thirty eight generations before the times of Alexander and
Chandragupta Maurya.
Considering the Chandra Gupta Maurya’s
reign as being around 307 BCE, the approximate period of Krishna’s existence
would be 3067 BCE.
The theory is certainly interesting.
However Vishnu or Krishna is very sparingly mentioned in the Vedas, the main
Gods being Agni, Indra, Rudra etc. Vishnu or Krishna attains prominence only in
the Puranic period (generally post 200 BCE). Vishnu is a minor
deity in the Vedas.
The popular practices of Hinduism today is based on the Puranas, with the Vedic religious practices almost extinct in a way in modern day India.
So why does a Greek historian give so much importance to Krishna( or Heracles) whenever our own Vedas does not?
The popular practices of Hinduism today is based on the Puranas, with the Vedic religious practices almost extinct in a way in modern day India.
So why does a Greek historian give so much importance to Krishna( or Heracles) whenever our own Vedas does not?
Theory
3- Surya Siddhanta Dates
Surya Siddhanta, the ancient work on astronomy
that provides the foundation for all Hindu and Buddhist Calendars, provides a
few timelines which are interesting.
Kaliyuga is slated to have started on 18
Feb 3102 BCE.
The belief is that human civilization
degenerates spiritually during Kaliyuga – almost a dark age – because people moved
away from God.
The first event to distance mankind
from God was the death of Krishna, thus pushing back the Vedic period by a
couple of millennium.
To nitpick, however, one can bring out
a few flaws in the dates set forth.
Firstly, the dates for Mahabharatha is
given as 3067 BCE as per the planetary alignments. But if Krishna died in
3102 BCE , then Krishna could not have
existed during the period of Mahabharatha as the battle occurs after his death,
which is clearly not acceptable.
Secondly again, why no mention of the
epics of Mahabharatha or Ramayana in the Vedas? Why is Vishnu treated as a
minor deity in the Vedas?
Even in Manusmriti, which is treated as a classic treatise on Hindu social laws, written somewhere in 300 BCE, and giving valuable insights into life in India of that era,does not mention of any of the Gods of the epics. Vishnu or Krishna is not even talked about. The emphasis is on the Vedic rituals and Vedic Gods.
Also why did Kaliyug start after the
death of Krishna? Of the ten Avatars of Vishnu, Krishna is the eighth, Buddha
the ninth and then Kalki.
In the first place Buddha as one of
the Avatars of Vishnu is not acceptable to most Buddhists. So treating the
period in which Buddha was alive as a Kaliyug, which has negative connotations, would be seriously objectionable
to Buddhists.
Theory
4- Archeological Evidence
The archeological evidences, according
to the book, proves without any doubt
that the Indus valley Civilization was the greatest Vedic Community on
Earth and it was the inhabitants who wrote the Vedas and Upanishads.
What are these archeological
evidences?
In Kalibangan, fire altars were
discovered here proving that this was a Vedic settlement.
In Mohanjodaro, discovery of ‘The
great bath’ which was used for ritual bathing is another hallmark of Vedic
settlement.
Also hundreds of seals have been
recovered with images of swastika – a symbol of Vedic origin in addition to seals
depicting yogic meditation.
The facts enumerated above are
interesting. However there is a flip side.
The Vedas are replete with mentions of
horses(there are 792 mentions of Asva or horse in Rig-Veda as per one study),
but the Indus valley civilization did not have horses.
Light horse chariots
with spoke wheels are mentioned in the Vedas, but the Indus civilization had
only cattle drawn solid wheel carts, as seen in numerous depictions.
The Indus Civilization script recovered from
the ruins is yet to be deciphered, but the consensus is that these symbols are
some form of hieroglyphics and not a script of any sophisticated language.So where did Sanskrit come from?
On the other hand however, it is a well known that the Rig Vedic Sanskrit
and the language spoken in Asia minor
(modern day Turkey) in the 1st millennium BCE( about 1500 BCE) were
more or less similar, indicating common ancestors supporting the Aryan
migration theory in respect to the Vedic people.
In the book, however there is a
further theory suggesting that India was the cradle of civilization and not
Mesopotamia as widely believed.
When Sarasvati started drying up
around 3200 BCE, it split up the Indian civilization. Some people moved eastwards towards the
Ganges and some westwards in the direction of Tigris- Euphrates
The people who moved eastwards were
called Devas and those who moved westwards were called Asuras. The
Zoroastrians( of Persia) viewed the Ahuras( or asuras ) as good people and the
Devas as the villains, the exact opposite of Vedic civilization.
Further the founder of Judaism is
Abraham, and his name is similar to Brahma and is only separated by a single
letter – ‘A’. Also Abraham’s consort and Brahma’s consort have almost the same
names – Sara and Saraswati.
Unfortunately apart from these
phonetic word play, there is no other empirical proof in the book.
On the other hand, archaeological evidences
abound with regards to the move of Indo- Europeans to India from the West.
The various attempts at reconstructing
the ‘glorious past’ of India by co-opting even the Indus Valley civilization as
Vedic had received a fillip with the
growing Hindutva movement.
It was difficult for the Hindutva
brigade to accept foreign roots of the Vedic civilization and Sanskrit language
and hence re-branding the Indus civilization as Vedic fit into their scheme of
things.
For this purpose ‘archeological
evidence’ was cooked up with a picture of a terracotta seal with a horse in it,
cited as the final ‘proof’ that the Indus civilization was indeed Vedic. The
same was published in all BJP led states
in NCERT school text books in 2000.
However the grand scheme came a cropper when
it was revealed that the horse seal was a simple fraud based on computerized distortion
of a seal of a unicorn bull.
It is difficult to fathom as to why
the Hindutva zealots are bent upon twisting historical facts and being
complicit in obvious frauds and lies, to advance the ‘indigenous theory’ of the
Vedic civilization.
Why this insecurity? How does it
matter where the Vedic people came from -
the fact that they flourished in India is what is important.
And there
are many important mathematical and science treatises between 800 BCE to 500 CE
of which Indians can be justifiably proud of.
For instance The Baudhayana
Sulbasutra had worked out the Pythagoran theorem in 800 BCE, 400 years before
Pythagorus.
But in the book, the author is not happy with such mundane achievements. He alludes to the depth of ‘scientific knowledge ‘ by claiming that the ancient Vedic people knew among other things, the making of a nuclear bomb, Stem cell research, cloning, nuclear transmutation and that the lost city of Atlantis is Dwaraka, Mount Kailash is actually a man made pyramid......
It would have been really funny if it wasn’t so sad.
The USA is less than 300 years old,
but it doesn’t stop them from believing that they are the best.
We need to stop sinking to lame attempts at reinventing history. We were a great civilization. Period.
Of course the present state is somewhat less than glorious. And we should probably we focusing on getting that right.
Well researched and wonderfully written.
ReplyDeleteSnehashish Bhattachatya wrote: "This seems to be a favourite high horse of yours..... All the things you talk of as established facts/archeological evidence are just postulates put forward by the likes of max mueller and the later communist hordes, including the most notorious of them all... the protege of the person who wrote the discovery of India and who digraced our NCERT texts with her bigoted, aseptic and amoral interpretation of a civilisation beyond her myopic comprehension. It took an american to ask what exactly was the conclusive archeological evidence that there was actually a mass exodus from the mesopotamian/asia minor/turkey region.... and arrival into this area, to which there is no answer. Its one thing to claim non existant archeological finds and quite another to actually explain the demographic demands of the ingress of such a massive peoples like the demand of food, land, increased trade etc. And neither is there actually any evidence to support the similarity of language. Max mueller was one of three poor but highly intelligent and ambitious clerks in the east india company who were recruited and trained to masquerade as indologists and sow the seeds of self recrimination and doubt into generations of Indians. It is apparent that they succeeded only too well. None of these lies and distortions could explain away Frawley's Paradox. Please do read about it. Named after the famous Dr David Frawley. We all know that after spending so much taxpayer's money on the Max Mueller bhavan in delhi, the distorted view of the history of India that has been force fed through generations of congress/communists like thapar/pseudo seculars. The amount of time, resources and finances invested in this elaborate fraud and its continued perpetuation, like even in marketing of the discovery book, they will be fanatical in trying to suppress facts even now. If anyone questions anything, that does not make him fanatical. call them fanatical, bigoted zealots who try to suppress questions and still insist on distorting history, be it from any political party/persuasion. If they are really secular, why have they not renamed the bhavan, at the very least???? Its just a book. relax....... and enjoy......"
ReplyDeleteKumar Bhattacharya wrote: "In India there are two kinds of history -- Actual and What people like to believe. I think this one of the second kind."
Snehashish Bhattacharya wrote: "PS: The use of words like "Apparently", "In one study", etc, are a dead giveaway........ The only study of this sort which I know of was by a communist pig who was trying to advance convoluted reasons as to why Santana dharmis, who are justifiably proud of their spiritual and cultural heritage are fools and communist pigs are the only ones who are allowed to profess knowledge and intelligence.... Kindly name the study and apparent source of knowledge instead of this devious and roundabout misinformation campaign."
Kumar Bhattacharya wrote: "http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Krishna_Key I didnt read it -- even though -- I feel it takes character to talk about gods in our country. Our gods are too holi."
Sorry Snehashish for the delay in reply. But it was that kinda day.
ReplyDeleteThere are two possible postulates that we are discussing here. One is the theory that Harappan civilization is Pre-Vedic and the other that it is not.
There are countless books and innumerable studies that vociferously advocate one or the other theory. You will agree with me that going by the antiquity of the events in question, it will be difficult to ever conclusively prove, whether your postulate is correct or mine, unless someone invents a time machine and we get a joy ride.
In my view, I find the archeological, linguistic and genetic evidence favoring the migration theory rather than the indigenous Indian theory.
You obviously do not. Period.
And you are entitled to your views.
But what I don’t get is the conspiracy angle that you keep raving about.
What is the purpose of this conspiracy? Who are these ‘communists pigs’ that’s unsettling you so much?
You think the greatness of the Vedic civilization will be reduced, give or take a few millennia?
As I had mentioned in the blog also, USA is just 300 years old- you do not see any desperate attempts by that country to increase their antiquity.
How the hell does it freaking matter?
I had enumerated a few of the reasons why I feel that I favor one postulate over the other. If you have better empirical reasons for favoring your theory , you are most welcome to share the same.
Kumar Bhattacharya I knew I could get my platoon type to support me always.
ReplyDeleteBut your name type is obviously pissed at me.
I mean our gods are too holy and not holi (holi means marine food fish of the northern Atlantic or northern Pacific; the largest flatfish and one of the largest teleost fishes). The spelling mistake can get me into trouble.
ReplyDeleteAnoop, how nice of you to immediately accept that whatever YOU had been raving about, was just a postulate. You have every right to propagate your theories, however aggressively and vociferously you desire. I would just like to request you to keep a few things in mind.......
ReplyDeleteOne, please try to understand that if anyone has views different from yours, or dares to question what has been unquestioned till now, it does not make them "Hindu Fundamentalists" / "BJP Zealots". This sort of language is only used by communist pigs and does not conform to the erudition that you claim/profess.
Two, I had requested you to at least read about 'Frawley' s Paradox'. It seems you are so full of yourself and so dogmatic about what you have acquired so far that you do not have room or courage for any new thought.
In the verbose comment that you had deleted, you had questioned the conspiracy theory. You see, after declassification of a lot of material relating to the war (and especially, India) by the brits, it has been seen that the trio of indologists, Max Mueller being the most notorious of them all, were all planted by the east India company/gb. They were all highly ambitious and intelligent clerks in the company from very poor, immigrant backgrounds. These three were trained extensively for about three years and then let loose. They went around posing as Indologists and were the first people to propagate the theories which you are so fiercely defensive about. Later on, the ruling party erected a Bhawan to him in Delhi. A band of communists who were staunchly anti hindu, led by Promila, shaped our history NCERT books and our mentality, in which generations felt that it made them sound educated if they talked against our heritage and agreed with other anglophiles that the British did us a favour by subjugating and exploiting us.
Whatever I have written is common knowledge/commonly available knowledge. I feel that it will not be too difficult for even you to comprehend it.
Cheers!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletesdg June 16, 2013 8.45pm
ReplyDeleteWe all keep falling into the same trap! What does it matter whether the vedas are 5000 or 10000 years old, or Krishna was born in 3102 BCE or 3067 BCE. It is the Philosophy that they lived and propounded, the values of life they have given us that matter. Instead of practicing those and enriching our lives we get into useless debates which would never reach any conclusions.
Instead of denigrating the present systems in our country,and thereby indirectly the people of INDIA, we should pause and think what exactly were the social, commercial, political, knowledge or spiritual systems and philosophies that made this country a shining beacon for the rest of the known world to throng to it. Why was it that as recently as the 14th/ 15th centuries the main aim of all explorers,wayfarers and brigands was to find the best and shortest route to India, rather than any other country in the world. Now for the book. Let us just enjoy it as a novel and not treat it as a serious research book. However I found the postulate about the Shivalinga representing a Nuclear Reactor very interesting and intriguing. I have also seen a u-tube documentary on underwater exploration at Dwaraka which suggests that it was a mega city, may be more than 10k years old. So if we have a mega city that old one can only make a guess at how far back had the civilisation, that built and settled it had started flourishing! Incidently according to our beliefs the VEDAS are eternal and one can't put a date to them. It is only when they were written down BY Sage Vyasa the question of dating them arose!!
I agree. The greatness of the Vedic civilization is never in doubt whatever the antiquity. Why nitpick?
DeleteSnehashish Sorry for the delay in reply, but connectivity has been a bitch this Sunday.
ReplyDeleteFirstly Snehashish, where are your previous posts? Why have you deleted them? And for the record I have not deleted any of my previous posts. In fact they are all accessible in my blog, which gives a context to the arguments set forth.
Secondly, of course, the migration theory AND the indigenous theories with respect to the Aryans, are mere postulates. I find the evidences provided for the migration theory more plausible and hence I wrote in its favor, listing out why I felt so in my blog, in an empirical fashion.
Thirdly, I have not used the term ‘BJP zealots’ at any point. It is a leading national party and good luck to them in the forthcoming elections. Yes, I have commented on the Hindutva Brigades/ zealot’s ham handed attempts to doctor NCERT text books in early 2000s, in a critical manner. How else would you classify such lame attempts at distorting history by attempting to pass on a fraudulent computerized distortion of a well known terracotta seal of a unicorn bull, by replacing the bull with a horse?
And for the record , the references to this seal was taken off shame facedly from the NCERT text books in 2004, when the fraud came to light.
There were many more such distortions at history, which have all been corrected later on. A glance at ‘Whither teaching of history: Saffronised and Substandard(2002)’ brings out many such bloopers.
Fourthly, you keep on raving about this ‘conspiracy’. I will request you Snehashish, please do not belittle the intelligence of some very erudite scholars who have spoken in favor of the migration theory- Frits Staal, R Ramachandran, Amartya Sen, Meera Nanda,Bridget and Raymond Allchin,DN Jha etc. You think all these folks are so dim witted that they have simply lapped up such monstrous falsities regarding our own civilization?
ReplyDeleteI am a proud Hindu. I know there is much that we can be proud of. The Baudhayana Sulbasutra which worked out the Pythagoran theorm 400 years before Pythagorus, Susrutha the surgeon, Aryabhatta, Varamihira, Brahmagupta- all were pioneers in their respective fields and we can be justifiably proud of them. The concept of Zero and infinity, the decimal system- the list is endless.
In fact I have a further half baked postulate of my own. And that is:
‘The origin of all predominant philosophic thought down to the modern existentialist period is Indian.’
Mind you-it is simply what I have felt after my limited reading of some books. No scholarly treatise this.
Philosophers throughout the ages have suggested that the world is not what it appears to be. That what we see is only an ‘apparent reality’, and that the ‘truth’ is hidden from us.
This is ditto Vedanta philosophy, that there is an apparent ‘duality’ in the world. Advaita further propagates that there is only singularity – the ‘Brahman’( Tat tvam asi).
All philosophers, whom I have been able to read, propagate more or less the same theory right down to the Existentialist period.
For Thales reality was ‘water’. For Plato ‘Shadows’ are the ‘world’, while light comes from the ‘real world’ as revealed in his famous parable of a man sitting in a dark cave. Descartes said there is a thinking substance(soul) and extended substance(matter), Spinoza spoke the language of Advaita when he said in reality there is only ‘substance’ and that is God. Kant said true reality cannot be known because of our limited tools of our mind. Schopenhauer was an out and out advocate of the Vedanta.
It is a fact that the first seers who spoke of this ‘reality’ of life were the Vedic seers. But whether the Vedas were known to Socrates, Plato and the like is a matter of conjecture. So can we speculate that the original rumblings of the dual nature of ‘reality’ which engulfed the world for almost 2000 years, right from Socrates period, had its origin in Vedic thought?
Lastly, regarding the Frawley’s paradox. I am familiar with the theory. I did not comment upon the same, because, you will agree with me, it does not prove anything. It puts a question mark on the migration hypothesis. But just because the migration theory does not answer everything, does not prove that the indigenous theory is correct. In fact due to the obvious lack of archeological evidence linking Indus valley civilization with Vedic people, some are even suggesting that the Vedic period is pre 7000 BCE!(As Harappan Civilization is generally considered between 7000 BCE to 1500 BCE).
I will only point out, Snehashish, that it is not a question of ‘us’ versus ‘them’. There are no conspiracies here. You don’t that think I qualify as an Indophile? Why would I diss anything that puts my country in a positive light? There are genuine reasons why one theory has gained more traction and the other has not.
The day I find that the Indigenous theory makes more sense, I will gladly advocate the same.
Yeh ‘Indigenous theory’ mera koi baap ka property nahin hain, for me to brandish it about.