Friday, June 25, 2010

"Asura" origin of Brahmins!

Religious history of India is heavily corrupted by the Brahmin scholars in an attempt to prove their supremacy over other castes. Few decades ago they were constantly propagating that they were “Aryans” who invaded India, defeated Dasa, Dasyu’s and Asura’s, the local uncultured tribal communities and forced Aryan culture over them. When well planned ancient cities begun to see sunlight after various excavations in Sindhu/Ghaggar Hakra region, first they were shocked, baffled and later on suddenly changed their stance. First they started to state that those were Aryans who destroyed those cities. But when no proof of any violent battle in or around the remnants of cities came forward, they started to state that the Sindhu culture was created by Aryans. (Shrikant Talageri is a strong supporter of this hypothesis.) Also another scholar joining this hoard is Dr. M. K. Dhavalikar. In his book “Ayaanchya Shodhat” (In search of Aryan’s) he has propagated that those were Aryan’s of Vedik cultutre who were creators of Sindhu culture.

Surprisingly, this shift from one to other hypothesis is coming from superiority complex. However these contradictory claims (that Aryans were destroyers of Sindhu culture and Aryans were creators of Sindhu culture) cannot be proved on any ground in light of the proofs those are available with us today.
This so happened because awakening among the common people begun with the spread of education and many scholars and social reformers used the very Aryan invasion theory against Brahmins. “If you are the first invaders of this country, outsiders, just get out, you have no place on this very land of ours.” The researchers found many instances of killing or maligning of the history of India at the hands of Brahmins. Even in many cases, such as of Satvahana dynasties, Pandya dynasties, though these dynasties weren’t ever Brahmin, they declared them as Brahmin. It happened with Great Epical Poet Walmiki and Vyasa too those were non Brahmin’s by birth, but were labeled as Brahmins by creating strange stories of their birth, to suit Bramanical propaganda that no great person can take birth in ordinary class (varna). (Saint Ramdas already has stated that if anyone from Shudra class is seen valiant or knowledgeable take it that his biological father must be some Brahmin.) Recently the crooked minded Brahmin scholars spread similar rumor about Great King Shivaji.

However, when Brahmins found that their foreign origin theory is backfiring, they again changed their stance and started saying that they were originally Indians and that they from India migrated worldwide spreading Aryan culture and Sanskrit language. The main question remains, whether there really exists Indo-European language group? The answer is negative, but we will deal with this later.
However there is no proof either in Veda’s or in any ancient so called Aryan scriptures that Aryan ever was a race that migrated to India. Also there are no physical proofs of such invasion.
Then who were they?
The word “Arya” appears in Rig Veda 36 times in 34 verses. Whenever this word is used it is addressed to the Clan of Sudasa only. (King Sudasa ruled a small unnamed kingdom that was situated on the banks of river Saraswati and he belonged to Puru clan. He promoted Yajna religion which was originally introduced by Bhrugu clan.) Rests of clans, such as Ikswaku ( In this clan Lord Rama took birth) Yadu (Clan of Lord Krisna), Anu, Bhalanas, Visanin, Matsya, Naga etc. were “Anarya’s” for the Vedic seers.
To them “Arya” meant Noble Person. Not a race.
To trace origins of these Vedic people we have ample of proofs available in Rig Veda’s itself.

Vedics themselves were Das, Dasyu and Asuras!

May be this statement will sound stunning but it is the only fact.

Aryan invasion theory (AIT) proposes that Aryans invaded India from north and defeated Das, Dasyu and Asura’s.

Fact: In the name of king Sudasa is a very word Das. During the rule of Sudasa veda’s were composed. Now, if Aryans defeated dasa’s how the word Dasa could be attached to his name? (Sudasa means “Good Slave”) The winners always despise defeated communities is a global example set from ancient times. If Dasa community was despicable an Aryan King wouldn’t have preferred to call himself by this name.

Sudasa’s fathers name was “Divodasa”, again the same “Dasa” in his name.

Sudasa’s grandfather’s name was “Trasdasyu”.

Again the same logic. If so called Aryans defeated dasa’s and dasyu’ how come that very "dasyu" word appearing in the list of Aryan kings?

ABOUT ASURA'S

It is always have been propagated that “Asura” means bad, devilish and demonic. Scholars state that the Puranic wars between Deva and Asura actually depicts wars between aboriginal Indians and Aryans in which Asuras were finally defeated.

Fact: Tarkatirtha Laxmanshastri Joshi, a noted scholar, has clearly stated that originally meaning of Asura was entirely opposite. Asura meant valiant and lively person. In the course of time the meaning got changed, whether deliberately or not, it is difficult to say.

There is no doubt that though Asura’s have been despised by the Purana’s it is clear that Asura society was a strongest one in ancient times. Asura along with Naga, Vanara etc. dwelt in Indian subcontinent and had established their kingdoms in various parts of India. These people had their own religion, had their own Veda's which are now not available. For example Asura's had Aurveda, Naga's had "Sarpaveda", Pishacchya people had "Pishacchya Veda" and Gandharva people of Gandhar region had their own "gandharva Veda". We find this information in Gopath Brahman.

And that Vedic’s too originally belonged to Asura clan.

How?

Rigveda is a solid proof to prove this statement. The greatest God in Veda’s, before rise of Indra was “Asur Varuna”. In at leat 64 verses of Rgveda he is called as Asur Varuna.

So Varuna was always Asur. Not only Varuna but Agni to whom Vedics revered as their most important deity is called Asur in many verses. Besides Varuna, Agni there are hoards of deities those are referred as Asura, such as Mitra, Aryama, Bhaga, Aditya, Vansa etc. Even mother of Indra was also belonged to Asur dynasty, hence shcholar like Malati Shendge had stated that Indra is half Anarya….and Indra was greatest God of Vedics!
Now, by any logic, it cannot be said that so-called Aryans or Vedics defeated Asura, dasas or dasyus as their kings and Gods bear epithets such as Dasa, Dasyu and Asura. No winning race can bear this. So this kills Aryan Invasion theory and proves that:

Vedic’s originally belonged to Asura clan of whom Das -Dasyus were sub-clans. For political reasons King Sudasa adopted Fire-sacrifice religion on the instance of Rishi Vasishtha. This religion was originally introduced by Bhrugu’s. But though separated from the same Asura clan (society), Sudasa and his seers couldn’t abandon their ancestral roots/faiths. Hence Asura, Dasa, Dasyu remained important epithets those were obscured in later times when the division was complete. And we can find traces of this course in the Vedas.

OTHER EXAMPLES OF ASURA AND SO-CALLED ARYAN RELATIONS

Grandson of Lord Krishna, Aniruddha, married Usha, daughter of Banasur, an Asur King.
Lord Krishna’s mother belonged to Asur clan.
Sisters of Krishna married Asur King Jarasangha.
Arjuna married Ulupi, a Naga (Asur) princess.
Bhima married Hidimba, a Raksasa (another optional name for Asura) woman.
Seer Jaratkaru married a Naga woman, sister of Naga Taksaka, of same name…Jaratkaru.

There are hundreds of such examples which tell us that Asura clan never was dethroned from their original position nor it was shoved southwards. The Puranik Brahmins in later centuries opened a campaign through Puranik myths composing heinous stories around Asuras…that Asuras were bad, demonic, man-eaters, enemy of virtues, devilish and what not. While doing so they forgot they too were Asuras and now too follow their religion…Idol (Shiva-Vishnu) worshipping!

Note: Read Diwali 2008 issue of KISTREEM magazine (Marathi) for detailed version of this article.

21 comments:

  1. Very Nice Article indeed. But this has raised certain questions in my mind.The word Iran is a deformed version of the word Aryan. Besides this ,the original inhabitants of Iran , The Zorastrians ,were fire worshippers. Their main god was Ahura Mazda . If we believe in the theory that Arabs pronounced the letter 's' as 'h' then this God was also an Asura ,Asura Mazda?. The next question is related to the Assyrians,people who destroyed ancient Israel & the country which formed a part of the Mesopotamian Civilization at the banks of the Rivers Tigris & Euphrates. They too worshipped a God called Ashura. Can this be an Asura only? The Vishnu Puran mentions the story of Kal Yawan ,an Asura king.He was probably from Afghanistan, as even today one finds a city named after Him in north west Afghanistan.Does that mean that everywhere there was an Asura culture only? Then where did the Suras arrive from? Are they hypothetical?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Himanshuji, I am really happy that you have deep curiosity in this regard. Asur and Ahur in Iranian tradition are same. Assyrian empire was a creation or dominance of Asura clan. The invokation of Asur Varun and Asur Indra in Bogazkai treaty is because of Asur people.

    But here we should not be mistaken at the point whether so-called aryans invaded via Iran to India. The fact is though Zorostrayan religion can be asscociated with Vaidik religion...as they were fire worshippers...the fact cannot be forgotteen that the Gods highly favored by Indian vaidiks turn villains to the Iranians. Also Jhorostarian religion doesnt date back beyond 6th century BC. whereas Rugvaidik period doesnt come down below 1750 BC by any count. This time-gap cannot be filled up and hence it gives a way to new questions...whether Vaidiks of India later on migrated to Iran because their religion was defeated here? We are aware none worships Yadnya here since last 200 yearsw at least. Will writ more on this. Thanks for your curious quewstions and the points you have raised.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sanjay ji, interesting perspective. However the DNA mapping done by the scientists tells us a slightly different story. Looks like Indian population is a mix of various races and Brahmins, Marathas and even some of the OBC casts such as dhangars share some common genes. The deeper we go,more confusing it becomes. Zend Avesta is said to be inspired from Rigveda (Or vice versa).

    However , race should not matter in a modern society. I wish that we become casteless society one day. Best wishes to you. You have been an outspoken and honest intellectual. It's a pleasure to read your blogs.
    Milind.

    ReplyDelete
  4. रावण हा असुरही होता आणि ब्राह्मणही.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Saint Ramdas already has stated that if anyone from Shudra class is seen valiant or knowledgeable take it that his biological father must be some Brahmin.....dear sanjayjee,why do u blame samarth for this statement.this verse appears in das vishram dham,which is not composed by samarth.there is no such statement made by samarth ramdas.

    ReplyDelete
  6. LOL. I told about this to my mother but she denies logic. I'm an agnostic & now this article has assured me a lot that no Krishna or Rama was born. It is a jugglery by Brahmins. That's what they are doing today. They are using this to earn money for their living.

    ReplyDelete
  7. to sanjay sonwani sir,it is well known fact that the subject u chosen is sanvedanshil. so,i thank u to raise questions about roots of brahmins. u have written that shift of hypothesis has come from superiority complex.i am very sure that u know about superiority complex.if u have come from out side u have no right to live here.this statement made u helpless to prove ur point about roots of brahmins. i have read ur articles about caste system in which u have said that at the end of 10th century caste were made birth caste. so if such is the case how one formulate the pseudo story about brahmin identity of vyass? u raised question about root of shudra who is knowlediable . but i think u have come acrross to the scientific claim that man inherits something and he learns something.if such is the case there is some room to say that the present shudra is vansh of a brahmin. it is well known that history is written by winners. so if u think that brahmins have mis-guided history then u have to go deep to prove ur points.it is universal accepted thing that some words lost their first meaning with time.(dhasas lavne-samagam karne)so it can be understood that asura has lost its good sense. but ur statements about rigveda, ancestors of krishna and other deitis are not self clarifing .so u need effrts to put forth truth before us and i am watiig eagerly to have ur explanation. thank u again about ur continous thought provoking subjects...........

    ReplyDelete
  8. marathit liahla asta tr vachaila interest ala asta

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sir,krupya marathit lekh lihala asata tar sarvsamanyanahi samajla asata

    ReplyDelete
  10. Having read through a few books on the subject of ancient Indian history, my working hypothesis is that ancient India was such a melting pot of religion, race, philosophy and culture that untangling this ball of yarn is mostly a quixotic endeavour.

    The root of most Vedic/Brahminical superiority came from the need to protect their power and dominance in the society - just as most dominant clans/communities have done the world around - not because they were necessarily smarter or more evolved than others.

    Today, this defense of Vedic/Brahminical order stems from the need to - (1) cover the guilt of a thousand years of inhuman and cruel treatment of lower castes, especially shudras and tribals and, (2) cover the inferiority complex arising from the fact that India is a 3rd world country ridden with poverty, corruption and nothing to show for in terms of achievements in the last, almost 2000 years.

    No amount of logic, scientific research or data is going to convince the Brahminical apologists about their prominent role in the state of Indian dalits and tribals today and get them to accept responsibility. It has to come from within. Maybe if every Brahmin/Kshatriya person took a personal vow to marry a Shudra, the balance might be corrected :)

    Back to your point about the lost meaning of the world "asura" - I agree that it never meant what it has come to mean - "an evil person". In her book "On Hinduism", the author Wendy Doniger who is a Sanksrit scholar, translates "asura" simply as one who does not partake "sura" or the mythic intoxicant consumed by Devas in the Vedas.

    There is an interesting story about how even the gods of medicine - Ashwinis, were not allowed the secret of "Soma" (were they asura?) and eventually, Dadyanga gave away the secret to the Ashwini brothers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Funny how facts/data can diametrically change one's opinion (again, go back to my point about futility in untangling the great Indian puzzle).

      First, looks like I made a rookie mistake of confusing soma with sura. Apparently, while the former is the preferred thrice-a-day tonic for Devas and forbidden for asuras, the latter is a brew exclusively downed by Asuras but looked down upon by Devas (perhaps too strong for their constitution).

      Also, Malati J. Shendge, in her book "The Civilized Demons: The Harappans in Rigveda", opines that "Asura" is the same as "Sura" with the "A" skipped by Devas and not an antonym of "Sura". Thus making, "Asuras" those who partake "Sura".

      In any case, I am pretty convinced that "Asuras" were merely the other team that the "Devas" managed to beat-up/subdue and re-write history to paint "Asuras" as villains - which is pretty much the norm for victors even as late as WW-II or the Iraq Wars - winners are always painted as evil-smashing heroes with no flaws whatsoever (until an Asura Snowden comes along and punctures that projection)

      Delete
  11. So much negativity.First assess yourself before saying somebody is crooked.Surprising that you have changed the meaning of Sanskrit words to serve your purpose.check your negativity first.

    ReplyDelete
  12. संजयजी ...भगवान बुद्ध देखील एखाद्या मुर्खाला ...अज्ञानी माणसाला 'अनरीयू' असे संबोधतात....आर्य म्हणजे सभ्य आणि अनार्य म्हणजे असभ्य असे त्यांना म्हणायचे होते का ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. आर्य शब्दाचा अर्थ सभ्य याच अर्थाने येतो, वंश म्हणून नाही.

      Delete
  13. Hello Sanjay ji,
    Having earlier read your articles in Magazines, I would love to buy & read your Book on Asura. Pl . let me know with what book seller it is available, particularly in Vile Parle (East), Mumbai Subhash S. Naik
    .vistainfin@yahoo.co.in

    ReplyDelete
  14. Danava WHITE AS THE CLOUDS ... Adi Parva. Asura Danava, children of goddess Danu like Danu in Tautha De Danaan. one eyed Odin, father of Aesir, son of Burr and grandson of Buri. One eyed shukra, teacher of Asura, son of Bhrigu and grandson of Brahma. See it is much more complex than you think ha ha.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If we asked everyone to go back, we'll all have to pack our bags and go to Africa where we all originated :-) And if everyone all around the world asked everyone they felt were outsiders to go back to where they came from we'll end up in the same place as the world is round.

    ReplyDelete