India's suppressed history

[sarang]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

History of various regions of Bharat must now be rewritten with inscriptions collected and still lying scattered in many places and after filtering out JNU interpretations.

It is clear from this example, that the fourth varna too, reddys in this instance, formed dynasties, and protected brahmins and brahminical culture. King vema, restored all agraharams after defeating the mlechchas.
++++

 

[cmano1981]

I have heard India never invaded any other foreign country. First time when I went to Singapore history museum, I came to know Cholas has travelled all the way there and has annexed many places in South East Asia. Look at Rajendra Chola's map - I bet many of us have never read in our history books. Many thinks Angkhor Wat in cambodia (largest hindu temple in the world) is built by Cholas. All we read in our books is about British and Mughals.

 

[prasad1]

I have heard India never invaded any other foreign country. First time when I went to Singapore history museum, I came to know Cholas has travelled all the way there and has annexed many places in South East Asia. Look at Rajendra Chola's map - I bet many of us have never read in our history books. Many thinks Angkhor Wat in cambodia (largest hindu temple in the world) is built by Cholas. All we read in our books is about British and Mughals.

It is very convenient. India as a country did not exist before the British, (actually before 1950 to be technical). Kingdom that existed in Indian subcontinent routinely annexed other kingdoms. The Maurya kingdom extended all the way to Afghanistan. Similarly Chola Kingdom attacked far away lands. So the myth perpetrators are technically right that India did not attack foreign country (we will forget that India Annexed Goa). India did help Bangladesh by attacking East Pakistan. But then again Rama attacked Lanka (again for a reason). So the spinners of history come in all shades, Some are misguided other are deliberate
liars.

Dasharatha fought battle against Sambarasura of Dandaka. Dandaka, a kingdom and a forest had the same name is a frequently featured region in Hindu mythology. It was a colonial state of Lanka under the reign of Ravana.

In Mahabharata In the Dig Vijaya portion of the Sabha parva, it is said that Sahadeva crossed the sea and brought many islands under his sway after defeating the Mlecchas and other mixed tribes inhabiting them. If this be an historical fact the inference is irresistible that he could not have effected his conquest without the use of boats and vessels.

 

[sarang]

Some people may repeat that india was never one country, but it is the english logic - call him a dog and hang him. Bharat was always a culturally united nation; one has to read (and understand) what our scriptures, literature and people say to understand what is 'bharatavarsha'.

In the same way, the statement india never invaded must be read. In any conquest by a foreign power, the locals after defeat were enslaved, and the victor became the supreme ruler. It was never so in bharat. Lanka was given to vibhishana, rama did not keep it. Kishkinda was given to sugriva. Even after rajasuya yagnas, the kingdoms were not annexed, but given to the current rulers. Even in our chola pandya mini wars, the defeated king's rightful heirs were made kings. Even the cholas did not put their reps in the land they conquered across seas. There may be exceptions, but generally the kings followed smruti dharma, and allowed the locals to live the way they wanted. Enforced conversion and culturalisation was never done. Yagnavalki smruti enjoins the king not to enforce his views on his conquered subjects.

Two hundred years of english has vitiated cultural history of bharat. We have also ignored willingly enormous manuscript literature available with us. Hope we rescue whatever is safe and bring it to public domain, so that we learn and see things and events as our people saw, and not through biased english eyes.

Every word we use - dharma, atma, acharam, ritual etc must be understood the way our elders meant it, not what coat-suit walas want us to understand.

 

[renuka]

Its clear from the OP that Sudras assumed the role of protectors of Brahmins and cows and became powerful,brave and capable rulers as explained above.

What I am wondering is..how does Gunas fit into this scenario?

Again and again we have been made to believe that Sudras have predominance of Tamo Guna.. dull and are in the mode of ignorance but here its seems that its totally disproved cos how on earth can a community that is supposed to be dull and ignorant assume the role of protectors so efficiently and effectively? Being a capable protector needs a certain degree of IQ and strategic planning..certainly not ignorance mode!

That shows they were capable to assume any given role if the situation warranted..so are we humans actually Guna birth based creatures as commonly thought? Why let Gunas seal our faith and suppress the present and future?

 

[sarang]

You got it - we have been made to believe. There have been kings from all varnas, learned people from all varnas, reformers (not in the sense we use that word today) from all varnas. There were boundaries, but not sealed. Varnasram dharma and stree dharma defined the basic duties and responsibilities, and this was respected by all. Brahmins never resented when a shudra or vaishya became a king or a a matsyagandhi became rajmata. If we rewind our knowledge base by a few centuries, and reunderstand what has been told to us by the 'mlechchas' then perhaps we will be enlightened. By the way, mlechcha is not a derogatory word, means just a foreigner who is outside the sanatana dharma way of life.

Even manual scavenging, carrying night soil on the head are all due to islamic rule. Only the communities which skinned dead animals were considered impure, not anyone else engaged in other professions.

Again and again we have been made to believe that Sudras have predominance of Tamo Guna.. dull and are in the mode of ignorance but here its seems that its totally disproved cos how on earth can a community that is supposed to be dull and ignorant assume the role of protectors so efficiently and effectively? Being a capable protector needs a certain degree of IQ and strategic planning..certainly not ignorance mode!

That shows they were capable to assume any given role if the situation warranted..so are we humans actually Guna birth based creatures as commonly thought? Why let Gunas seal our faith and suppress the present and future?

 

[renuka]

You got it - we have been made to believe..

So are we going to re-write even religious text?

 

[Vaagmi]

Its clear from the OP that Sudras assumed the role of protectors of Brahmins and cows and became powerful,brave and capable rulers as explained above.
What I am wondering is..how does Gunas fit into this scenario?
Again and again we have been made to believe that Sudras have predominance of Tamo Guna.. dull and are in the mode of ignorance but here its seems that its totally disproved cos how on earth can a community that is supposed to be dull and ignorant assume the role of protectors so efficiently and effectively? Being a capable protector needs a certain degree of IQ and strategic planning..certainly not ignorance mode!
That shows they were capable to assume any given role if the situation warranted..so are we humans actually Guna birth based creatures as commonly thought? Why let Gunas seal our faith and suppress the present and future?

It is not that sudras have predominance of Tamo and Rajo Guna.

It is that those who have predominantly tamo and rajo gunas happen to be sudras.

If you take a sample of a few thousand people in a village and plot their guna characteristics in a graph with x axis as guna characteristics and y axis as the number of people, you will get to know the truth of the above statement.

It is statistics revealing the reality as it is in the society.

 

[zebra16]

Its clear from the OP that Sudras assumed the role of protectors of Brahmins and cows and became powerful,brave and capable rulers as explained above.

What I am wondering is..how does Gunas fit into this scenario?

Again and again we have been made to believe that Sudras have predominance of Tamo Guna.. dull and are in the mode of ignorance but here its seems that its totally disproved cos how on earth can a community that is supposed to be dull and ignorant assume the role of protectors so efficiently and effectively? Being a capable protector needs a certain degree of IQ and strategic planning..certainly not ignorance mode!

That shows they were capable to assume any given role if the situation warranted..so are we humans actually Guna birth based creatures as commonly thought? Why let Gunas seal our faith and suppress the present and future?

Better way to start would be from the begining..

At least in the samhita portions of Rg. and Yajus I do not remember to have come across the classification of guNAs. I am not sure about upaniSads portion, but I feel such a classification was not there.

If my memory serves me correct, these guNas came into existence in the sAnkhya philosophy where prakruti was getting defined and contrasted with puruSa and all things other than puruSa were getting trifurcated...

 

[sarang]

So are we going to re-write even religious text?

Religion, history and history of religion are all different, not to be confused.