Subject: [world-vedic] Re: Western Failure to Face Reality? From: "indologia2000" Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:02:40 -0000 To: vediculture@yahoogroups.com A suggestion for the debate of Aryan invasion theory. Returning to the Puranas. By Horacio Fco. Arganis J. Graduade Student in Liguistic and Literature in U A de C. The research Klaus Klostermaier (Questioning the Aryan Invasion Theory and Revising Ancient Indian History) wrote: "Tacitus, the classical Roman writer, claimed to have described past events and personalities in his works sine ira et studio, free from hostility and bias. This motto has guided serious historians through the ages, and it became their highest ambition to write history 'objectively', distancing themselves from opinions held by interested parties. The ideal was not always followed, as we know. We have seen twentieth century governments commissioning re-writings of the histories of their countries from the standpoint of their own ideologies. Like the court-chroniclers of former times, some contemporary academic historians wrote unashamedly biased accounts of events and redesigned the past accordingly. When, in the wake of World War II the nations of Asia and Africa gained independence, their intellectuals became aware of the fact that their histories had been written by representatives of the colonial powers which they had opposed. More often than not they discovered that all traditional accounts of their own past had been brushed aside by the 'official' historians as so much myth and fairytale. Often lacking their own academically trained historians-or worse, only possessing native historians who had taken over the views of the colonial masters-the discontent with existing histories of their countries expressed itself often in vernacular works that lacked the academic credentials necessary to make an impact on professional historians." But will be in the correct Klostermaier when affirming that this passed in the India, in reference to the Puranas? Let us to appeal to that we discuss in my thesis work: "Since this is one of the medullary parts of the investigation, the justification will be presented. Because it is important to mention that this field of the knowledge, denominated the indology, it is not unified. In fact in the current moment in that this thesis arises, a strong confrontation exists among the experts, what has created a series of divergent postures. This way, the width of opinions is diverse as to make a precise generalization. However, in tentative form the investigators can be divided in three big groups: a)The enthusiasts who seek that all the studies of the Westerns indologist are seen like part of a dominance and suppression strategy. That is a consequence of looking for self-trust, the political self-assertion, intellectual and national of the India. b) The conservative erudites whose reject any tentative of revision to the paradigm created by the first indologits on the dates of the texts. And they are reluctant, in visceral form, toward to anyone that proposes new investigations that place in question this paradigm, and they categorize to reviser researcher in the same cell that the group (a) already mentioned. c) The specialists that take a scientific attitude, neutral, self- criticic and objective toward the new discoveries and they commit with the facts and the revision, with the hope of opening new horizons in the search of more discoveries that they allow the advance of the knowledge. The specialists of the categories (a) and (b), often they are attacked mutually with denigrants and corrosive words. By way of painting a brave and ridiculous square of their opponents, without not even to grant the most minimum value to who question them. But like Norvin Hein wrote: "Ultimatly, the competitors need one of the other one... Those (a)... they are most attentive people in the works of the academics (b), with a closet revision of their writings and, as such, it would be said, thatØ{(a) and (b)} they are as the bread and the butter... Because for the other side, the contribution of the erudites (b) it is necessary still for the traditionalist ones... to that which, them (a) they are of the most irritable." 1 For that that without dredging in the punishable aspects of the colonial legacy , coarse to say that many Western investigators, although certainly not all, they have confirmed their ability to talk more objectively about the study topic that those grateful ones inside the community (a) as reliable spokesmen, and this has created a real tension. Because it has given to those (b) an autoritarism fame. The point here is that the Western investigators are not the antagonistic of the studies of the Hindu literature. In fact, much of the Western learning about the India, so much today and as in the past, it has been excellent and invaluable. For that in this part, by way of making the most objective thing this exploration, the elementary steps of the methodology of the scientific investigation will be provided, together with the previous proposals of the experts on the topic, and the difficulties that face their postulates on the dates of the work in study… 1.1 justification: The specialists in the history, philosophy and sociology of the science like I. Lakatos, Musgrave, Quine, Popper, Feyerabend, Saul Kripke, J. Hitika, Harre, Carl Sagan, etc., they have outlined that one of the characteristics characteristic of the fields of the scientific investigation that distinguishes them of the belief systems, genency or of the seudociences, it is it explored by Thomas S. Kuhn: "All scientific work this characterized by some divergences, and in the heart of the most important episodes in the scientific development there are gigantic divergences... As these two ways of thinking (divergences and convergences) they enter inevitably in conflict, it is inferred that one of the primordial requirements for the scientific investigation of the best quality, is the capacity to support a tension that, occasionally, it will become unbearable. In another part I am studying these points from a perspective but very historical, emphasizing the importance of the revolutions ' for the development of the science." This implies the elementary dynamics that has allowed some significant advances in the fields of the scientific knowledge, since the academic study of the language and literature Hindu — indology—it is a branch of the science, this has to familiarize with a continuous critical revision of their paradigms. Otherwise, not allowing this measure, it can generate a problem that was pointed out by Carl Sagan: "When the possibility is forbidden of making critical observations and of entering in discussion, she/he is hiding the truth." In this respect, Gastón Bachelard elucidates the factor from a perspective causalistic: "When the psychological conditions of the progress of the science are investigated, you arrives very soon to the conviction that it is necessary to outline the problem of the scientific knowledge in terms of obstacles... it is there where we will show stagnation causes and until of setback, it is there where we will discern causes of inertia that we will call obstacles epistemologicals. The empiric thought is clear, immediate,... When returning on a past of errors, she/he found the truth in a aunthentic state of intellectual regret. Indeed, it is known against a not well acquired knowledge or overcoming that... To have access to the science is to rejuvenate..., it is to accept to an abrupt mutation that must contradict to a past. So that this step of the cognitive advance you ends up carrying out, Sagan suggested: "If we want to determine the truthfulness of a matter we should approach it with such a big mental opening as it is possible, as well as with full conscience of our limitations and biases." Now then, another brilliant research in this field, Micheal Witzel from Harvard (ON INDIAN HISTORICAL WRITING.The role of the Vamēāvalīs) argued: "It has long been held in modern Indological and in more general and popular writing that India has no (sense of) history, and this view has frequently been justified by the observation that indigenous historical writing has been almost completely absent until fairly recent times.1 This is even maintained by firmly nationalistic writers such a R.C.Majumdar: "It is a well-known fact that with the single exception of Rājataranginī (History of Kashmir), there is no historical text in Sanskrit dealing with the whole or even parts of India."2 Both contentions are, however, somewhat rash statements, arrived at by the prima facie observation that continuous histories or chronicles, such as first attempted by Herodotos in the West, are absent in South Asia, while compiling long historical chronicles has been a tradition kept alive since Antiquity in Europe and, to a greater degree, has been ingrained in East 1 See the beginning words of Sir Marc Aurel Stein's introduction to his translation of the Rājataranginī: "It has often been said of the India of the Hindus that it possessed no history." 2 R.C. Majumdar, The history and culture of the Indian people, The Vedic Age, Bombay, (Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan), p. 47; similarly, in the same series, The Classical Age, p. 131: "Kashmir alone has the advantage of possessing a written history from the earliest times." - When writing such statements he forgot about the well-known Dīpavamsa, Mahāvamsa and the many consecutive chronicles of medieval Sri Lanka, treated in the same volume by D.C. Sircar, p. 284 sqq. He also forgot, e.g. about Nepalese sources, also treated in the volume -- by himself, p. 136 sqq., and well known since Bendall's and Sylvain Levi's studies of Nepal, Nor were the early western Indologists the only ones who stressed the alleged ahistorical attitude of the Indians. Already about eight or nine hundred years earlier, Albiruni had the same impression when he did his "fieldwork" in the Panjab and in neighboring areas that lead to his "India" in 1030 A.D. He expresses his frustration with words that - unknowingly - have been echoed by many other students of the subcontinent. "Unfortunately the Hindus do not pay much attention to the historical order of things, they are very careless in relating the chronological succession of their kings, and when they are pressed for information and are at a loss, not knowing what to say, they invariably take to tale-telling."3 2. Legendary history (Purāna). India possesses, it is true, a class of texts that proclaims to be a history of the subcontinent, the Purānas.4 These texts were redacted, and to a large extent also composed, by Brahmins over a span of perhaps a thousand years (in the first millennium A.D. and partly even later), and long after the facts they pretend to describe (i.e. creation up to the Guptas, more or less). Naturally, they contain much legendary material and are, even if taken at face value, mutually contradictory. It can be shown, and indeed this has been done to some extent already,5 that they represent a patchwork of data gleaned from other texts, such as the Vedas and the Epics (Mahābhārata, Rāmāyana). Nevertheless, they have been used uncritically, e.g. by some historians, such as R.Thapar, and by modern archaeologists as materials to establish their identifications of particular pre-historic cultures." That is a quite objective statement whose meaning would allow us to take considerable steps in the investigation. Still more, in very deep form he informs us: 3. The idea of genealogical history. It has long been recognized that the Purānas are based on a framework of a genealogical nature.6 One would suppose that such genealogies are basically 3 India, vol. II p. 10-11. 4 And a few others, like Rājatar., Dīpavamsa, etc. see below 5 For example by Renate Soehnen in her lecture at the 6th World Sanskrit Conference at Philadelphia 1984, published separately later on. - Cf. also the Purānic parallels quoted by Horsch in his book Die vedische Gātha- and Ēlokaliteratur, Bern 1966. The parallels in the Mahābhārata, Rāmāyana and in the Puranās indicate, by their linguistic form, that they are dependent on Vedic texts; cf. below, note 8 6 See Pargiter, Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, 1922, repr. Delhi 1962; see now R. Thapar, Ancient Indian Social History, Hyderabad 1978 sound as they represent the dynastic history of the region in question. Such a view is firmly held by Pargiter, see Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, p.119 sqq. He maintains the superiority of the "ksatriya tradition" (preserved, according to him, more or less, in the Mahābhārata and the Purānas) above the Vedic evidence and has failed to recognize that much of the genealogies of the Purānas were extracted from the Vedas.7 Consequently, he maintains that the Purānic accounts are proved by whatever scraps of evidence we can find in the various Vedic texts. It is well known that much of historical information in the Vedic texts is contemporaneous and that these text have been unaltered for more than 2000 years (and have, in fact, transmitted word by word, including the otherwise long lost tonal accents of early Sanskrit) while bardic tradition, such as finally recorded in the Mahābhārata and the Purānas was prone to constant re-creation by the reciting poet/bard, - a feature that has been well studied in the Homeric and other epics by M. Parry and Albert Lord. However, even in this more specific case, it can easily be shown that the Purānas have made use of disjuncted bits and pieces in Vedic and Epic literature to construct their genealogies. To mention just the most obvious case: early priests and Rsis such as Cyavana, Viēvāmitra (Gāthin/Gādhi,8 Jahnu) were fit into these genealogies as early kings, or Triēanku is made the father of Hariēcandra while he (Ēunahēepa, connected via his RV hymns with Triēanku) was offered by Hariēcandra as substitute for his own son Rohita. In addition, it can safely be said that virtually no such genealogy, in India or elsewhere, is free from tinkering, interpolation etc. Instead, they have frequently been used to bolster the claims of minor local chiefs and kings to a high rank, and if no such prestigious link was in sight, it has been manufactured.9 All of this seems to create some problems for R. Thapar's idea the general acceptibility of lineage history. Though she admits that the genealogies have often been "improved" or tampered with she thinks the idea of genealogy is important. This is, as the following deliberations will again indicate, certainly correct. But the ancient lineages as reported in the Epics and the Purānas just do not work at all. Even if one subsumes that they were 7 Cf. R. Soehnen's article, mentioned above, and note 5. The process is visible in a comparison of Aitareya Brāhmana 7 and 8 and Bhāgavad Purāna, see below. 8 The texts (such as Bhāg.Pur 9.16.35) still try to gloss over this well-known fact (see the Aitareya-Brāhmana 7.17.6 sqq.) by saying that Viēvāmitra at first was a king called Viēvaratha, see Pargiter, p.151. - Actually, even these Gāthās of this AB section differ in style (as priestly creation) from others in AB 8.21 sqq. which give historical facts about earlier kings, perhaps our earliest surviving specimens of bardic lore; see author, Studies in Vedic dialects (forthc.) 9 To give a European example, once I have seen an inscription of the local duke of Carinthia, in S. Austria, traced back his origins via Rome to the Homeric heroes of the Battle of Troy, in the footsteps of the Roman poet Ovid, who had done the same for his nation. Cf. also the origins of the various noble Japanese families in the Kojiki, and their connections with the imperial family. originally based on correct lineage lists, they have been used from early on, for "secondary justification" of origin and the social prestige going with it. We can witness politically motivated adoptions, both of kings as well as of important poets and priests, already in the early Vedic texts. In fact, they are reported even from the oldest surviving Indian text, the Rgveda, in the cases of some poet's families10 and they are to be suspected in the case of some kings.11 Nor is the procedure of tampering with the family line limited to India. In the closely related Iranian civilization, Darius and his successors used the same principle extensively to secure their claim to the throne of Persia. They simply had to be descended from Haxāmaniē, to be Achaemenids. One can also compare the long lists of early Zoroastrian families in the Avesta. And we know such pedigrees from texts such as the Bible (Old testament) and can observe to what extremes, the writers of the New Testament had to go to show the decent of Jesus from King David, in spite of the fact, that his father Joseph is reported, by the same texts, not to have been his actual, somatic father... In all civilizations which stress the patrilinear descent such pedigrees are of great importance.12 In the Purānas these pedigrees (vamēa) have been systematized as to trace back every local dynasty of the subcontinent to they mythical Sun (Su^ryavamēa) or the Moon (Candravamēa) lineages. Even newcomers, such as the Huns, or the local dynasties of Nepal or Kashmir, simply 'must' go back to the beginning of mankind, or, at least to a well known ancient dynasty. This is what the Nepalese Licchavis (c. 300-750 A.D.) chose to do: they are traced, by their very name, back to the contemporaries of the Buddha, the Licchavis of Vaiēāli,13 and they have simply invented the necessary link - interestingly not in their oldest surviving inscription of 467 A.D.,14 but in their chronicle and in their later, official lineage.15 In the late Middle Ages, the Later Malla, such as Pratāpa Malla of Kathmandu (in an 10 Most of the clans belong to the Bhrgu or Aangirasa. The others tend to get adopted into these two clans: see the case of Viēvāmitra, RV 3.62.16-18, who acquires the lore of the Jamadagnis (themselves adopted by the Bhrgus); or Ēunahotra/Grtsamāda, adopted by the Bhrgus, though originally an Aangirasa. 11 Such as Trasadasyu who is said to have been a demi-god (ardhadeva), or later, AB 7, Viēvāmitra adopts Ēunahēepa, the son of the Brahmin Ajīgarta, a the substitute for King Hariēcandra Aiksvākava's son Rohita. 12 The examples, are, of course, legion. One may point to early Japan, or to a civilization without script, that of Polynesia, where remarkably similar genealogies are found in places as far a part as Hawaii and New Zealand. 13 Just as their contemporaneous (and later medieval) Western neighbors, the Mallas, did, with the help of their very name. 14 This points to the local origin (viz. to one in the neighborhood of the Kathmandu valley, say in the Terai lowlands) of this dynasty. 15 Paēupatināth inscr. of Jayadeva II whose reign is attested by inscriptions, 713-733 A.D. inscription of NS 778 = 1657/6 A.D.), trace back their origin to the famous Karnātaka king Nāndyadeva, who - only according to later tradition, not yet contained in the Gopālarāja-Vamēāvalī (written about NS 509, 1388/9 A.D.), became a king of Nepal.16 Newcomers can also resort to other tactics: they can claim descent from one or the other semi-divine nymph, a Nāginī, - again nothing out of the way, as some of the earliest descendants of Manu, the first man, are reported to have had nymphs as their mothers (such as Puru^ravas' son Aayu.) So did the Kārkotas of Kashmir who took over the country in c. 600 A.D., and so did many local dynasties such as those of Bhadrāvakāēa, Chota Nagpur, Manipur, Bastar, and even the Sālivahana king of Pratisthāna, the Pallavas, and especially also in the newly brahmanized countries of South-East Asia.17 The genealogies thus frequently serve for the limited purpose of political 5. Indian Ideas of history. Turning to the second question put at the beginning, the absence of a historical sense in India. This is a more serious charge. And to defend it by pointing to the genealogical trend in India history, has, as indicated above, no salvatory effect, on the contrary, this scheme is simply based on traditional political rights of inheritance. Do the Indians indeed have no interest in the changing world around them, as experienced over time? And if so, was this always the case? Or was this a product of their alleged "pessimistic" view of the world, as some 19th century / early 20th century Indologists claimed? The idea of the passage of time is, of course, not absent. Even a brief look at the structure of the various Indian languages, ever since Vedic Sanskrit, could convince of the contrary. They all have quite involved systems of expressing various stages in the past, and thus a whole array of forms relating to several past "tenses". Some have alleged, in more recent times, that the Indians indeed were not interested in, for example, the historical changes in their language(s). This again, is a rather limited view, instigated by the Brahmanical interest in the unchangeability (aksara) of Sanskrit. Sanskrit as the sacred language, the language of the gods, simply "cannot" change. The gods speak the same Sanskrit as we indeed should, nowadays, instead of Prakrit or Hindi. Pānini, when using chandas, thus refers to the sacred language, not to the laukika Sanskrit of his area and time (bhāsā). The beginnings of this attitude can be seen already in the authors of the Vedic texts. They have put such changes as they noticed into a social framework. The language of the gods has a socially higher status than that of men. Thus the gods used the higher, more correct form rātrīm "the night" while men (and thus the author of the text) used rātrim.21 (Linguistically speaking, the gods' form is the older one). This attitude towards linguistic changes has been perpetuated in the Dramas, where Brahmins and the king speak Sanskrit, but his wife and the servants various degrees of (the historically younger) colloquial Middle Indian Prākrts. On the other hand, the Vedic poets were keenly aware of past kings and dynasties and of their obligation of always creating new songs, praising gods and kings. They speak of a new yuga which would follow them... and in which they want to preserve their poetry (Rgveda 7.87.4) and which they indeed did until today, by the chandas - rsi - devatā scheme latched on to the recitation of every hymn. They live in a later yuga already (similar to the 21 See Maitrāyanī Samhitā 1.5.12 = ed. L.v. Schroeder, p. 81.3-4 concept known from classical antiquity), and they expect another one to follow theirs. However, was it really important to record the events of the human past correctly or were they just variations on the constant theme of a repetitive yuga cycle? Time was regarded as cyclical,22 a concept diametrically opposed to the linear concept of time we are used to in science. Telling sequentional history, was not limited to cultures with a sequential concept of time, such as the Hebrew one,23 but also found in others, such as that of Greece, where "the father of history" Herodotos, in turn often recalls the example of Egyptian records. Such writings of sequential history are, of course, different from the Rgvedic concept of creating new songs, of incidental telling about former deeds of the gods, of earlier (Sādhyāh, Pu^rve Devāh) and later gods (Devāh), of ancient learned persons (pu^rve ērotriyāh, VādhBr.) or of semihistorical processes such as the colonization (Brahmanization) of Eastern India (Videha) under Videgha Māthava and Gotama Rāhu^gana (Ēatapatha Brāhmana). After all these caveats we will see, in the sequel, that such a sequential view of history indeed also existed in India. Actually, both views, the sequential one and the cyclical one, are not mutually exclusive -- if only a segment of the cycle is regarded or described. Sub specie aeternitatis, of course, time was regarded as cyclical." This approach are very significant, but there are a class of scholars very hostiles to the acceptations of Puranas and other vedic text like history too. If compared the version of Vedic texts inside themselves, we often find the two at opposites poles. Nevertheless, scholars have reconstructed various historical periods, which they theoretically assign to the thousands of unaccounted years. Pioneer Indilogist Max Mueller devised a system of classifying the Vedic civilisation into periods called "Chandas, Mantra, Brahman and Sutra and a number of scholars have concurred. Others have also given their own divisions as Vedic, Epic, Sutra and Scholastic. Generally, the high conservative academics base their answers to these questions upon the historical order in which they believe the Vedic books appeared. Thus, there has arisen the hypothesis that the Rig-veda appeared before the Upanisads and the Puranas. As hundreds and thousands of years passed and the people's attitudes changed, concluded that around 200 B. C. monotheism arose, with Krishna deification like Visnu. Handbooks on Vedic history differ on specific dates. Epistemological flaws and pollutions in the (b) conservative scholarship Although the (c) objective and liberal modern researchers are more openly to reviews; the class of conservative scholars, it should be pointed out for the benefit of members of the public not familiar —in the sophistry—, that men like them, whose poses as the guardian of "logic", "reason" and the "scholarship", are sailing on a sinking ship when they, addle in matters that lie beyond of their limited paradigm. In fact, the Indology isn't a unified field. Everyone in this area has his own theory about the history of Vedic literature. They assume, usually correctly his multiples versions because the scholar's reputation, for so called probing research and analysis. When discrepancies become obvious, the scholars usually represent their own views as the objective picture of Vedic history. Indeed, Morris Winternetz, one of most respect chronologists, argues that any attempt to reconstruct the Vedic periods is unscientific. He wrote: "The chronology of the history of Indian literature is shrouded in truly terrifying darkness"...."But every attempt of such a kind is bound to fail in the present state of knowledge, and the use of hypothetical dates would only be a delusion, which do more harm that good". (Cit. for RVL C. III.) The Dr. Richard L. Thompson, Mathematical researcher write: "We have discussed the arguments of Pingree, Toomer, and Van der Waerden (Indologist historians) in detail to show the kind of foundations that underlie scholarly conclusion about the origins of Indian astronomy. The main characteristic of these foundations is that they are composed almost entirely of unsupported assumptions, unbased interpretations, and imaginary reconstructions. It is unfortunate, however, that after many scholars have presented arguments of this type in learned treatises, the arguments accumulate to produce an imposing stratified deposit of apparently indisputable authority. In this way, supposedly solid facts are established by fossilisation of fanciful speculations whose original direction was determined by scholarly prejudice. Ultimately, these facts are presented in elemetary texts and popular books, and accepted by faith by innocent people." (VCC p. 198) Dr. Hridayananda Goswami, Sanskrit Ph D from Harvard write too: "...therefore the occasional practice of commentators to force on it extraneous doctrines often renders the text obscure where it is bright, esoteric where it is literal, and impersonal where it is intensely personal...I should note at once that this principle does nor away with intellectual response to the scriptures. Rather it is a call for sober practices for understanding, in which we firsts struggle to comprehend a scriptural message on its own terms, through careful study of its internal structures of meaning." (K Bg. p21.) Fallacious examples of evidence rejection In this part we show some tactic instances of evasion for cloud the evidences from conservative scholars: C) means my self. B) One conservative scholar. c) Here I want to comment that my remark (cited above) about the name Krishna as found in the Chandogya Upanisad are not only the view of "the first indologists" but in his highly acclaimed translation of the Upanisads from the 1990's also accept that this Krishna is not the Krishna of the epics. After all, so many people by the name Krishna must have lived in India. c. But we appointed like false concotion, asseverations like this. For instance, some scholar said: "In the VI century BC or before, some compilators, felt the necessity of inserting the Devakiputra Krishna". Here, the question is, ?how did he travel to the past for know the literary necessities (inside of the mind) of unidentified authors that he never observed?— like the farce of unknown genius author of Gita—. May be, he can give us the secret formula of past travels to verify his claims. The Mr. Patrick Olivelle holds, it is a proof of the how even the modern indology is contamined by the influence of the speculative concepts from firts indologists B)Attempts have been made to shif the date earlie the Bhagavata Purana still by refering to Gaudapada's bhasya on the Uttara Gīta where he mentions the Bhagavatam, and quotes this work form the verse 10.14.4. But this Gaudapada is supposed to be a later author of the same name as that of Sankara's grand theacher. On the contrary, it can be argued that Bhagavatam borrowed words and ideas from the Mandukyas-Karikas of Guadapada. Plainly speaking, the Bhagavata as of quotationes for works of Sankara and Gaudapada, has not been conclusively proved, as Bhagavatam can be said to be borrower from Gaudapada or both might have quoted from different common source. C: One of more used sophisms by seudoscience is when you show literary evidences of Krishna and the Puranic works from srutis and other sources; the so-called scholars said, "it is doubitive, interpolated" or make other interpretation like you. Because, besides from the words jugglery the questions arise: What is the proof of other Guadapada, for observing this? What this proof that Dvaipayana- vyasa borrowed from the Karikas of Gaudapada??? What is the proof of one different source existing in these times? I should accept these fanciful speculations like absolute truths without any evidences? This is an oracle. Also we can see, that Gaudapada already mentions the Srimad-Bhagavatam in his works, therefore I can not understand your seudoscientific concoctions. B: Why is considering that passages may be interpolated pseudo- scholarship? Madhva, one of the Vaisnava acaryas, says very clearly in his commentary of the Mahabharata (the Mahabharata- tatparya-nirnaya) that the verses have been interpolated into the Mahabharata. He says that in some places verses have been added, and at other places verses have been removed. Madhva believed the sacred texts to be really indestructible, but he admitted that they are now mostly altered. Also, Jiva Gosvamin of the Gaudiya Vaisnava group says in his Bhagavat-sandarbha that puranas such as the Skanda-purana are "full of errors."If the Vaisnava acaryas accept that the scriptures are altered and full of errors, why is it unreasonable that modern indologists also believe this? C) The big problem with your argument is, that any of the vaisnavas acaryas reject the quotes that show the Puranas and Krishna's mentions in the Vedas. Therefore, if you want accept his opinions, you can no be arbitrary, and you should accept all his body of evidence and not only that wich support you whimsical ideas. Also, let me correct to you, that the acaryas never said that "all the sastras are full of errors". Jiva Goswami said in the Krishna sandharba Anuccheda (28. 69): iti siva-sastriyatvac ca natra vaisnava- siddhanta-viruddhasya tasyopayogah. Yata uktamskanda eva sanmukham prati sri -sivena. That the Skanda Purana is not like that; but the Sivaites puranas should be accept only if they are confirmed in the vaisnava puranas. You are like one indologist, who was so honest in recognising his inability to arrived to a conclusion on the topic. And later created a trinket hypothesis. Where He adulteres the age of Ghata jataka and the Puranas for He transfers them to the Christian era. This has been a bogus thing, because the Ghata jataka date of the III century B.C., and the Puranas are mentioned in the old Upanishads like Chandogya 7.1.14, Brhat-Aranyaka 2.4.10 and others archaic texts. B) Certainly the words "purana" and "itihasa" are mentioned in the two Upanisads you mention. But what is meant by these words in these texts? We have to consider this carefully, for one of the greatest scholars and intellectuals of India, Sankara, does not accept that the words refer to the texts known as Puranas and Itihasas. In his commentary on Brhadaranyaka Upanisad 2.4.10. Sankara says, that "purana" refers to passages such as Taittiriya Upanisad 2.7, and "itihasa" to stories such as the dialogue between Urvasi and Pururavas in the Satapatha Brahmana. This is also accepted by the Mimamsaka School. C: However, a close observation proof, that your argument is simply a fanciful interpretation from Sankara and mimansa school, and not in line with the spirit of the Upanisads verses themselves. At respect, others of the most serius authorities in this matter, Dr. Thomas Hopkings, recognized that such hostility upon the evidence of the puranic literature in the srutis are: "such objections are mere pedantry..." (RVL p. ix.) And other expert in the Vedic text, Dr. Michael Witzel from Harvard openly said: "Still, there is some evidence that there may be ample reason for calling these things (Puranas) "the fifth Veda". (V p.23) This is probed by a direct reading in the text. Because, if you know the more elementary literary preceptive, you can observe that the words are used in numeration statement, and the other sustantives, like Rig, Yajur, Atharva and Sama, are sacred books, and the same categorical status is given to the Puranas and Itihasas. You can read the same fact, with open eyes, in other sources, like Atharva veda XI.7.24, Saptapatha Brahman XI. 5,6,8, etc. Therefore, even the late scholar Rapson admits that, the Puranas have preserved an independient tradition, which supplements the prestly tradition of the Vedas and Brahmanas and which goes back to the same period. (CHI, I.902) So, on the face of such an elaborated record, it is absurd to build up hypotheses on basis of vague suspicions and unbridled imaginations. B: In the Ujjvala-nilamani by Rupa Gosvamin there is a reference to a passage in an appendix of the Rgveda (Rk-parisista) where the name Radha is mentioned in connection with the name Madhava (considered a name of Krsna). The passage where Rupa Gosvamin mentions this is Ujjavala-nilamani 4.4. However, Rupa Gosvamin seems to ignore the context in which this passage occurs in the Rk-parisista. This context dictates that Radha is the constellation Visakha, and Madhava is the month in spring (now known as Vaisakh) that coincides with that constellation. C: The Big problem with this argument is the fault of historical observation. For example, in the other cultures, the constellation of Taurus is namely because the bull existed before on earth and the men assigned this name to the constellation. Other instance is the month of July or August; this months are called by the influences of Romanic Kings figures. The Egyptians conceive a cocodrile in a constellations and the Milk Way they called the celestial Nilo river, and we can observer that there are many alligators in the river Nilo. Therefore, the names Radha and Madhava might be also the names of a month in spring and the constellation of Visakha, however, these objects have been named after the personalities of Radha-Madhava, and not the contrary. After all, Vishakha is an intimate friend of Radha in the spiritual realm of Goloka. Under the approach used previously, let us look the follow part from Witzel, which is more objective than the examples above-mentioned. 6. Actual sources of history and of historical writing. If we now turn our attention to the actual sources of ancient Indian history, we find the following early materials for historical writing. 22 Though the origin of the universe is somewhat shrouded in mystery, time never began nor will it ever end: instead, it moves in cycles: The first cycle of creation of this world and the following cycles, called yugas, lead up to still later ones (already hinted at in RV 8.87.4). -- Just like the yugas follow each other in endless succession, so behave the sun, the moon and the stars: the succession of dawn and dusk, day and night, new moon and full moon, the 3 to 6 seasons of the year, the bright half of the year "when the sun moves northwards" and dark half of the year, the return of the new year as such at Winter solstice, the counterclockwise turning of the Milky Way around the north pole during the course of the year, --- as well as a five year cycle (originally called dyumna, i.e. the period after which solar and lunar months can be made to start over again at the same point in time) all point to the cyclical nature of time. The dangerous transition points in this process are clearly marked by Vedic rituals, as well as the human rites of passage do so, in the cycle birth, death and rebirth. 23 The Bible begins with creation by Yahwe, out of nothing, and then proceeds with elaborate genealogical lists down to the time of David and later kings of Israel, and in the New Testament, of Jesus. -- In pre-literary times, the bardic and poetical family traditions. These contain contemporary, originally Vedic fragments of historical information (such as the famous battle of the 1o kings, dāēarājn~a), and in the case of the Epic, a bardic re-working of events of an already rather distant past.24 Purānic scholars often take the mentioning of itihāsa and purāna in the late Vedic texts as proof of an original, unified Purāna. This, however, goes against everything we now know of bardic traditions25 and, ironically, rather unwittingly regards the ancient bardic Purānic texts through the eyes of Brāhmanical or even Vedic traditions, characterized by their fixed textual corpus that was no longer altered after the redaction in the first millennium B.C. The old Vedic texts were composed, often by inspired poets who, nevertheless, worked in the tradition of Indo-Iranian (Aryan) and even of Indo-European poetry. They did not only adhere to the metrical forms of their tradition but also to well-established kennings or kakekotoba, stereotyped ends of lines, etc. This has to be taken into account when studying the historical fragments in the Rgveda. We have to go back this far in Indian history as much of the information contained in the RV has been taken over, first of all into the later Yajurveda Samhitās and the Brāhmanas, and later on, into the Mahābhārata and the Purānas. To give just one example: In the Rgveda, we find a brief reference to a battle of 20 kings,26 and another one to the famous Dāēarājn~a, the battle of the ten kings of the Five Peoples of the Panjab (Yadu, Turvaēa, Anu, Druhyu, Pu^ru) against the Bharata king Sudās. This is also found in a Brāhmana text such as the Jaiminīya Brāhmana,27 and has become the core of the Mahābhārata, which, however, does not mention Sudās at all and instead substitutes the five Pāndava brothers.28 The various Vedic fragments were worked into the new grand design of a battle between the Kurus of Vedic fame and their relatives, the Pāndava. These, however, are unknown newcomers to the historical tradition preceding the Mahābhārata; they often were taken as representing the Pan~cālas; I would prefer to identify them with the (Iranian?) Salvas who, according to a still little 24 I will deal with the prehistory of the Mahābhārata separately. 25 Cf. above, on the studies of Milton Parry and Albert Lord on Homeric and (living) South Slave bardic poetry. 26 Only mentioned at RV 1.53.9; this quite isolated mentioning, nevertheless, indicates by its very existence that, already by the time of the RV, the 10/20 king's battle was a famous topic of bardic/poets' lore. 27 JB 3.244-247, ed. and transl. W. Caland, par. 205 28 Other examples in the Vedic texts would include: the crossing of the Bharatas over the Sindhu, followed by the Iksvākus, at JB 3.238. Further, the historical tradition contained in the Yajn~āgāthās and Ēlokas should be compared; this is easily accessible now in Horsch, Die vedische Gāthā- und Ēlokaliteratur, Bern 1966. read Vedic text, the Jaiminīya Brāhmana 2.208, invaded Kuruksetra and destroyed the Kuru realm, so that a later text (Brhad-Aaranyaka Upanisad 3.3.1), can ask about the Kuru kings "where have the Pāriksitas gone? kva pāriksitā abhavan" A. Parpola may not be so far off the track with his guess of a new Aryan or Iranian invasion which he, however, tries to trace down to South India, to the Pāndyas.29 The Rgvedic battle of the 20 Kings, however, never re-appears, is completely forgotten in post-Rgvedic history. The various bardic authors and later redactors thus have reworked such bits and pieces of old historical information into the great Epic, which, as is well known, was at first a more "modest" text of 20.000 verses, in size comparable to the combined Iliad and Odyssey. How this reworking took place can be closely studied if we compare the Rgvedic form of such a popular tale as that of Puru^ravas and Urvaēī (RV 10.95), with its form in the Ēatapatha Brāhmana 11.5.1 or the Baudhāyana Ērautasu^tra 18.44, in the Mahābhārata 1.70, and in Kālidāsa's Kāvya. Here, just as in the treatment of the major historical fragments we see popular and bardic imagination at work. We are, of course well aware of how easily such data get confused in oral tradition even after a few generations.30 Thus even if we suppose that the pre-Bharata already had many of these traits and maybe still the original name of king Sudās as fighting in the battle, then it could have been changed within a few generations to that of this long later successor/descendant, Dhrtarāstra Vaicitravīrya, who, interestingly, occurs in somewhat later Vedic text, Katha Samhita 10.6, simply as a king of the Kurus.31 The ancient "historical" tradition of India, as found in the Mahābhārata and the Purānas, thus is flawed from the beginnings: It is not history but the bardic reworking of an old Epic tradition, often based on Vedic tradition itself.32 It is quite misleading to believe the Mahābhārata account and find the reason for the destruction of the Kuru realm in a flood washing away its capital at 29 On the Jaiminīya and Vādhu^la traditions of South India and the Pāndu/Pāndava problem, Studia Orientalia 55, 1985, 429-468. 30 Compare, e.g. the historically well known case of the Gothic king Theoderic of Ravenna (Italy was invaded by the Goths after 454 A.D.), who was confused in Germanic bardic lore with Ermanric, his ancestor who still was a king of the Goths when these lived in Southern Russia and were invaded by the Huns (375 A.D.). 31 Undergoing some harassment by the Naimisya vrātyas. 32 The parallels provided by Horsch (Die vedische Gāthā- und Ēlokaliteratur, Bern 1966) clearly indicate that the Epic and Purānic texts were based on the Vedic ones, cf. for example such evident cases as the substitution of a Vedic verb form AB 7.18.3 vayam smasi by BhāgPur 9.16.35b vayam sma hi (Horsch p. 95); Horsch concludes that BhāgPur. is based on AB, via oral tradition; Rām. 1.62.1 differs. -- Similarly, cf. AB 8.21.14 sqq., with parallels in Mbhār., BhāgP., ViP., MārkP, etc., see Horsch p. 101 sqq. "these Gāthās were transmitted orally and expanded." -- Cf. also the parallels in ĒB 13.5.4.3 sqq. and in the Epic. Hastinapura when Vedic texts tell of a contemporaneous invasion of Salva tribe which effected it - much more plausibly. Little value can be put on these Epic and Purānic data,-- at least, they should not be taken at face value but rather as a general outline of some historical processes. -- Another, and indeed the major source for Indian history used since the mid of the last century, have been the thousands of inscriptions on rocks and copper plates. They are so well known that I merely mention the category here. To them, of course, applies the factor, mentioned above, of hyperbole as well. In the praēastis, constituting the first, non-technical parts of inscriptions, the poets tried to praise the local king "to the heavens". -- A little used source of history have been the colophons of manuscripts which often mention the name of the reigning monarch and other historically interesting details. This is due to the fact that in India proper most mss. are only of relative late date. Except for the desert areas of Gujarat/Rajasthan, mss. have not survived much more than 500 years, and Hindus in general did not care much for their preservation as only the living, recited word, in the mouth of the teacher, poet or priest was important. Fortunately, the Jainas33 and Buddhists preserved their texts much better. And so did the Nepalese. Here we have mss. going back as far as the early ninth century A.D. (in dated form), and a few older undated ones, so much so that when Bendall first made use of their colophons for historical purposes at the Berlin congress about a hundred years ago,34 he was simply not believed at first. In Nepal the temperate climate and the almost complete absence of Muslim incursions35 worked together to preserve these old mss. Such ms. colophons, which also contain much of other valuable and so far unused information, such as on local personal and geographical names, religious trends,36 etc., should be used 33 The oldest in Indian mss. of the subcontinent, outside of Nepal, are those of the Jaina Bhandars of Gujarat and Rajasthan. At Jaisalmer, for example, as my friend A. Wezler told me (1974), the mss. are kept in a cave under the temple in large steel cases that must have been welded inside the cave as they are bigger than the small entrance of the room. 34 See the volumes of the Berlin Oriental Congress of 1888. 35 There was only one brief Muslim invasion, in November 1349 A.D. The Sultan burnt (Nepāla smasta bhāsmī bhavān) the towns for seven days (GRV fol.28b, 52a). Luckily enough mss. have survived this and similar destructions (due to earthquakes and fires). - Unfortunately the same cannot be said of medieval Kashmir from which no mss. older than c. 1500 A.D. remain. Local Hindu and Muslim chroniclers agree in blaming the reigns of the Sultans Sikandar and Ali (1389-1419/20) for their wholesale destruction by burning and dumping them into the Dal Lake, see author, The Veda in Kashmir, ch. II (forthcoming). 36 It has not been noticed, that we can date with great accuracy, for example the sudden spread of Rāma worship in (e.g.) Gujarat and Nepal in the 16th century by simply studying the sudden occurrence and spread of Vaisnava names in the colophons. for the elucidation of "dark spots" in the history of particular local areas and their political history, say for parts of Orissa, Kerala, and Gujarat. -- For the more recent history, there also are documents of all sorts. Again, the oldest surviving ones come from medieval Nepal where land sale and mortgage documents dating back even to 982/3 A.D. have remained in the possession of monasteries and in private ownership.37 The various archives in private possession (Rājas, etc.) and in public administration are still underutilized.38 -- Other sources include, as is well known, the coins, and more or less accidental remarks in literary texts or a few "historical" kāvyas. The well known ones among them are Aēvaghosa's Buddhacarita or Bāna's Harsacarita, Vākpatirāja's Gaudavāho, and immediately preceding Kalhana, the Vikramankadevacarita by his compatriot Bilhana, all of which inspired or influenced him. Sir M.A. Stein has made a collection of some expressions agreeing in the Harsacarita and in Kalhana's Rājataranginī.39 In addition, there are such kāvyas as the largely unpublished ones from medieval Nepal (see below). Similar kāvyās come from Rājasthān, some of them going back to Chauhan times,40 from 16th century Garhwal,41 or from South India.42 37 B. Kölver and H. Ēākya, Documents from the Rudravarnamahāvihāra, (Nepalica), St. Augustin (VGH Wissenschaftsverlag) 1985 38 For a (not quite complete) listing see the several volumes of: S.P. Sen, Sources for the History of India, Calcutta, Inst. of Historical Studies, 1978 sqq. --- How little understanding still exists for such materials I once witnessed myself: The old Hanuman Dhoka palace at Kathmandu contained a large collection of documents, lying on the floor in a room of c. 15 x 4 meters, to a height of about a meter. They dated from c. 1830 to 1960 an contained financial administration but also documents, as I saw, detailing which officials from all over the valley should take part in one of the festivals and how much remuneration they should get. As the palace was under restoration by UNESCO before the coronation of the king in 1975, the workmen and women used this strong paper as wrappings to protect their clothing or as head cushions for carrying loads, as well as for less describable purposes. After a UNESCO specialist and I had drawn the attention of the Director of Archaeology to this fact, the documents were carried and trucked away to some unknown location. They have not been heard of since and the story is that they have been destroyed. Only 2000 of them now are in the Tribhuvan University at Kirtipur/Kathmandu. - Another collection, of a small Orissa Rāja is said to lie on a verandah of his old palace, open to termites, rats and rain. Another similar collection, from Gujarat, is said to have, luckily, found its way to Europe. 39 See M.A. Stein, transl., Rājataranginī, vol.I, p. 133 40 See G.N. Sharma, Sources for the history of medieval Rājasthān, in S.P. Sen, Sources for the History of India, Calcutta, Inst. of Historical Studies) 1970, p. 27 sqq. and cf. his book, A Bibliography of Medieval Rajasthan, p.61-87 41 Manodaya Kāvya of Bhārata Kavi Jyotirāi, living at the time of Akbar and Jahangir, which presents the history of the Panwars as going back to Ajayapāla, a Candravāmēī king, but is of much use for the contemporaneous history. 42 A list of the less known or less studied historical Kāvyas has been made by Ratna Dutta, in her Calcutta PhD thesis, The development of historical and literary styles in Sanskrit inscriptions, (1988), p. 14 sqq. It includes: the Paramāra king Sindhurāja's -- Finally, there are the foreign accounts (Chinese pilgrims and diplomats, old Greek and more recent European travelers; Arab and Persian writers) -- with all their imperfections and inherent cultural bias, but on the other hand, their keen observation of what was new, strange, and exiting to them. 7. Kalhana's Rājataranginī If we now, after briefly reviewing the para-historical texts and the various materials available for a study of Indian history, turn our view to the major example of Indian "historical writing", the Rājataranginī of Kalhana, and then, some other medieval histories. Even a brief survey at such texts reveals that they survive only at the rims of the continent: the Rājataranginī of Kashmir, the vamēāvalīs of Nepal, the Dīpavamsa and Mahāvamsa of Ērī Lankā. The question may be asked, as it has been from time to time, whether their composition was due to foreign influences. In the case of Ceylon, e.g., this can roundly be denied. It did not take Arab traders to get the Singhalese interested in composing their many chronicles. The oldest date back to pre- B.C. times... As we will see, the situation is not different in other parts of South Asia.43 Kalhana, when setting out in mid-11th century, to rewrite and update the history of his country, wanted to write a kāvya, and in ēānta rasa (Rājataranginī 1.23). He was probably influenced by the fate of his family around 1100 A.D. His father Canpaka had held high office, but was ousted after the downfall of king Harsa in 1101 A.D.44 He thus writes critically above the kings of the past, even of the reigning Lohara dynasty, but he had to be more careful45 with the reigning monarch, Jayasimha, to whom he devoted about 26% of his work, i.e. 2058 verses of in total 7826 verses. It is Navasahasānkhacarita, ed. E.S. Islampurkar, (BSS 53), Bombay 1895; Sandhyākaranandi's Rāmacarita (Pāla time Bengal); Hemacandra's Kumārapālacarita (Cālukya dynasty, ed. BSS 60), Jayanāga's (or Jayanik, reported to be a Kashmirian,) Prthīvijaya (BSS 69), Someēvara's Kīrtikaumudi and Surathotsava (Vāghela dynasty, BSS 76); Jagaducarita, celebrating a local merchant of Gujarat; the Jain works Prabhavakacarita of Prabhācandra and Sthavīracalicarita which mention many facts about king Bhoja and the Cālukya king Bhīma. The list can, of course, be continued, see below, at the end on medieval Nepalese Kāvyas. 43 H. Bechert has recently dealt with the beginnings of Indian historical writing in an article which is not available to me here, at present. 44 Did he engage in a piece of psychological writing, revenge for his father? Cf. Stein, Rājataranginī, tr. I p.17. Note that Kalhana changed his account, see immediately. 45 See Stein, p. 17 f.: "outspoken manner with which he judges the king's character... comparatively few passages in which Kalhana praises Jayasimha... inserted... possibly with a view to avoiding denunciation and its probable consequences." little known that Kalhana even changed the text of his account, while he was redacting it. An inkling of this was felt already by M.A. Stein who pointed out the lack of revision in book 8.46 The earlier version, more critical of the king, has indeed survived in a single ms., which has been published in facsimile;47 it was earlier treated by its former owner, E. Hultzsch48 who did, however, not yet notice that this manuscript represents a different recension. This was discovered by B. Kölver.49 A detailed study of this unique case enable him to judge more competently the working methods of a medieval court poet, writing a conventional historical kāvya, even if he was not a member of the court, as Kalhana indeed was not. - In addition, we have another incidental advantage in judging him, i.e. the study of some of the sources he used, as well as an additional source, the Gopālarājavamēāvalī described below." In fact, it isn't a example of an argument that he tries to dismantle the validity of his statement "India possesses, it is true, a class of texts that proclaims to be a history of the subcontinent, the Purānas." It doesn't fit doubt that "The Rigveda contains to veritable treasury of information which sheds light on the early history of the Vedic Aryans, and of the Indo-Europeans ace to whole. However if we apply the so rigid and closed one criteria that intends from part of the anti-puranic erudites, under this could reject all type of historical evidence. Because in fact, the numismatic, archaeological evidences, etc., they are the only things with it is counted in the science of the history. This way that under that type approach, we would have to refuse the whole history. Because, if would be only the linguistic evidence the only one been worth, also that I am a linguist, it is good to recognize what other experts had affirmed, like it was report in my thesis: "The Vedic Age (8). Although the model of dates from Max Müeller has worked as an useful instrument in the philological studies on this literature, the fixation of the Vedas texts has been presently moment a problem far from being resolved. As Wilkins it pointed out it: "as for the antiquity of the Vedas, anything is not known with certainty. Without a doubt they count among the oldest productions in the world. But the date in that they were composed is object of wild conjectures. Colebrooke seems to deduce from a calendar Vaidick that have been write previously to the XIX century B C. Some assign them a more recent date, others an older one. Doctor Haug considers that the Vedic Age extends from the year 2000 B. C., although he believes that some of the oldest texts have been compose about 2,400 years B. C., Max-Müeller gives like probable dates, from the 1200 B. C. up to the 800 B, C.; for the Brāhmanas of the 800 B. C: at the 600 B. C:, and the rest of the 600 B. C: at the 200 B. C." For what Piggot informs like was arrived to those dates: "we have already pointed out the position of the Rigveda like archetype of that whole series, and the internal evidence demonstrates clearly that the Sutras is later to the Brāhamanas and the Upanishads, so that a relationship can settle down more or less precise among all those works. But even when we end up finding a chronological mark in which can locate the whole series, we will continue having very scarce material for their study. The only fact certain it seems to be that the doctrine preached by Budha is based essentially on a development of the concepts philosophical contents in the Upanishads, and all the tests coincide to fix the death of Budha in one decade the year 500 b. c. at least. Beyond this date, we don't have left another alternative that the one of appealing to kind of a philosophical esteem invented by Max Müeller and generally still accepted, by means of which the Brāhmanas is attributed a centuries VIII and VII B. C., the last Vedas a centuries X and IX, and the oldest elements of the Rigveda to the XII and XI centuries b. c. Max Müeller insisted that those you date they were only minimum dates, and but it takes there was kind of a tacit agreement (without a doubt for the influence of the discovery of the document mitany of toward 1380 with the names of the gods mentioned in the Rigveda) to date the composition of the Rigveda among the 1500 at the 1400 B. c., but without having for it any conclusive test." For what the adoption of a paradigm by covenium is denoted, based on the extrapolation. Because still the supposed proof that it consists on the date of Budha to the VI B. C., it has been discredited by Gokhale and other specialists. Assuming that "it estimates philosophical" what Piggot meant is rather philological, it becomes indicative. Since the linguistic methods are advisable and they allow to intrude in several aspects of the language. For that that if they are used under the appropriate requirements, they could throw lights on the dates and to contribute in the advance of this field, as the tentative of the variable 10. Nevertheless that investigators exist who defend the posture (a) explained in the introduction that they underestimate and they ignore the reaches of this methods in order of contradicting the müellerane paradigm. On the other hand, the erudites of the posture (b) they overestimate this tentative one and they don't admit an integration and revision of the restrictive ones of the methods before mentioned. However, such studies began with the comparative linguistics of Coeurdoux and Willian Jones in the XVIII century, which solidified with Franz Boop's positions. Nevertheless, regarding the Vedas, such postulates they became a debate when comparing them with the archaeological discoveries as linguist Ward Goddenaugh it pointed out it. Who he suggests that such interpretations of study of the language, were arbitrarily compiled in favor of social and political interests. Other experts as A. B. Keith assures that "taking the linguistic method literally, one can conclude that the Indo-European originals knew the butter and not the milk, the snow and the feet but not the rain and the hands." Winifred Lehmann also insisted in 1971: "Clearly, the paleontologists linguists have been extrapolated to the point of the elimination... the language [for itself only] it can not be used like a primary source for the reconstruction of an old culture." Now then, Morris Swadesh has invented a well-known method as the glotocronology, which tries to measure the changes of the languages with spending of the years. However, as the linguists they have pointed out it like Talk Hockett, such techniques load with deficiencies that depend on unpredictables supposed. Nevertheless, we are continuing working in this field, and may be that in the future these systems will be perfectionates. Now the conclusions of other investigators will be shown, already including those mentioned whose discoveries suggest alternative dates to those of the müellerane paradigm: Pro Aryo invasionista 1) Max Muller was the one of the first ones that rejected the paradigm: "Either that the Vedic hymns were composed in the 1000 or 1500 or 2000 or 3000 B. C., it is not necessary to be able to on the earth that ends up him to determine." Similar statements appear in other two texts of him. 2) Haug considers that the Vedic Age extends from the year 2000 to the 2400 B. C. 3) H. of Glasenapp it denotes in their revision of the theses of P. Giles and J. Hertel, an age of 2500 B. C. 2 4) M. Winterniz arrived to one period from the 2000 to the 2500 B. C. suggesting that the Puranas already existed that time. 5) Luis Renou sustains the age from 2000 to the 2500 B. C. 3 6) Colebrooke seems to deduce from a Vedic calendar that have been write previously to the century 2900 B. C. 7) P. C. Sen Gupta discovered that the eclipse described in The Prohibited Rig observed by the wise Atri corresponds at the 26 of Julio the 3928. 8) B. G. Tilak, for the references of the constellation of Orión of the Rig, reached the conclusion that you/they date of the 4000 to. C. 4 9) Bon. H. Jacobi, through the Hindu candelarios and comparing the astronomical references of the Brįhmanas, he discovered a date of the 4000 B. C. 5 Anti-Aryo invasionistas 10) K. Elst sustains that the formulations of the zodiac that are observed in Rigveda, correspond to a time of at least the 2000 at the 6000 B. C. 11) D. Frawley points out that several brāhmanas and The Prohibited Atharva describe the vernal equinox in the Krittikas, that is to say the Pléyidas, and the summer solstice at the beginning of Leo. This references correspond at the 2500 B. C. 6 12) F.E. Pargiter intends that the Vedic age went about 3000 B. C. 7 13) B.R Ambedkar, sustains a similar conclusion at the 3000 B. C. 8 14) N. S. Rajaram proposes based on the astronomical calculations an age 3000 at the 10,000 B. C. 15) P. Gokhale affirms: "The analysis of the astronomical references of the Taiteriya Brahamana 3.5.15, when Jupiter crossed the constellation Pashya they date of the 4650 to. C.. The Aitereya Bhramana points out astronomical data of 6000 B. C." 16) B. M. Sidharta settles down starting from the astronomical data and the excavations in Turkey that the Vedic Era comes from 8000 B. C., as proto-agricultural culture. Other apparent discovery that leans in favor of the antiquity of this culture, is the recent discovery in the Gulf of Cambay, near Dwaraka, reported by the Department of Ocean Development of India in February of the 2002. Where they met devices of an establishment with ceramic of unknown style until the present, rock mortars, objects like figures that represent the goddess Mother (Durga?), deer heads, a duck, and human remains. The studies carried out by two specialized Institutes have concluded that the analyses of carbon 14 suggest an age of 5500 to. C. That which locates them as the oldest culture in India, overcoming those of the Valley of the Shindo like Harappa. For that that independently of where It has originated the Indo-European community and the principle of the Vedic Age, the presented discoveries suggest an age that it goes of the 2000 to. 8000 B. C. that mark a (22.2%) inside the data gathered in this variable. " Also, the research Klaus Klostermaier wrote: While the Rigveda has always been held to be the oldest literary document of India and was considered to have preserved the oldest form of Sanskrit, Indians have not taken it to be the source for their early history. The Itihasa-Purana served that purpose… However, they contain detailed information about ancient events and personalities that form part of Indian history. The Ancients, like Herodotus, the father of Greek histo- riography, did not separate story from history. Nor did they question their sources but tended to juxtapose various pieces of evidence without critically sifting it. Thus we cannot read Itihasa-Purana as the equivalent of a modern textbook of Indian history but rather as a storybook containing information with interpretation, facts and fiction. Indians, however, always took genealogies quite seriously and we can presume that the Puranic lists of dynasties, like the lists of paramparas in the Upanishads relate the names of real rulers in the correct sequence. On these assumptions we can tentatively reconstruct Indian history to a time around 4500 BCE. A key element in the revision of Ancient Indian History was the recent discovery of Mehrgarh, a settlement in the Hindukush area, that was continuously inhabited for several thousand years from c. 7000 BCE onwards. This discovery has extended Indian history for several thousands of years before the fairly well dateable Indus. Other point, is very good don't ignore that the Puranas are recognized by experts , neutrals to the this debate, in other fields, like Jo Woldak and David Oldroyd, both of them Social historians of Science, as more philosophical, ontological and rational as the poetry of the srutis: "Rig Veda, the most ancient Hindu scripture (and early text in an Indo-European language)… Whether these ideas are derived from this profound but poetically rather than philosophically focused text, or from somewhat later Upanishadic, Budhist and Puranic, philosophical speculation…" (Wodak and Oldroyd 1996) This way, it is good to remember again that the Puranas have subsisted from the Vedic time: C: However, a close observation proof, that your argument is simply a fanciful interpretation from Sankara and mimansa school, and not in line with the spirit of the Upanisads verses themselves. At respect, others of the most serius authorities in this matter, Dr. Thomas Hopkings, recognized that such hostility upon the evidence of the puranic literature in the srutis are: "such objections are mere pedantry..." (RVL p. ix.) And other expert in the Vedic text, Dr. Michael Witzel from Harvard openly said: "Still, there is some evidence that there may be ample reason for calling these things (Puranas) "the fifth Veda". (V p.23) This is probed by a direct reading in the text. Because, if you know the more elementary literary preceptive, you can observe that the words are used in numeration statement, and the other sustantives, like Rig, Yajur, Atharva and Sama, are sacred books, and the same categorical status is given to the Puranas and Itihasas. You can read the same fact, with open eyes, in other sources, like Atharva veda XI.7.24, Saptapatha Brahman XI. 5,6,8, etc. Therefore, even the late scholar Rapson admits that, "the Puranas have preserved an independient tradition, which supplements the prestly tradition of the Vedas and Brahmanas and which goes back to the same period." (CHI, I.902) So, on the face of such an elaborated record, it is absurd to build up hypotheses on basis of vague suspicions and unbridled imaginations. .Therefore like also appoint in my thesis work: "The total of verses of the whole literature puranic is of 400,000. In The Bhāgavatam the thematic of these books is given, which consists in: 1) The creation of the universe. 2) the creation of the worlds and the alive beings. 3) the maintenance of all the alive beings. 4) the sustenance of the same ones. 5) the government of the different Manus. 6) the dynasties of the big kings and their genealogies 7) the feats of the main kings. 8) the destruction. 9) the motivation. 10) the supreme refuge. For that that the experts as E. Royston Pike defines them: "they are it more similar to a history that can be in the Hindu literature." "... that they combine with an encyclopedic information." It is relevant to mention that several cultures have had works of traditional history or protohistory. For example, in the codex Ixtliyochitli is informed that Texcoco Huematzin's king, made a compilation of the chronicles of the called toltecs the Teomoxtli or Divine Book that it contained the story of the creation of the world, his emigration from Asia of those people, the stages of his trip, the dynasties of his kings, his social and religious institutions, etc. The investigator Klaus Klostermaier points out another parallelism: "The Puranas —like the Bible—they try with the creation, history of the dynasties, saints' biographies, moral laws, human wisdom, the first created beings, a personality type Noé, the savior's birth, all type of miracles." In the same way Flavio Josefo's Jewish Antiques, The Annals of Their Ma Chien, etc. In those which, contrary to the modern natural history, the authors don't make the discrimination between the literary ornaments and the historical facts." To conclude with this brief report, in my thesis, we uses an full methodolgy applying to triagunlation to subject the body of evidence intern (geographical, cronological, astronomical, intertextuality, social, economic, philosophical, religious, political, language type) and external (documental, epigrafic, sculpture, numismatist, and discoveries adjunts) on the Bhagavata purana, to tests statisticaly of percentages and we discover that the weight of the evidence tend to sustain to remote antiquity, with the hope of opening new horizons in the search of more discoveries that they allow the advance of the knowledge. Nevertheless like I noticed in my thesis mentioning to Klostermaier: "While the older theory rested on exclusively philological arguments, the new theory includes astronomical, geological, mathematical and archaeological evidence. On the whole, the latter seems to rest on better foundations." And also to Max Planck who pointed out: "A new scientific truth doesn't triumph by means of the convincing of its opponents, making them see the light, but rather because this opponents end up dying and a new generation grows that familiarizes with it ." 8 1.- Rosen 2. Opus Cit. p. 2. 22 Cit por De Mora et alt. Opus cit. p. 43. 33 idem. 44 Cit por Ibid. p. 43. 55 Idem. 66 Frawley, David. The M ith of Aryan Invasión. URL: http://www.bharatvani.org/books1998. 77Talageri Loc. Cit. Chapter 8 (Appendix 1) .Misinterpretations of Rigvedic History 8 Planck, Max. Scientific Autobiography. Cit por Kunth, Thomas S.1, La Estructura de las Revoluciones Cientķficas. Fondo de Cultura Económica. Col. de Brevarios No. 213. 1971, p. 235. Bibliography Arganis, Juįrez. Horacio Francisco. What is the ancientness of Srimad- Bhagavatam or Bhagavata-purana from the classic Literature of India? Thesis for Graduate Studies Degree in Lingusitic and Literature. Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación y Humanidades Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila. 2003. Klaus Klostermaier.Questioning the Aryan Invasion Theory and Revising Ancient Indian History ISKCON Communications Journal .Vol 6, No 1 June 1998 Michael Witzel .ON INDIAN HISTORICAL WRITING.The role of the Vamēāvalīs. Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies 2, 1990, 1-57 Bentley, John, 1825, Historical View of the Hindu Astronomy, Osnabruck; Biblio Verlang, etd 1970. (RVL) Goswami, Sartsvarupa, dasa. Reading in the Vedic literature. The tradition speak by itself. Bhaktivedanta Books Truths , 1977. (K Bg.) Goswami Hridayananda Ph. D. Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gīta, Starling an Exploration in the meanings. Conference in the UCLA. Editade in the BTG. (Part I, BTG, IX-X p.21, y Part III, BTG, I-II, pp.32). (HK) Gelberg, Steven J. ed., Hare Krishna Hare Krishna. FIVE DISTINGUE SCHOLARS ON KRISHNA MOVEMENT, Groves Prees, N.Y.1983. Kunth, Thomas S.1, La Estructura de las Revoluciones Cientķficas. Fondo de Cultura Económica. Col. de Brevarios No. 213. 1971, (V) Rosen, Steven, Vaisnavism, Cotemporary Scholars Discuss the Gaudiya Tradition N. Y. Folks Books, 1992. (VCC) Thompson, Richard L. Ph D, VEDIC COSMOGRAPHY AND ASTRONOMY, The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. 1991. (KHL) Majumdar, Bimanbehari. KRISHNA IN HISTORY AND LEGEND. University of Calcuta 1969. Wodak, Jo & Oldroyd, David. Social Studies of Science. Vol 26. p. 192. Sage Publications