19th century Aryanisms

[Guest guest]

Like the Aryan-NonAryan conferences hosted by the University

of Michigan (1979, 1999), a series of conferences (with an interval

of once in say ten years) with Proceedings published in due course,

can be arranged by Indologists at a prominent European university. The

role of dualism (light/white vs. dark/black) in world religions of

Judaism, Christianity, Islam and their borrowal from Vedic and Avestan

produced by collaborations between Iranian and Vedic Aryans

when they ingressed into India. Panels on "Aryan" Europeans

with contributions by important Indologists, Historians

and also new 19th century Aryanism produced in Maharashtra,

and a reaction of Dravidianism in Tamil Nadu can be included.

 

The polemics, politics and rhetorical ploys of 19th century

Aryanisms can be studied by Indologists and other scholars of the

academe. What did Prof. de Jong say about the connexions

between nazis and indology? What is the reference?

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

 

----

-----------

Wed, 2 Dec 1998 10:59:52 -0500

Indology <INDOLOGY

Sender: Indology <INDOLOGY

Madhav Deshpande <mmdesh

Re: Vicious Debate

In- <19981202135517.27490.qmail

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

The "indigenous Aryan" debate has a tendency to get vicious for a

very simple reason. For people of Indian origin, this issue has close

connections with their own perceptions of their identiy. Before the

modern period, there were other "vicious debates" in different parts

of India. For instance, in Maharashtra, many vicious debates

developed in the 16th and 17th century over whether there were true

Kshatriyas around and whether a particular contemporary caste was or

was not to be counted among Shudras. The ruling Maratha rulers like

Shivaji were denied the status of Kshatriya by many local Brahmanas,

including the later Peshwahs who became the prime ministers of this

dynasty. This was prompted in part by the Brahmana claim that in the

Kali age there were only two Varnas to be found: Brahmana and Shudra.

The debate over the status of Kayasthas was equally vicious. The

Brahmanas of Maharashtra were among the first to begin using the term

Arya as a self-referring term in the modern era, and this term was

understood within the context of the contemporary Brahmana

beliefs about there being only two Varnas in the Kali age. The

Brahmana and Shudra were often replaced with Arya and non-Arya in the

19th century writings. Later, the Aryanism proliferated to other

movements such as the Arya Samaj, the Hindu Maha Sabha, the RSS, and

BJP/VHP etc. But one can historically look at the roots of the

ideologies in the 19th century.

 

Madhav Deshpande

 

On Wed, 2 Dec 1998, N. Ganesan wrote:

 

> <<<

> I think the answer to your question is partly to be found in

> internal Indian politics. I have been digging around in the little

> nationalisms that India produced at the turn of the century and

>that partly are still there (particularly Dravidianism), and it

>would seem that Indigenous Aryanism is a knee-jerk reaction to some

>of the more Aryan-unfriendly ideas that turned up in the South. (I

>think there are other reasons as well of a non-scholarly nature).

(Quoted from LMFosse. from memory, must check -NG).

> >>>

>

> Indigenous Aryan schoolers point to Europeans wanting to

> come out of their long hold from "Bible, Neareast, Semiticism"

> etc., William Jones' discovery gave Europe a good avenue to

> do that. So, Europeans all of a sudden became "Indo-Europeans".

> It is natural that Anybody likes to dig for their roots.

> Sanskrit professorships got endowed all over the West.

> Hitler took the Aryan idea too far! [...]

 

----

----

 

Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:03:07 -0400 (EDT)

Madhav Deshpande <mmdesh

new questions

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

Currently I am reading a text in Sanskrit called VedavicaaraH

by an author Dvivedi DraviDa Shyaamashaastrii. This was published

from Vai in Maharashtra with a Marathi translation in 1912. Has anyone

heard of this author in any other context? Secondly, if anyone has

access to Mss catalogues from Vai, would you please check

for me if this text is listed in their collection.

Finally, the text several times refers to an author

'raamaaNDaara' (for example: raamaaNDaarair uktam). The Marathi

translator keeps this exactly as is. I have a hunch that this is a

shortform for something like raajamaartaNDakaara. There is a

Dharmashastra text by this title listed by PV Kane, but again I do

not have access to it at the moment. May be Ludo or Rosane Rocher may

have seen this text and its possible abbreviation. Would love to hear

from all those experts out there.

Thanks.

Madhav Deshpande

 

----

------

Mon, 31 Jan 2000 06:07:56 -0500

Indology <INDOLOGY

Sender: Indology Mailing List <INDOLOGY

Madhav Deshpande <mmdesh

Re: Q: Manu on Pouring Lead in Sudra Ears

Comments: INDOLOGY

In-

<Pine.SGI.4.10.10001301404020.14274724-100000

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

In this connection, I came across a series of documents in the files

of the Peshwa rulers of Maharashtra (Peshwa Daftar, Vol. 43, pp.

92-94, edited by G.H. Sardesai). Documents 108 and 110 deal with an

interesting case. Doc. 108 is a letter from an official who caught a

Jangam (a non-Brahmin Shaiva priest) performing a Rudra (Taittiriya

YV) recitation during an Abhisheka for a Bania. This was detected by

the local Brahmins and reported to the official. Both the Jangam and

the Bania were jailed, and the document seeks advice from the Pune

authorities on what to do. The Bania claimed that he had no idea of

what the Jangam was reciting, and hence was believed to have lesser

responsibility. But then how did the non-Brahmin Jangam learn the

Vedic Rudra recitation? Who taught him? Document # 110 reports the

finding that a Brahmin, Lakshman Bhat Bawle taught the Rudra

recitation to the non-Brahmin Jangam. The Brahmin was fined, was

forced to give up the fees he had received from the Jangam, and was

made to perform a series of penances (equivalent to giving away 90

cows). The document cites a verse from Manu that the Shudra reciting

the Vedas should be put to death by the king. This, however, is

reduced to confiscating all his possessions (sarvasva-hara.na) and

public humiliation (vi.tambanaa). Clearly, the Shudra reciting Vedas

was not tolerated by the authorities. Here we have at least one

documented case from the 18th century Maharashtra ruled by the Brahmin

Peshwas. Interestingly, document 113 deals with how to punish a

Brahmin who, in delusion (bhrama), ate the food given by a Shudra.

These were real social/religious/legal issues, and not purely

Dharmashastric theories. Best,

Madhav

 

On Sun, 30 Jan 2000, Chris Wallis wrote:

 

> > Q: Why is Manu so generally blamed for this ? Are there perhaps

> > different versions of Manu - a stricter Southern version ? Or is >

> it just a case of popular misconception ? Is Manu actually innocent

>>? How common was this

> > `pouring lead into ears' as shown by other literature ?

>

> A: A.L. Basham notes that though this punishment is written in the

> lawbooks, no skull has ever been found with lead traces; IOW, we

>have no evidence that this ever actually occurred (as far as he

>knew). "The Origins and Development of Classical Hinduism", p. 10.

>

> Chris Wallis

>