New Book Exposes Western Academic Anti-Vedic Bias

[Guest guest]

Macaulays, Muellers exposed

Satish Misra

 

Lies with Long Legs

by Prodosh Aich. Samskriti. Pages 404. Rs 650.

 

IN his painstakingly long academic journey through mountains of source

material available in Europe, Prof Prodosh Aich establishes that the

entire understanding of India developed by self-claimed scholars from

West is erroneous, since the initial attempt to comprehend ancient India

through the Vedas was itself faulty.

 

He questions the validity of the works of the famous western scholars

who translated the Vedic literature from Sanskrit into Italian, English

and German. A vast majority of them did not even set foot on the Indian

soil and those who came here did not learn the ancient language in an

organised manner, even though translation needs an equal command of

both languages. Since Sanskrit was not a spoken language, it was all

the more difficult for them to develop language skills required for

translation.

 

Colonialist Imperial England had prepared a concerted design to

establish the superiority of white, blue eyed, blond, Christian culture

over other cultures that they opted to define as "primitive", particularly in

case of India.

 

Prof Aich uses juxtaposition to drive home a point and leaves judgement

to readers. He frames a question and then answers it by using the

primary source material. The book is bound to trigger an academic

debate in the West also and would go a long way to establish once for

all that the much-trumpeted and self-championed discipline of Indology

in the West has in fact been based on falsehood.

 

It must have been a design that none of the scholars so far bothered to

use the existing material, so abundantly available, which could have

helped to unravel the truth about the colonial powers and imperial

administration and bureaucracy. Scholars after scholars, even after the

end of colonial empire, have continued to overlook the material that

would have removed the well-laid myths about Indian society, polity and

culture.

 

It would raise questions on popularly accepted theories on India, such

as did the Aryans come to this part of the world from the north or they

emigrated and then pushed back the original inhabitants to south. The

book also puts a serious question mark on the anthropological

understanding of the ancient Indian society as sought to be explained

on the basis of the colour of the skin.

 

Prof Aich has dissects the methods adopted by famous Indologists for

collecting material for their renowned works and made rightful inquires

into their sources. A Jesuit father, Roberto de Nobili, in his missionary

zeal, went to the extent of claiming that he had been able to find the

lost Yajur Veda, which in fact was a copy that he had written to

establish that there was indeed a relationship between Christianity and

ancient Indian practices preserved and followed by Brahmins. In order to

win the confidence of the local Brahmin community, he even called

himself a Brahmin from Rome.

 

The author has put every Indologist under the microscope and exposed

the majority. Comparing their descriptions with the writings of

Megasthenes and others, the author shows how the 18 and 19th

century Indologists did irreparable damage to the people of India.

 

Sir William Jones, celebrated as the Father of Indology in the UK,

befooled not only his superiors but also the entire academic community

by claiming that he knew 32 languages, including Sanskrit. He came to

India as one of the Judges and went on to set up the Asiatic Society of

Bengal, which closed its doors to the Asians, on January 15, 1784. He

disseminated so much false information about India that an entirely

wrong image of this ancient society was painted in the popular mind.

German Indologist, Friedrich Maximilian Mueller, known here as Max

Mueller, despite never visiting India, came to be known as the most

authoritative Sanskrit expert.

 

It's now beyond doubt that it was an English conspiracy hatched by

none other than Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay, who wanted to

control Indian minds by ensuring that they should know, comprehend

and understand India through books written in English. Mueller became

an instrument in Macaulay's plan to convince the majority of the local

population that the English alien rule was better for them.

 

Macaulay had written in 1835 in absolutely clear terms: "We are not

content to leave the natives to the influence of their own heredity

prejudices..."

 

Till the l6th century, social studies, including historical studies, did not

use racial terminology.

 

It was used later, by the British, to create a conscious divide between

the ruled and the ruling classes, by bringing in words like "us"

and "them" alien and local, Aryans and non-Aryans, Indo-European or

Indo-German, so much so that a new discipline, "ethnography" came to

be established at the European academic institutions.

 

Even physical descriptions like skin colour and types of lips, etc. were

consciously used to drive a wedge between people. Stories of

conquests were designed as the "historical justification" for looting,

building strongholds, colonising foreign lands with the purpose of

sustained exploitation and presented as an inherent law of evolution.

The conquerors, the deliberate killers, the occupants, the exploiters

were hailed for having brought culture and "civilization" into

the "colonies". They were just following the pattern of the nomads on

grazing grounds who came in some "pre-historic" period and

brought "civilization" into India. "What could be wrong with that?

 

The book has exposed the western scholars who are never tired of

claiming their objectivity and impartiality.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050918/spectrum/book1.htm