Guest guest Posted January 31, 2004 Report Share Posted January 31, 2004 Jesus in India? Plausible Deniability, New Age Neo-Gnostic Religions and Fraudulent ‘Ancient Scriptures’ - Part One By Bhakti Ananda Goswami In this three part series, Bhakti Ananda Goswami addresses some of the fraudulent and corrupted 19th and post-19th century New Age religious literatures often encountered and sometimes accepted as authentic by devotees. In doing so he will give references in Parts Two and Three to sites and scholarly texts where devotees can learn more about these inauthentic so-called ‘ancient’ scriptures, which are being aggressively promoted by various New Age ‘gurus,’ religious and esoteric groups. Editor’s note: The following is in the form of a response to Jim Deardorff, an independent researcher and proponent of various non-traditional (i.e., “New Age”) religious theories; in particular, the purported discovery by Nicolas Notovitch of evidence of Jesus’s sojourn and ministry in India and Tibet. Dear Mr. Deardorff: While I appreciate your obvious sincerity and desire to prove the objective reality of these texts by logical argument, neither yourself, nor anyone else has ever provided the world with any real proof that these texts existed or were genuine. In fact, the original language texts themselves, or even authenticated COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE TEXTS have not been produced or safeguarded for analysis and comparison with other known-to-be ancient texts. Instead there is an operative standard format for religious dis-information, for political control of religious populations, and for Rosicrucians, Masons, Theosophists and other ‘esotericists’ to conspiratorially pass-off fraudulent ‘scriptures’ and other literatures on the public. The literatures that you are promoting fit that format perfectly. Their content can not stand up to real scholarly (specialist) scrutiny either. With all due respect to your own great endeavors regarding the so-called “Talmud of Jmmanuel”, it is also another one of these esoteric frauds. You have been duped sir, and have invested years into the product of an esoteric conspiracy. Like the “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” and numerous other concoctions before and since, layer-upon-layer of convincing-sounding pseudo-evidence and conspiratorial testimony, as well as the sincere belief of persons like yourself, over time gives literatures like those you are promoting, and the movements that they support plausible pseudo-history. Plausible deniability is used to construct a scenario in which the originals are not available for examination. There is usually a single revelator, or handful of co-conspirators, as with Joseph Smith’s Masonic Lodge-brothers testifying to his “Book of Mormon”, or H.P. Blavatsky’s precipitated “mahatma letters” and her concocted “Stanzas of Dzyan” and ‘materializations’ etc. being validated by her closest supporters. There is NEVER any objective support for these things from ANY source that would stand up in a court of law. All of the circumstantial evidence in the world will not replace the facts that... 1. The acclaimed literature WAS NEVER ASSESSED BY ANY OBJECTIVE EXPERTS. 2. The acclaimed literature is NOT NOW AVAILABLE FOR SUCH ASSESSMENT. 3. There are not even any authenticated COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE TEXTS AVAILABLE. 4. The internal evidence in all these ‘translated’ secondary literatures is a give-away to real scholars, including appropriate specialists and experts, regarding the genealogy of the text. In this case the texts themselves are their own worst enemies. To the lay person (which is what you are despite your advanced degree and service in another field), these literatures can certainly appear genuine. Why shouldn’t they? These literatures have been produced, like spurious ‘ancient artifacts’, specifically to fool people! Real experts, analyzing even the translations of the ‘unavailable’ original documents, find internal evidence of their inauthenticity throughout. Thus the documents themselves cannot stand up to the scrutiny of real experts. For an example of this, see my series of articles on the fraudulent Theosophical Society “Mahatma Letters” and Stanzas of Dzyan” on the ESOTERIC AND SCIENCE NEWS and related sites. http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~muehleb9/index.html The sister-site with most of the Theosophy and Aryanism studies on it is called From Esoteric to Pseudo-Science, and it is down for maintenance right now. When it is back up, you can see how Blavatsky used numerous sources to create the illusion of her ‘mahatmas’ original teachings, and the existence of her concocted scripture the “Stanzas of Dzyan”. In the same way, Ellen White of the Seventh Day Adventists and Joseph Smith of the Mormons utilized other sources to create their fraudulent ‘scriptures’. The RLDS (the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints), was carried on by Smith’s son in extreme opposition to the Mormons, headed by Brigham Young. As in the case of the Theosophical Society, the Adventists, and Christian Scientists, the very foundations of the faith were rocked by original and early in-group hostilities and divisions, which resulted in profound schisms. In modern times, the plagiarism of Blavatsky, Smith and White has been proven, to the shock of many faithful followers. This has of course resulted in new acrimonious schisms, and the loss of many from these belief systems. Reactionary movements have also formed to defend the supposed ‘revelators’ from the claims of plagiarism and fraud. Despite all of the best efforts of the apologists, the fact remains that the primary source documents of these religions cannot stand-up to any objective scholarly scrutiny, and thus these documents remain esoteric and ‘fringe group’ movement fodder, and have no acceptance as authentic ancient literatures in real-world realm of scholarship, where scientific methodology and rules of evidence apply. Hearsay and third or fourth etc, person testimony does not suffice. Invested witnesses are not automatically credible by themselves, and are properly subject to examination for credibility. The so-called evidence presented by the proponents of these works must be able to stand-up to objective rules-of-evidence and testing. The ‘witnesses’ must be available for cross examination etc. Just because one person or a group of people says or even sincerely believes that something is real, does not make it real anywhere outside of their imaginations. There must be objective real world PROOF submitted into evidence to convince educated reasonable people. The reason that these fringe religious groups and movements have been so successful, is that they APPEAR TO PRESENT REAL WORLD PROOF ENOUGH TO SATISFY REASONABLE PERSONS WHO ARE NOT EXPERTS. However, in fact the mountains of circumstantial evidence and testimonies they present all evaporate when subjected to the analysis of real experts. Below, you have sincerely presented your case in support of Notovitch. Since you are not one of the original conspirators in his Jesus at the Lamasery fraud, and you are a reasonable and educated person, you are typical of the present sincere and honest victims of Notovitch’s 19th century esoteric conspiracy. Layer-upon-layer of hearsay and circumstantial evidence (and out right deceptions) has created the plausible illusion that such a document or documents exist or existed. You and other honest persons who lack the specialized training to detect the fraud in the document’s internal evidence, have been cheated. You also do not have the expertise regarding the historical genealogy of the thoughts presented, or of the socio-political context of the fraud, or of the persons involved, to make a fully informed assessment of the origins and intents of literatures. For a real expert on the time of Jesus and the origins of Christianity, the content of the spurious New Age ‘Gospels’ is laughable at best and tragic at worst. The inauthenticity of these literatures is transparent in every internal thing about them, and the external evidence in support of their authenticity evaporates like the thinnest of vapors, when subjected to the light of any objective critical analysis. Furthermore, the ploy to discredit critics of the literatures by claiming that their criticism is politically or religiously ill-motivated does not account for the fact that no number of ardent of the most supporters has ever been able to produce the unavailable literature in question, or to answer the critics with real-world evidence that would stand-up in a court of law, or to explain-away the internal evidence of fraud in the ‘translations’ themselves. I myself have studied the actual ancient connections between Eastern and ‘Western’ (Old World Mediterranean Region) and ‘New World’ (Western Hemisphere) religions for over thirty years, and have dedicated my entire life to promoting the cause of interfaith understanding, so I can assure you that if there was any provable historical authenticity at all in these East-West esoteric syncretistic ‘New Age’ discovered or channeled texts, I would have gladly proclaimed it to the world ! However, none of these texts has ever been able to meet even the most minimum standard of evidence for historical authenticity. The ‘plausible deniability built into the external surroundings of the appearance of the claimed texts from never-available originals, and the internal evidence of the texts’ sources together disproves their authenticity. As with the Ahmadiyya Muslim Sect ‘Tomb of Jesus’ in Kashmir, and other carefully constructed pseudo-historical evidences, the circumstances surrounding Blavatsky’s “Stanzas of Dzyan”, Meier’s “Talmud of Jmmanuel”, the “Book of Mormon”, and the Jesus-in-Tibet stories etc. were all charged with religio-political tensions. The conspiracy has not been to suppressed these patently silly literatures and claims, but has been to promote them as authentic. Below consider the gravity of what is being charged on your site! You have become convinced, by blindly immersing yourself in the esoteric world-view surrounding these literatures, that there is a great conspiracy to suppress and destroy them. I can tell you that the conspiracy is an esoteric one to promote them, not that the exoteric religions want to suppress them. As with all the other ‘hidden’ and unavailable so-called scriptures and gospels, which may seem convincing to non-specialists, no global conspiracy theory can reasonably account for why the most zealous PROPONENTS of these texts and bogus ‘ancient’ traditions themselves have utterly FAILED to produce any definitive evidence in support of their claims. For example, Blavatsky was repeatedly exposed as a liar and hoaxer in her own lifetime, even by some of her closest associates. So one would think that any zealous follower of hers would be eager to vindicate her by producing any authentic verifiable portion of her “stanzas of Dzyan”, and yet to this day, none has !!! Neither will anyone ever produce an authentic ‘original’ copy of the “Book of Mormon”, the “Talmud of Jmmanuel” or the Secret / Lost Years of Jesus, or any other of these bogus ancient literatures, because they were all modern fraudulent concoctions. Quoting from your site... http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/ “Tests for TJ [Talmud of Jmmanuel] genuineness are indirect because its original Aramaic scrolls were destroyed due to their heresies, and only the German translation survived.” http://www.tjresearch.info/discovery.htm “This discovery occurred in 1963 as Swiss citizen and world-traveler, Eduard Albert Meier, and his friend, an ex-Greek-Orthodox priest, Isa Rashid, were walking along the road just south of the Old City of Jerusalem.” ... “But his presence there became known to Israeli authorities, and the camp was heavily bombed, forcing him to flee again, this time to Baghdad, where he posted the letter to Meier. However, he and his family, like the other refugees, had to flee so suddenly that Rashid had no time to retrieve the Aramaic rolls or his further translations of them, and they were destroyed in the resulting conflagration.” ... “In 1976 Meier learned that Rashid and his family were assassinated in Baghdad, making him (Meier) the only known surviving witness to the TJ’s discovery and historicity.” So here we have it. The ‘scrolls’ were discovered in 1963 and destroyed by a murderous Jewish and international conspiracy that involved bombing a refugee camp and an assassination in Baghdad! Between 1963 and 1976 these epoch-making scrolls were not exhaustively photographic or otherwise preserved in any way that could be properly studied by objective investigators. Meier and Rashid and their friends did not take any SUCCESSFUL steps to authenticate and replicate and safeguard these priceless scrolls, as Meier continued his world touring and Rashid continued his affairs. Apparently while Rashid was protecting the scrolls with his life, and that of his family, Meier had something more important to do at the time. Of course Meier developed elaborate explanations for the many contradictions and deficiencies in his story, which have made the story more believable. As more and more people are convinced, they will add their own conspiratorial circumstantial bit of evidence, and in the end, there will grow to be a vast mass of ‘evidence’ that seems convincing to many reasonable people. This is how these New Age religions (‘spiritualities’) develop from the deceptive (and even delusional) ‘revelations’ of modern esotericists. Let us look at some of the evidence you have accepted. In the below, my inserted comments are in UPPER CASE for clarity. Editor’s note: Passages in quotes are by Jim Deardorff; those set off by >>> are previous postings by Bhakti Ananda Goswami. As noted, passages in upper case are current replies by Bhakti Ananda Goswami. “However, another critic that you mentioned, Professor J. Archibald Douglas, had to acknowledge evidence that Notovitch had indeed been to Leh at least (the dentist in Leh had once treated him), and in responding to Müller, Notovitch mentioned names of two others who could attest to his having traveled there (one was the governor of Ladakh). The critics never followed up on these names, or if they did, never published it. “ NOTOVITCH IN LEH IS NO PROOF OF HIS CLAIM REGARDING THE STORY OF JESUS AT THE MONASTERY. “Also, Notovitch’s description of both the exterior and interior of the Hemis monastery, like those of his travel experiences themselves, are sufficiently detailed without appearing in any way contrived as to dispel doubts that he had been to the monastery. Thus, Müller’s claim here, along with his others, seems to have been irrelevant.” HE COULD HAVE VISITED THERE WITHOUT ANY OF THE JESUS STORY BEING TRUE. FURTHERMORE, HE COULD HAVE GOTTEN HIS DESCRIPTION FROM ANYONE WHO HAD BEEN THERE. AFTER ALL, HE WAS A JOURNALIST AND WRITER BY PROFESSION! “However, from Abhedananda’s confirmation of the Lost Years verses, we know that Notovitch’s find had indeed been genuine. Notovitch may have been no saint, but the genuineness of his finding has been confirmed. You have now placed yourself in the position where you have to claim that Abhedananda was a colossal liar. And others, too, who visited Hemis monastery still later and spoke with certain monks who mentioned the Lost Years verses. And also the author and discoverer of the Talmud of Jmmanuel. And the report of another whom you would have to denigrate, is as follows: THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THESE CLAIMANTS AND THEIR FOLLOWERS. WHERE IS ANY VERIFIABLE PROOF ? WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? EXAMINE THEM EACH FOR EXISTENCE AND CREDIBILITY. WHO ARE “CERTAIN MONKS” AND WHY SHOULD WE ADMIT THEIR TESTIMONY INTO EVIDENCE? WHO IS THIS SWAMI, AND WHAT IS HIS CREDIBILITY? WHAT IS HIS LINEAGE AND WHAT ARE HIS AFFILIATIONS? WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SOURCE, YOU ARE BACK TO TAKING THINGS ON THE WORD OF PERSONS WHO MAY NOT EVEN EXIST, OR WHO HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN PROMOTING A PARTICULAR PERSPECTIVE. NEW AGERS ‘AUTOMATICALLY’ DISCREDIT JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN TRADITIONALISTS, AND CREDIT ESOTERICISTS AND ALTERNATIVE HISTORY WRITERS. THEY ARE GENERALLY GULLIBLE AND NAIVE ABOUT THE RELIABILITY OF THEIR COUNTER-CULTURE SOURCES, AND ACCEPT PRACTICALLY ANYTHING FROM THEM AS CREDIBLE. THIS IS A CASE IN POINT. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE, ONLY HEARSAY OF EVIDENCE. “There is a report that records exist in the Puri Jagannath Temple archives confirming that Issa had spent some time in India. This comes from Sri Daya Mata of the Self-Realization Fellowship, when in 1959 she interviewed Sri Bharati Krishna Tirtha in India; he was the Shankaracharya of Puri. In the article she says, “In 1959 I discussed this [Jesus being in India during the ‘unknown years’] with one of India’s great spiritual leaders, His Holiness Sri Bharati Krishna Tirtha, the Shankaracharya of Puri. I told him that Guruji had often said to us that Christ spent some of his life in India, in association with her illumined sages. His Holiness replied, ‘That is true. I have studied ancient records in the Puri Jagannath Temple archives confirming these facts. He was known as “Isha,” and during part of his time in India he stayed in the Jagannath Temple. When he returned to his part of the world, he expounded the teachings that are known today as Christianity.’” In the above, “Guruji” refers to the yogi Paramahansa Yogananda, and Puri is a coastal city in southeast India, where the Jagannath Temple is located. The Lost Years verses mention that Issa had spent time at this location.” WITH ALL RESPECT TO PARAMAHAMSA YOGANANDA AND H.H. THE SHANKARACHARYA OF PURI, WHERE IS THE PROOF? THIS IS ALL HEARSAY AND NO ONE HAS PRODUCED THESE DOCUMENTS. IF THEY ARE SO IMPORTANT TO THE WORLD, WHERE IS A SINGLE AUTHENTICATED COPY OF THEM FOR THE WORLD TO STUDY ? IT IS ALL ‘SMOKE AND MIRRORS’ AND HEARSAY UNTIL THERE IS AN AUTHENTIC ORIGINAL OR EVEN A RELIABLY AUTHENTICATED COPY TO STUDY ! “It just isn’t at all scholarly to assume that everyone who has researched and disclosed the reality of the “Jesus in India” evidence, including the Ahmadiyyas and Ahmad, is to be automatically disqualified.” I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY ‘AUTOMATIC’ DISQUALIFICATION, BUT I HAVE SEEN VAST AMOUNTS OF INFORMATION THAT DISCREDITS THE WHOLE POST 19TH CENTURY ESOTERIC CONSPIRATORIAL JESUS-IN-INDIA ENTERPRISE FROM EVERY DIFFERENT ANGLE. MUSLIM SCHOLARS ALONE HAVE PRODUCED DETAILED HISTORIES OF THE AHMAD’S LIFE AND REVELATIONS, INCLUDING HIS VARIOUS ‘DISCOVERIES’ OF THE ‘TOMB OF JESUS’. THE ACTIVITIES AND DECEPTIONS OF NOTOVITCH ARE WELL DOCUMENTED. HE WAS NOT ONLY NOT A SAINT, BUT HE WAS, LIKE BLAVATSKY, A PROVEN PEN-FOR-HIRE, LITERARY CON ARTIST AND ASPIRING SPY ! >>> Worse yet, Müller shared a letter (June 29, 1894) from an English woman who had visited Leh in Ladakh, including the Hemis lamasery, where she checked out Notovitch’s story. She reported that, according to the abbot, “There is not a single word of truth in the whole story! There has been no Russian here. No one has been taken into the Seminary for the past fifty years with a broken leg! There is no life of Christ there at all! [Goodspeed, p. 11] “There’s no reason to believe that this English woman would have known anything about what went on within the monastery. If you continue on with her letter, which you didn’t, it read: It is dawning on me that people who in England profess to have been living in Buddhist monasteries in Tibet and to have learnt there the mysteries of Esoteric Buddhism are frauds. The monasteries one and all are the most filthy places. The Lamas are the dirtiest of a very dirty race. They are fearfully ignorant and idolaters ‘pur et simple; no—neither pure nor simple.’ “This was in Mueller’s Oct. 1894 article in Nineteenth Century journal. This woman was apparently a very biased person who wouldn’t have wished to enter the monastery. She was likely associated with the Christian missionary outpost in Leh, which Notovitch stayed away from. When he broke his leg, he decided to take his chances with assistance from the monastery rather than going to the mission for assistance (Read his book!). So in all, I’d have to give zero credence to the claims of this woman, who seems to have been quite a racist. Here there is very good reason why she should be disqualified.” THE FACT IS THAT LIKE THE LATER LOBSANG RAMPA, WESTERNERS, EVEN AND ESPECIALLY IN NOTOVITCH’S TIME, WROTE ELABORATE FICTIONS ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCES IN TIBET, THAT WERE THEN SUCCESSFULLY PASSED OFF ON OTHER OUTSIDERS AS AUTHENTIC. IN THE 19TH CENTURY, OPEN TIBET WAS AT THE CENTER OF THE OUTSIDE WORLD’S POPULAR ATTENTION FOR EXOTIC AND MYSTICAL PLACES. IT WAS REPLACING EGYPT AS THE OCCULT WORLD’S PLACE-OF-CHOICE IN POPULARITY. NUMEROUS ESOTERICISTS AND POPULAR WRITERS TRAVELED TO KASHMIR, AND LEH ETC., IN THEIR BODIES AND IMAGINATIONS, TO BE IN THE INNER SANCTUM OF ‘WHAT WAS HAPPENING’ AT THE TIME. DUE TO THE RUSSIAN, BRITISH AND INDIAN-KASHMIRI RELATED POLITICAL INTRIGUES IN TIBET AND KASHMIR, THE WHOLE REGION WAS ALSO FULL OF INTENSE RELIGIO-POLITICAL SPYING, INTRIGUE AND PROPAGANDIZING. PLEASE READ THE EXCELLENT SERIES ON THE HISTORY OF THE KASHMIRI SINGH DYNASTY CONSPIRACIES, ON THE ESOTERIC AND SCIENCE NEWS SITES. THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER MULLER AND HIS CORRESPONDENTS WERE RACISTS OR NOT OR CHRISTIANS OR NOT, BUT WHETHER THERE IS ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THE DOCUMENTS OR NOT. WHERE IS / ARE THE DOCUMENT(S) OR ARE THE PERSONS CLAIMING TO HAVE SEEN THEM? WHAT IS THE CREDIBILITY OF THE PERSONS AND EVIDENCE THAT CAN BE PRODUCED BY THEIR PROPONENTS. INVOKING THE RACISM OF THE CRITICS DOES NOT DISCREDIT THEIR ACCURATE OBSERVATION THAT WESTERNERS WERE GUILTY OF WRITING FICTIONS ABOUT TIBET AND PASSING THEM OFF AS TRUTH. NEITHER DOES IT EFFECT THE FACT THAT NO PROPONENT HAS PRODUCED ANY AUTHENTICATED RECORD OF THIS / THESE DOCUMENTS AT THE ALLEGED MONASTERY. >>> After Müller’s attack, Notovitch began to back-pedal, changing his story in the preface of the 1895 edition. This time it seemed that there had been no single two-volume work as he had first claimed, but that he had assembled his Unknown Life from fragmentary notices scattered among many Tibetan scrolls. “This was New Testament scholar Goodspeed’s claim, after Notovitch had responded to Mueller by writing, “They [the Isa verses] are to be found scattered through more than one book without any title.” From that, Goodspeed and later others have claimed Notovitch back-pedaled or perhaps reneged, since in his book he had mentioned them having come from two large volumes. (See Prophet, p. 188.) But is it so difficult to imagine that most of the Issa verses were located in one volume, from which Abhedananda was later read to, and most of the rest located within a second volume? You can see what has happened—Christian scholars so badly wanted the whole thing to be a hoax that they distorted the slightest seeming discrepancy, picking on the difference between “two volumes” and “more than one book.” Really! And as I questioned before, would Notovitch have been able to keep track of which of two volumes the lama read from on any given day?” THIS ‘PLAUSIBLE DENIABILTY’ DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR THE FACT THAT NO DOCUMENT(S) HAVE EVER BEEN PRODUCED FOR EXAMINATION AND NO ACTUAL TIBETAN AUTHORITY HAS COME FORWARD TO PROCLAIM THEIR LEGITIMACY. WHY HAS H.H. THE DALAI LAMA NEVER CONFIRMED THE STORY ? WHY HAS THERE NEVER BEEN ANY OFFICIAL CONFIRMATION OF IT? OF COURSE THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS WORK OVER TIME TO EXPLAIN THIS...BUT THE FACT IS THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO OBJECTIVE OR AUTHORITATIVE CONFIRMATION. I AM A VAISHNAVA MASTER, AND I AM DAILY CONFRONTED WITH THE FACT THAT OTHER VAISHNAVA MASTERS HAVE IN GOOD-FAITH ACCEPTED THIS FRAUDULENT NONSENSE AND ARE ENTHUSIASTICALLY TEACHING IT AS FACT TO THEIR ACCEPTING DISCIPLES. JUST BECAUSE A SAINTLY AND HONEST RELIGIOUS LEADER IS PROMOTING THESE THINGS AS TRUE, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE TRUE. FURTHERMORE, THE RELIGIOUS FANATICS TO BE FEARED ARE NOT THE MAINSTREAM RELIGION JEWS AND CATHOLICS, WHO ARE SUPPOSEDLY CONSPIRING TO ‘HIDE’ THESE TRUTHS, BUT THE FANATICAL AHMADIYYA MUSLIMS, HINDUS AND OCCULT ‘FUNDAMENTALIST’ ARYANISTS, WHO BELIEVE THIS STUFF AND THREATEN AND ATTACK PERSONS LIKE MYSELF FOR EXPOSING IT. AS A SCHOLAR WHO HAS RESEARCHED AND TAUGHT ABOUT REAL EVIDENCE OF EASTERN, ‘PAGAN’, JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN HISTORICAL CONNECTIONS FOR OVER 30 YEARS, I HAVE NEVER ONCE BEEN THREATENED OR ATTACKED, BOMBED OR ASSASSINATED BY A JEWISH OR CATHOLIC FANATIC. THERE IS NO JEWISH OR CHRISTIAN CONSPIRACY TO SUPPRESS THE REAL EVIDENCE OF EASTERN (CENTRALLY VAISHNAVA) AND JUDEO-CHRISTIAN CONNECTIONS, BUT THERE HAS BEEN AN EFFORT OF ARYANIST ESOTERICISTS AND MAYAVADI HINDUS, MUSLIMS AND BUDDHISTS TO INTIMIDATE, DISCREDIT AND SILENCE ME. MY LIFE HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY THREATENED AND I HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN ATTACKED BY FANATICAL ADVOCATES OF YOUR ‘JESUS IN INDIA’, WHO CONSIDER HIM TO BE EITHER CONVERSELY AN ARYAN MASTER, OR THE ‘GURU OF THE ANTI-ARYAN MLECCHAS AND YAVANAS’. IN EITHER CASE, IT HAS NOT BEEN JEWS OR CHRISTIANS WHO HAVE ATTACKED ME FOR PRESENTING REAL-WORLD EVIDENCE THAT JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY ARE HISTORICALLY CONNECTED TO THE GREAT EASTERN BHAKTI TRADITIONS, IT HAS BEEN THE ARYANIST AND ESOTERIC ADVOCATES OF THE ‘JESUS IN KASHMIR’ TEACHINGS THAT HAVE TRIED TO SILENCE ME WITH THREATS AND ATTACKS. >>> The same year, Professor J. Archibald Douglas of Agra visited the Hemis monastery and interviewed the abbot, reading him Notovitch’s Unknown Life. The abbot was outraged at the hoax and asked why crimes like Notovitch’s fraud could not be punished! As abbot for the past fifteen years, he knew no one had been given shelter with a broken leg, and as a lama for forty-two years he could attest there was no such document as Notovitch claimed to have used [Goodspeed, p. 13]. Notovitch was exposed as a fraud and that was the end of it for a while. “Here the critics have assumed, without cause, that a lama would certainly not tell a lie to a potential trouble maker to get rid of him. Müller noted that there indeed had been travelers to the East “to whom Brahmans or Buddhists have supplied, for a consideration, the information and even the manuscripts which they were in search of.” He felt that Notovitch might have been such a victim of a Buddhist monk who supplied him with an invented story. However, it is more likely that Douglas instead was the unknowing victim of a monk’s discretion or subterfuge, as it would obviously have been much simpler for the chief lama of Hemis to deny to Douglas any knowledge of Notovitch’s visit there, after having learned of some potentially dangerous reactions that Notovitch’s 1894 book could cause, than it would have been for him to invent on the spot a collection of 244 verses about Isa to read to Notovitch and his translator. And any impartial reading of his book discloses no good motivation why Notovitch, of Russian Orthodox belief, would have had to invent the verses about Isa, though he was obviously excited at the prospect of being the one to fill in this gap within the Gospels and bring the information to the attention of the West.” YOUR WHOLE ARGUMENT SHOWS THAT YOU ARE BOTH UNLEARNED AND GULLIBLE WITH REGARD TO NOTOVITCH’S HISTORY, CHARACTER AND MOTIVES, AND THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO CLAIM DECEPTION ON BEHALF OF THE MONKS WHEN IT SUITS YOU. BUDDHIST MONKS TAKE VOWS OF TRUTHFULNESS. WHILE HUMAN FAILINGS ARE A FACT, LET US CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING. IS IT MORE REASONABLE TO ACCEPT THAT NOTOVITCH, AND HIS KNOWN CON-ARTIST ‘ESOTERIC’ AND POLITICAL SPY CRONIES WERE LIARS, OR THAT BUDDHIST MONKS, CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES AND SCHOLARS WITH REPUTATIONS FOR TRUTHFULNESS (EVEN IF THEY WERE BIASED) WERE LIARS ? IS IT MORE REASONABLE TO ACCEPT THAT NOTOVITCH, A MAN WITH A PROVEN HISTORY OF FICTION WRITING, SPYING, DISINFORMATION AND OTHER CALCULATED DECEPTION WAS AGAIN WRITING FICTION AND LYING, OR THAT VARIOUS BUDDHIST MONKS, INCLUDING THE ABBOT.... 1. LIED TO HIM ABOUT WHAT WAS IN THEIR LIBRARY, READING HIM CONCOCTED STORIES ? 2. LIED TO OTHERS ABOUT HIS VISIT TO THEM? 3. LIED TO OTHERS ABOUT WHAT WAS IN THEIR LIBRARY ? 4. LIED TO OTHERS ABOUT READING NOTOVITCH THE JESUS STORIES ? 5. LIED CONTINUALLY OVER TIME TO COVER UP THAT NOTOVITCH HAD HAD THE STORIES READ TO HIM THERE ? WHAT IS MORE CREDIBLE, THE SWORN SEALED TESTIMONY OF AN ABBOT, THE TESTIMONY OF A MISSIONARY OR SCHOLAR, OR THE TESTIMONY OF NOTOVITCH, WHOSE LIFE WAS ONE OF NO SERIOUS RELIGIOUS DISCIPLINE, DEVOTIONAL SERVICE OR SCHOLARSHIP, AND INSTEAD WAS FULL OF POLITICAL-PEN-FOR-HIRE WORK AND CHARLATANISM? THE COUNTER-CLAIMS OF THE ABBOT, MISSIONARY, SCHOLAR AND OTHER OF NOTOVITCH’S EARLIEST CRITICS HAVE NEVER BEEN DISCREDITED BY ANY OFFICIAL BUDDHIST REFUTATION SUPPORTING NOTOVITCH’S ORIGINAL CLAIMS ! THE SUPPOSED TEXT(S) HAVE NEVER BEEN PRODUCED FOR GENERAL AUTHENTICATION AND STUDY ! WHATEVER ANY SUBSEQUENT MONKS OR A GURU CLAIMS TO HAVE SEEN HAS NEVER BEEN PRODUCED EITHER, SO WHOSE CLAIMS HAVE BEEN PROVEN BY THE TEST-OF-TIME AND VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE, AND WHOSE CLAIMS HAVE NOT ? “In his response to Mueller, which he placed in his 1895 book, Notovitch explained that the head lama may have replied negatively to Prof. Douglas “because Orientals are in the habit of looking upon Europeans as robbers, who introduce themselves in their midst to despoil them in the name of civilization.” This is backed up by the Tibetologists D.L. Snellgrove and T. Skorupski who, in their 1977 book, reported that, “They [the monks at Hemis monastery] seem convinced that all foreigners steal if they can. There have in fact been quite serious losses of property in recent years...”. In the 1907 book by V. R. Gandhi, he wrote that, “Europeans have not yet understood the reason why the monks and other custodians of the sacred literature of the East have been unwilling to give full information about manuscripts.” He went on to explain that it was due to the Muslim invaders of India once having destroyed thousands of the Indians’ sacred documents, and to early Christian missionaries having acquired and belittled some of the documents.” ARE THESE PLAUSIBLE REASONS TO DENY THE WORLD ACCESS TO AUTHENTICATED COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS IN QUESTION? DOES THIS ARGUMENT JUSTIFY THE FACT THAT THE DOCUMENTS HAVE NEVER BEEN COPIED AND THOSE COPIES MADE AVAILABLE IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGES FOR OBJECTIVE STUDY ? WHERE IS THERE EVEN ANY READABLE COPY OF THE ARAMAIC TEXT OF THE “TALMUD OF JMMANUEL”, OR OF THE TIBETAN TEXT OF THE LOST YEARS OF JESUS, OR OF THE SENZAR TEXT OF BLAVATSKY’S “STANZAS OF DZYAN”, OR OF THE ‘EGYPTIAN’ TEXT OF THE “BOOK OF MORMON” ? NONE WILL EVER BE PRODUCED BECAUSE THESE ARE NOT REAL ANCIENT LITERATURES. “This easily explains Prof. Douglas’s findings, about whom we know nothing except what he wrote in a letter to Mueller. In his letter, it shows through that he was a Christian who was deeply offended by Notovitch’s findings.” EVEN DEEPLY OFFENDED JEWS AND CHRISTIANS CAN TELL THE TRUTH SOME TIMES YOU KNOW ! YOUR OWN PREJUDICE AGAINST JUDAISM AND CATHOLIC-RELATED CHRISTIANITY IS PERVASIVE ON YOUR SITE. IN FACT, THE ESOTERIC TRADITIONS (LIKE THEOSOPHY AND MASONRY) ARE PREDOMINANTLY ANTI-JEWISH AND ANTI-CATHOLIC IN GENERAL, IN THEIR HISTORICAL GENEALOGY, AND SO THESE FIND SUPPORT IN ALL OF THE SAME PLACES THAT YOU ARE DRAWING YOUR INSPIRATION AND INFORMATION FROM. SADLY, LIKE SO MANY OTHERS, YOU HAVE SIMPLY FALLEN VICTIM TO SOME OF THE MANY SCAMS / CONS IN THE LUCRATIVE POST 19TH CENTURY NEW AGE REVELATION-MAKING BUSINESS. YOU AND OTHER MILLIONS OF PEOPLE HAVE BECOME ENTHRALLED TO THESE SCAM ARTISTS AND CANNOT DISCERN THAT YOU HAVE BEEN CHEATED. YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO. NOW AS HONEST AND EDUCATED PERSONS OF INTEGRITY, YOU ARE UNWITTINGLY REPEATING LIES, WHICH ARE EVER MORE MIXING WITH LAYERS OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AND NEW TRUTHS TO PRODUCE A MASSIVE CONCRETION OF CONFUSED TRUTHS-AND-ERRORS / LIES. AT THE HISTORICAL CORE OF THE CONCRETION IS NOTHING BUT A LIE, AND NO AMOUNT OF SUBSEQUENT DEFENSE WILL CHANGE THE FACT. Praying for your deliverance from the illusions that have enthralled you, your sincere well wisher, Bhakti Ananda Goswami part 2-a http://www.saragrahi.org/columns/one/jesus_in_india2a.htm part2-b http://www.saragrahi.org/columns/one/jesus_in_india2b.htm part 2-c http://www.saragrahi.org/columns/one/jesus_in_india2c.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2004 Report Share Posted February 1, 2004 I wonder what Bhakti Anand Gosvami would have to say about claims by devotees that the Vedas endorse Jesus as a 'saktyavesa avatAra' of bhagavAn, or that the purAnas do so. Certainly I have seen many individuals make that claim here, only to get angry and resentful when gently asked to substantiate such claims with primary evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gokulkr Posted February 1, 2004 Report Share Posted February 1, 2004 Following quotes relating to Jesus in Bhavisya purana. Jesus is identifed as "Isa" here. [shalivahan, ruler over the Aryans, grandson of Vikramaditya, occupied the throne of his father. He vanquished the attacking hordes of Chinese, Parthians, Scythians and Bactrians. He drew a border between the Arians and the Mleacha (meat eaters), and ordered the latter to withdraw to the other side of India.] ekadaa tu shakadhisho himatungari samaayayau hunadeshasya madhye vai giristhan purusam shubhano dadarsha balaram raajaa "One day, Shalivahan, the chief of the Sakyas, went into the Himalayas. There, in the middle of the Land of the Hun, the powerful king saw an auspicious man who was situated on a mountain. His complexion was fair and he wore white garments." [NOTE: Hun is Hunadesh, near Manasa / Kailash Mountain in W. Tibet; also known as Lasadakh, part of the Kushan empire.] ko bharam niti tam praaha su hovacha mudanvitah iishaa purtagm maam viddhi kumaarigarbha sambhavam "The king asked, 'Who are you sir?' 'You should know that I am Isha Putra, a Son of God,' he replied blissfully, 'and am born of a virgin.' [NOTE: Jesus refers to himself as "a" son of God or one of many; not "the" son of God or the only one God could ever create.] mleccha dharmasya vaktaram satyavata paraayanam iti srutva nrpa praaha dharmah ko bhavato matah "I am the expounder of the religion of the Mlecchas (meat-eaters) and I strictly adhere to the Absolute Truth.' Hearing this the king enquired, 'What are religious principles according to your opinion?' shruto vaaca maharaja prapte satyasya amkshaye nirmaaryaade mlechadesh mahiso 'ham samaagatah "Hearing this questions of Salivahara, Isha putra said, 'O king, I came from a foreign land where there are no rules or regulations and and evil knows no bounds. When the destruction of truth occurred, I, Masiha the prophet, came to the country of degraded people. Through me the sinners and delinquents suffered, and I also suffered at their hands. Finding that fearful irreligious condition of the barbarians spreading from Mleccha-Desha, I have taken to prophethood'. mlecchasa sthaapito dharmo mayaa tacchrnu bhuupate maanasam nirmalam krtva malam dehe subhaasbham naiganam apamasthaya japeta nirmalam param nyayena satyavacasaa manasyai kena manavah dhyayena pujayedisham suurya-mandala-samsthitam acaloyam prabhuh sakshat- athaa suuryacalah sada "'Please hear O king which religious principles I have established among the mlecchas. The living entity is subject to good and bad contaminations. The mind should be purified and the body by taking recourse of proper conduct and performance of japa, chant the holy names to attain the highest purity. Just as the immovable sun attracts, from all directions, the elements of all living beings, God as firm as the sun, Who is fixed and all-attractive, attracts the hearts of all living creatures. Thus by following rules, speaking truthful words, justice, mental harmony, unity of spirit and meditation, O descendant of Manu, in the center of that light one will find their way to Isa, and should serve and worship Him as that immoveable Lord'." [NOTE: Christ again uses the word "Isa" here. Whether it is spelled Issa or Isa, it is the same. We should notice he first makes a distinction between that of Isa (God), and the Isa-Masih or one who came to preach about God. As mentioned on my other web pages below, Isa is a name for Krishna that means the "Supreme Being" or "Supreme God." However, Isa das and Isa-Messiah both denote "servant" of God. Different language, same meaning. isha muurtirt-dradi praptaa nityashuddha sivamkari ishamasihah iti ca mama nama pratishthitam "Having placed the eternally pure, auspicious form of Isa, the Supreme Lord and giver of happiness, forever within my heart, O protector of the earth planet, I preached these principles through the Mlecchas' own faith, and thus my name became the Isa-Masih.' [NOTE: Christ refers to the "Form" (murti) of God as Isa, so it again indicates Jesus believed in Deity worship, most likely as long as such worship was performed by sincere, honest, qualified priests/brahmana's.] iti shrutra sa bhuupale natraa tam mlecchapujaam sthaapayaamaasa tam tutra mlecchasthaane hi daarune "After hearing these words and paying obeisances to that person who is worshipped by the mlecca's, the king humbly requested him to stay there in that most miserable land of Mlecchas." svaraajyam praaptavaan raajaa hayamedhan cikirat rajyam krtva sa sasthyabdam svarga lokamu paayayau "King Salivahara, after leaving his kingdom performed an asvamedha yajna and after ruling for sixty years, went to heaven. Now please hear what happened when the king went to svargaloka." (Bhavishya Purana 19:20-33.) Thus ends the second chapter entitled, "The Age Of Salivahara" of the story of Kali Yuga of the Caturyuga Khanda also called pratisarga-parva of the wonderful Bhavishya Maha Purana, 3191 Kaukikia Era or 115 A.D, ~ Srila Vyasa dev - literary incarnation of Lord Krishna. The question often arises, "If Jesus was pure, why did he put so much attention on healing the material body or even on 'material' truth or 'material' justice, etc?" To this, the answer is above in Christ's own words, but to sum it up: it was a step by step process. First he taught them to be clean in body which next lead to soul. Then there were different rules, like thou shalt not kill and the other commandments, keeping them on the human being platform (as the 4 regulative principles by Srila Prabhupada are to keep us on the human being level). Next, Jesus taught them prayer/japa and to think often of God or meditation. If all this was followed, his disciples could eventually understand the concept of God as light (the impersonal brahmajyoti). From there, they would find "in the center" of that light: Isa/ Krishna. (Reminds me of the story of the Four Kumaras who were impersonalists but it lead them to ultimately discovered the higher Personal form of Krishna.) Then Christ's disciples would finally be able to Isa , both in the heart (as Paramatma) and through the all attractive Deity (form) "Isa" or Lord Shri Krishna, where they would find happiness that never leaves but stays within forever, thus spiritual happiness. Therefore, through his process, Christ's disciples could become elevated from material status of sudras to the highest transcendental position of Vaisnava! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2004 Report Share Posted February 1, 2004 Organized efforts of the British to destroy our culture and religion, and mutilate our history. --------------------------- The first evidence of the above fact is the personal secret suggestion of Jones (along with a derogative essay) of 1784 to Warren Hastings, Governor General of India, where he explains his plan of how to destroy the religious faith of the Hindus of India which is deep rooted in their hearts by: (1) Fabricating a false Sanskrit scripture that would show all the greatness of Jesus. (2) Translating a gospel and Isaiah into Sanskrit in the style of a Hindu scripture with (false) ancient predictions about Jesus being a great Divine person, and then (3) carefully distributing these (false and fabricated) books in our educated society to withdraw their mind from the Vedic religion and to divert it towards Christianity. See for yourself. Evidence of their malicious intentions (to produce fabricated Sanskrit scriptures). Sir William Jones, 1784 (from Asiatic Researches Vol. 1. Published 1979, pages 234-235. First published 1788). “As to the general extension of our pure faith in Hindustan there are at present many sad obstacles to it… We may assure ourselves, that… Hindus will never be converted by any mission from the church of Rome, or from any other church; and the only human mode, perhaps, of causing so great a revolution, will be to translate into Sanscrit… such chapters of the Prophets, particularly of ISAIAH, as are indisputably evangelical, together with one of the gospels, and a plain prefatory discourse, containing full evidence of the very distant ages, in which the predictions themselves, and the history of the Divine Person (Jesus) predicted, were severally made public; and then quietly to disperse the work among the well-educated natives.” Such a plot was launched against India with two main objectives: (1) To destroy the Bhartiya religion, and (2) to mutilate its history. One can imagine the depth of their bad intentions of which Jones was the main implementer. We are giving a few more passages from the same essay “On the Gods of Greece, Italy and India” by Jones, President of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (Calcutta), written in 1784. This is a long essay of 47 pages in which Jones had tried to demean all the forms of the Hindu God and Goddess in a very humiliating manner and tried to condemn Their Divine greatness by all means. First effort of Jones (1784) and the secret planning. -- Jones writes in “On the Gods of Greece, Italy and India”, “Since Gods of all shapes and dimensions may be framed by the boundless powers of imagination, or by the frauds and follies of men, in countries never connected; but, when features of resemblance, too strong to have been accidental, are observable in different systems of polytheism, without fancy or prejudice to colour them and improve the likeness… It is my design, in this Essay, to point out such a resemblance between the popular worship of the old Greeks and Italians, and that of the Hindus.” (p. 188) “…drawing a parallel between the Gods of the Indian and European Heathens.” (p. 190) His writing clearly shows his atheistic views and a deep scorn for Indian religion in his heart where he tries to demean all the forms of our God by comparing them with the fictitious mythological figures of the Greeks and Romans and calling everyone heathens. He further proceeds and tells on pages 203 and 215 that Goddesses Lakchmi, Parvati and Durga (Who are supreme Goddesses of Vaikunth and have the ability of governing the whole universe) are like Ceres, Juno and Minerva, respectively. Not only that, he writes that ‘Meru’ (the actual name is Sumeru which is a celestial hill) is the north pole of this earth planet. He compares the most important supreme Divine Goddesses of Vaikunth with the imaginary non-vegetarian goddesses of Homeric origin. But, hold your breath, if you have a regard for Bhagwan Ram you may be shocked to read his statement where he says, “RAMA and CRISHNA, must now be introduced, and their several attributes distinctly explained. The first of them, I believe, was the DIONYSOS of the Greeks.” “The first poet of the Hindus was the great VALMIC, and his Ramayan is an Epick Poem… comparison of the two poems (the Dionysus and the Ramayan) would prove DIONYSUS and RAMA to have been the same person; and I incline to think, that he was RAMA, the son of CUSH, who might have established the first regular government in this part of Asia.” (pp. 214, 221) First look to his understanding where he says that Kush was the Father of Ram. Every religious Indian knows that Bhagwan Ram had two sons, Kush and Lav who ruled Bharatvarsh after Ram. Now come to his main statement about comparing Bhagwan Ram with Dionysus, which is like synonymizing Divinely blissful and glorious daylight with the demonically scary, spooky, and darkest midnight. Dionysus was an imaginary figure called the god of wine and worldly enjoyments. The demented hilarity of the followers of the diabolical Dionysian cult involved frenzied and worse than cannibalistic savagery. Jones then condemns the history and the Divinity of Manu. He writes, “This epitome of the first Indian History… though whimsically dressed up in the form of an allegory, seem to prove a primeval tradition in this country of the universal deluge described by MOSES, and fixes consequently the time when the genuine Hindu Chronology actually begins.” “We may suspect that all the fourteen MENUS are reducible to one, who was called NUH by the Arabs, and probably by the Hebrews; though we have disguised his name by an improper pronunciation of it. Some near relation between the seventh MENU and the Grecian MINOS may be inferred.” (pp. 198, 202) The deluge of Moses which Jones mentions had happened only about 5,000 years ago and the deluge mentioned in the Bhagwatam, which was an occasional kalp pralaya, had happened 1,972 million years ago. The 14 manvantar of separate Manus with their definitive history is an established fact which is related to the 14 cycles of the ‘time’ element in a day of Brahma, whereas the Grecian Minos, was only a legendary king of Crete around 2800 BC whose history is unknown. A stone slab called Linear A was found at Crete which is believed to be related to the Minoan culture. The script of Linear A is still undeciphered. Every historian knows that the Greek and Roman gods were the imaginary figures, created by the primitive people of those countries. He further says, “…the whole crowd of gods and goddesses in ancient Rome and modern Varanes, (Varanasi of India) mean only the powers of nature, expressed in a variety of ways and by a multitude of fanciful names.” “Be all this as it may, I am persuaded, that a connexion subsisted between the old idolatrous nations of Egypt, India, Greece, and Italy, long before they migrated to their several settlements.” (pp. 229, 232) Their secret planning. These two passages reveal the true format of the planning of the British that they tried to execute, and they employed their full resources to accomplish it for as long as they ruled India. (1) The first passage indicates that they wanted to destroy the authenticity and the theme of our scriptures which also includes our history, and (2) the term ‘migration’ of the second passage clearly indicates that they had already planned to establish a fallacy that Indians came from somewhere else and migrated to India. By the first act they wanted to degrade the Hindu religion by all means and to show that the Hindu religion is no better than the religion of Greeks and ancient Romans. They also wanted to prove their imagined greatness of Christianity so that they could impose their superiority upon us. By the second act they wanted to prove that they also had equal rights to live in India like the Hindus as both have come from outside. If we look to their doings, during the period they ruled India, with this angle of view, everything becomes crystal clear. A brief review of how was it executed. 1784 • In January 1784, the Asiatic Society of Bengal was established in Calcutta under the patronage of Warren Hastings and Sir William Jones was appointed its President. Its main purpose was to find ways of how to accomplish their secret aims mentioned above. Its literary works were published in the name of “Asiatic Researches.” 1784 • Towards the end of 1784 Jones produced his first essay (described above) which was the first most important work of the Asiatic Researches. 1786 • On 2nd February 1786, Jones, in his Presidential speech, produced his new fabricated theory of some unknown protolanguage that was designed to disprove the authenticity and the first originality of the Sanskrit language, and to create a ground for fabricating another theory of Aryan invasion. 1793 • Jones in his 10th Presidential speech discredits our entire history as described in the Puranas and places Chandragupt Maurya as the contemporary of Alexander by falsely telling that he was no other than Sandracottus of 312 BC. 1816 • Jones died in 1794 but in 8 years he could not produce the full thesis of his created theory of some unknown protolanguage. Another coworker of the Asiatic Researches group of people, Franz Bopp (see pp.180-181) worked hard for his whole life and then produced his first work in 1816 and the detailed work around 1852 to substantiate the ideology of Proto-Indo-European language which Jones had created. 1828 • All the articles of the Asiatic Researches including the writings of its secretary Mr. Wilson (1828) were purposely designed to be extremely derogatory and produced falsified descriptions of Hindu religion and history. 1828 • In 1828 an atheistic society, contempting the personality of God, called the Brahmo Samaj, was formed in Calcutta. Its founder and coworker received great appreciation by the British and were heartily welcomed in England and were praised by Max Müller and other writers of that group. 1847 • Max Müller was appointed by the East India Company to wrongly translate the theme of the Vedas and construct a wrong history of India. He was highly paid for this job. (Max Müller’s letters themselves reveal this secret.) 1866 • In 1866, a professor of Calcutta Sanskrit College, Pandit Taranath, was given a lot of money on a contract basis to compile the largest Sanskrit dictionary and to wrongly interpret certain Vedic words to suit the derogatory theory which the British had fabricated against the Vedic religion. 1922 • F.E. Pargiter, retired I.C.S. (Indian Civil Service) Calcutta, was appointed to write the wrong history of India. All the history writers of that period (like Smith, Keith etc.) were also assigned to write the wrong history of India, squeezing it into the frame of their fictitious story of Aryans coming to India. From the above account you can clearly understand how well planned was their scheme Two more attempts of Jones to destroy the Divinity of Sanskrit language and to mutilate Bhartiya history. -- His second attempt was to mutilate the Divine greatness of Sanskrit language, and his third attempt was to create a fiction about Chandragupt Maurya being the contemporary of Alexander. The statements of Jones and the fiction of Sandracottus. Sir William Jones, President of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, gave his tenth anniversary discourse on February 28, 1793. The topic was, “Asiatic history, civil and natural,” and it was published in the fourth volume of the Asiatic Researches, first printed in 1807, reprint 1979. This was his third attempt to destroy the culture and the history of Bharatvarsh by mutilating the historic dates. Jones says in his speech, “I cannot help mentioning a discovery which accident threw in my way, (I) thought my proofs must be reserved for an essay which I have destined for the fourth volume of your Transactions. To fix the situation of that Palibothra which was visited and described by Megasthenes, had always appeared a very difficult problem.” “…but this only difficulty was removed, when I found in a classical Sanscrit book, near 2000 years old, that Hiranyabahu, or golden-armed, which the Greeks changed into Erannoboas, or the river with a lovely murmur was in fact another name for the Son itself, though Megasthenes, from ignorance or inattention, has named them separately. This discovery led to another of greater moment; for Chandragupta, who, from a military adventurer, became, like Sandracottus, the sovereign of Upper Hindostan, actually fixed the seat of his empire at Patliputra, where he received ambassadors from foreign princes; and was no other than that very Sandracottus who concluded a treaty with Seleucus Nicator; so that we have solved another problem, to which we before alluded, and may in round numbers consider the twelve and three hundredth years before Christ.” (pp. xxv to xxvii) He tells in his speech that he has found a classical Sanskrit book of about 2,000 years old. The other thing he says is that Chandragupt was no other than the very Sandracottus who is described by Megasthenes to have made a treaty with Seleucus around 312 BC; and, to establish that that Chandragupt belonged to the Maurya dynasty, he mentions about some poem by Somdev which tells about the murder of Nand and his eight sons by Chandragupt in order to usurp the kingdom. In this way Jones created a fictitious connection between Chandragupt Maurya and Sandracottus. He says in his speech, “A most beautiful poem by Somadev, comprising a very long chain of instructive and agreeable stories, begins with the famed revolution at Patliputra, by the murder of King Nanda with his eight sons, and the usurpation of Chandragupta; and the same revolution is the subject of a tragedy in Sanscrit, entitled the Coronation of Chandra.” (p. xxviii) These were the basic points of his speech that was called the discovery of the identity of Chandragupt Maurya as Sandracottus. Anyone could see that these people were adamantly prone to fabricating false statements all the time just to demean our culture and to destroy the genealogy of our religious history. All the things referred to in this speech are absolutely wrong and outrageous. Finally, Somdev was just a story writer of fun and frolics. Yet he never described Chandragupt Maurya as the usurper of the kingdom and never connected him to the period of Seleucus Nicator and Alexander; and: there was never a written book in India that lasted for 2,000 years, and there is no such statement in our religious writings to show that Chandragupt Maurya was in 312 BC. The scriptures, in ancient times, were written on bhoj patra (a paper thin bark of a Himalayan native tree) which never lasted in a readable condition for more than 500 to 800 years even with extreme care. These books were written for teaching and learning purposes so they were constantly in use (not like writing and hiding them in a cave as Dead Sea scrolls). When one book was worn out, another one was rewritten by the learned scholars under the guidance of the Master. Thus, the knowledge of the scriptures uninterruptedly continued. Now we know that there was no such book that was 2,000 years old. Moreover, Jones never produced or showed that book to anyone, even to his close associates. It was simply his word of mouth to relate the fake story of a 2,000 year old book. As regards the period of King Chandragupt Maurya, the Puranas give a detailed genealogical account of all the kings of the Magadh kingdom, starting from the Mahabharat war (3139 BC) and up to the Andhra dynasty. Accordingly, the period of Chandragupt Maurya comes to the 1500’s BC. In no way could it be pushed forward to 312 BC. But those people (the British diplomats) were determined to do it that way because they wanted to squeeze the entire history of India within the time frame of their Aryan fiction story. Everyone who has read Megasthenes knows that his writings are most unreliable. But Jones found an excuse to quote the writings of Megasthenes where he describes the treaty of Seleucus with Sandracottus, the king of Magadh. One thing we must mention, that there were two different dynasties that had similar names of their first king: the Maurya dynasty and Gupt dynasty. The first king of the Maurya dynasty, called Chandragupt Maurya, was in BC 1500’s, and the first king of the Gupt dynasty, called Chandragupt Vijayaditya, was in BC 300’s. The second king of Gupt dynasty and the son of Chandragupt Vijayaditya was Samudragupt Ashokaditya. He was the ruler of Magadh between 321 and 270 BC. Chandragupt Maurya, who was the legitimate heir, was enthroned by a brahman, Chanakya. After cleverly killing Nand and his eight sons, Chanakya coronated him to the throne of Magadh. Chandragupt Maurya was not ambitious of conquering the other states of India and he did not receive foreign ambassadors because there were only trade relations of India with the foreign countries in those days (1500’s BC) not political relations. So his kingdom was much smaller as compared to the kingdom of Chandragupt Vijayaditya of Gupt dynasty. Chandragupt Vijayaditya, who was the son of Ghatotkach Gupt of Shreegupt Family, was made the commander-in-chief of the large army of Chandrashree of Andhra dynasty. After the accidental death of Chandrashree, his minor son, Prince Puloma, under the guardianship of Chandragupt, ruled for seven years. But Chandragupt finally terminated Puloma, usurped the kingdom and became the crowned king. In this way the kingship of Magadh was transferred from the Andhra dynasty to the Gupt dynasty. There were seven kings in the Gupt dynasty (called Abhir in the Bhagwatam) who ruled for 245 years between 328 to 83 BC. Chandragupt ruled from 328 to 321 BC and his son Samudragupt Ashokaditya from 321 to 270 BC. Chandragupt was an ambitious king. He invaded the neighboring states, conquered them and extended his kingdom up to Punjab. For his constant victories, he was titled vijayaditya, which means the sun of victory. Thus, taking into account the above facts, it becomes clear that Sandracottus of Megasthenes could only be Samudragupt of Gupt dynasty, historically and also according to the phonetic similarity of both of the names. (1) It was Chandragupt, father of Samudragupt, who was a military adventurer and usurper of the kingdom, not Chandragupt Maurya who was made the king of Magadh in his young age by a brahman, Chanakya. (2) Chandragupt Maurya was in the 1500’s BC, not 300’s BC. (3) In the writings of Megasthenes the word “Maurya” was never used with the name of Sandracottus, and (4) there is absolutely no mention of Chanakya (Vishnugupt) who was the most important person in Chandragupt’s life. These are such obvious evidences that no historian could deny them. But, Jones, deliberately overlooking these facts and taking an excuse of the unfounded writings of a worldly disdained gossiper, Megasthenes, fabricated the story of matching Chandragupt Maurya with Sandracottus. In fact, he was doing his job as he was told by his superiors. However, these scheming strategies show the malignancy of their promoters, the people of East India Company. Now we can look into the statements of Megasthenes. The non-credibility of the statements of Megasthenes. The original writing of Megasthenes called ‘Indica’ has been lost. Extensive quotations from the writings of later Greek writers, Strabo, Diodorus and Arrian, still survive. Strabo was of the opinion that Megasthenes simply created fables and as such no faith could be placed in his writings. Strabo’s own words: “Generally speaking the men who have written on the affairs of India were a set of liars. Deimachos is first, Megasthenes comes the next.” Diodorus also held similar opinions about him. Now see the personal situation of Megasthenes. He was a Greek, who had no understanding of Bhartiya language and culture, who knew only Greek mythology, who was appointed as an envoy to the court of Samudragupt in Patliputra (between 302 and 288 BC) so his activities were limited, who did not see much of India as he was mostly in Patliputra, and who was dependent on his translators to communicate with the people who were also ordinary folks. In this situation, how could he have learned about the Bhartiya culture and philosophy which is so extensive and deep, especially when he was dependent upon the incomplete information of his translators. The fiction of Aryan invasion, introduction of English language, and the suppression of Sanskrit language. -- The preplanned scheme of Jones to introduce the idea that Sanskrit was an outside language gave birth to the speculation of the imagined existence of some Central Asian (Aryan) race who spoke Sanskrit and who brought Sanskrit language to India when they forcefully entered the country. In this way, the fiction of the Aryan invasion was created much later, sometime in the 1800’s by the same group of people and was extensively promoted by Max Müller. Let us now probe into the matter and see how this story was formulated. It is a well known fact that India is called Aryavart. Manu Smriti (2/21, 22) describes the exact location of Aryavart which lies from the south of the Himalayas and all the way up to the Indian ocean. Its inhabitants are called the Arya. But it is not a locally spoken name. Commonly, we write Bharatvarsh for India in general and scriptural writings. The territory of India (or Bharatvarsh or Aryavart) during the Mahabharat war (3139 BC) was up to Iran. So the ancient Iranian people also used to call themselves the Aryans. People of the British regime using this information, fabricated a story that some unknown race of Central Asia who came and settled in Iran were called the Aryans and they were Sanskrit speaking people. They invaded India, established themselves permanently, and wrote the Vedas. Those who introduced this ideology never cared to produce any evidence in support of their statement because it never existed, and furthermore, fiction stories don’t need evidences as they are self-created dogmas. If someone carefully looks into the ancient history of India, he will find that there was no such thing as an Aryan invasion. Since the very beginning of human civilization, Hindus (Aryans) are the inhabitants of Bharatvarsh (India) which is called Aryavart. In the Bhartiya history there are descriptions of Shak and Hun invasions and also of Muslim invasions but never an Aryan invasion. It was simply a figment of the imagination of the British diplomats that fabricated this false story. However, after creating this story, they had to fix the period of the entry of the Aryans into India which needed a careful decision. The second millennium BC was the period of migration and the expansion of major civilizations in the Middle East area. The Sumerians were at their peak around 2000 BC, the Babylonians were expanding their empire around 1700 BC and the Assyrians established their independent kingdom around 1400 BC. The Hittite empire (Turkey) also flourished during the second millennium BC. The Hittite language used Akkadian cuneiform script of which the earliest known record of cuneiform text goes back to 1700 BC. The cursive form of the alphabetical writing of early Hebrew and Aramaic languages started taking their first primitive shape around 1000 BC, and the Greek around 900 BC. Considering these factors of social and literal developments in the Middle East, they randomly fixed the fifteenth century BC for their speculated Aryan invaders, telling that they came from the Iranian side, forcefully entered the Indus valley, settled there and spread towards the south. This is the whole story about the Aryan invasion fiction which was so extensively popularized that it appeared in the writings of every historian. Max Müller promoted this invasion story and formulated his dates of Vedic origin accordingly. In 1833, Thomas B. Macaulay (1800-1859) was appointed to the Governor General’s supreme council by the East India Company to modify the education system of India. Discouraging Sanskrit education he designed a western style of English education that was supposed to ‘produce such a group of people who would be Indian in blood and color, but English in taste, opinion and intellect.’ In October 1844, Lord Hardings, Governor General for India, passed a resolution that all government appointments in India should have a preference to the English knowing people. This condition hampered the Indian culture and greatly promoted English education in India Max Müller. A paid employee, who translated the Rigved in a demeaning style. The hidden secrets of his life. -- 1. Max Müller was a British agent, especially employed (in 1847) to write the translations of the Vedas in such a demeaning way so that the Hindus should lose faith in them. His personal letter to his wife dated December 9, 1867 reveals this fact. 2. He was highly paid for this job. According to the statistical information given on page 214 of the “English Education, 1798-1902” by John William Adamson, printed by Cambridge University Press in 1930, the revised scale of a male teacher was £90 per year and for a woman, £60 in 1853. The present salary of a teacher in London is £14,000 to £36,000 per year, which averages a minimum of at least 200 times increase in the last 146 years. Max Müller was paid £4 per sheet of his writing which comes to £800 of today (1999). This is an incredibly high price for only one sheet of writing. But it’s the general law of business, that the price of a commodity increases with its demand. The British were in such an imperative need to get someone to do this job and Max Müller was the right person, so they paid whatever Max Müller asked for. His enthusiastic letter to his mother dated April 15, 1847 reveals this fact. 3. Max Müller’s letters dated August 25, 1856 and December 16, 1868 reveal the fact that he was desperate to bring Christianity into India so that the religion of the Hindus should be doomed. His letters also reveal that: 4. He lived in poverty before he was employed by the British, (5) his duplicity in translation was praised by his superiors, and (6) in London, where he lived, there were a lot of orientalists working for the British. Letters of Max Müller. “The Life and Letters of Friedrich Max Müller.” First published in 1902 (London and N.Y.). Reprint in 1976 (USA). 1. TO HIS WIFE, OXFORD, December 9, 1867. “…I feel convinced, though I shall not live to see it, that this edition of mine and the translation of the Veda will hereafter tell to a great extent on the fate of India, and on the growth of millions of souls in that country. It is the root of their religion, and to show them what that root is, I feel sure, the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last 3,000 years.” 2. TO HIS MOTHER, 5 NEWMAN'S ROW, LINCOLN'S INN FIELDS, April 15, 1847. “I can yet hardly believe that I have at last got what I have struggled for so long… I am to hand over to the Company, ready for press, fifty sheets each year; for this I have asked £200 a year, £4 a sheet. They have been considering the matter since December, and it was only yesterday that it was officially settled.” “…In fact, I spent a delightful time, and when I reached London yesterday I found all settled, and I could say and feel, Thank God! Now I must at once send my thanks, and set to work to earn the first £100.” 3. To Chevalier Bunsen. 55 St. John Street, Oxford, August 25, 1856. “India is much riper for Christianity than Rome or Greece were at the time of St. Paul. The rotten tree has for some time had artificial supports… For the good of this struggle I should like to lay down my life, or at least to lend my hand to bring about this struggle. Dhulip Singh is much at Court, and is evidently destined to play a political part in India.” To the duke of Argyll. Oxford, December 16, 1868. “India has been conquered once, but India must be conquered again, and that second conquest should be a conquest by education. Much has been done for education of late, but if the funds were tripled and quadrupled, that would hardly be enough… A new national literature may spring up, impregnated with western ideas, yet retaining its native spirit and character… A new national literature will bring with it a new national life, and new moral vigour. As to religion, that will take care of itself. The missionaries have done far more than they themselves seem to be aware of.” “The ancient religion of India is doomed, and if Christianity does not step in, whose fault will it be?” 4. (a) From the diary of Max Müller. Paris. April 10, 1845. “I get up early, have breakfast, i.e. bread and butter, no coffee. I stay at home and work till seven, go out and have dinner, come back in an hour and stay at home and work till I go to bed. I must live most economically and avoid every expense not actually necessary. The free lodging is an immense help, for unless one lives in a perfect hole… I have not been to any theatre, except one evening, when I had to pay 2 francs for a cup of chocolate, I thought ‘Never again’.” (b) To his mother. Paris, December 23, 1845. “…instead of taking money from you, my dearest mother, I could have given you some little pleasure. But it was impossible, unless I sacrificed my whole future… I have again had to get 200 francs from Lederhose, and with the money you have just sent shall manage till January or February.” 5. On April 17, 1855, Bunsen wrote to thank Max Müller for an article on his Outlines. “You have so thoroughly adopted the English disguise that it will not be easy for any one to suspect you of having written this ‘curious article.’ It especially delights me to see how ingeniously you contrive to say what you announce you do not wish to discuss, i.e. the purport of the theology. In short, we are all of opinion that your cousin was right when she said of you in Paris to Neukomm, that you ought to be in the diplomatic service!” 6. To his mother. September 1, 1847. “My rooms in London are delightful. In the same house lives Dr. Trithen, an orientalist, whom I knew in Paris, and who was once employed in the Office for Foreign Affairs in St. Petersburg. Then there are a great many other orientalists in London, who are mostly living near me, and we form an oriental colony from all parts of the world… We have a good deal of fun at our cosmopolitan tea-evenings.” Major falsehoods as promoted by the British. -- Accordingly they created three groups of major falsehoods to deteriorate Hindu culture. They were: 1. Sages and Saints: To demean the Vedic Rishis, Sages and brahmans by calling them savages and to degrade all our great Masters and acharyas (because the early inhabitants of the British Isles were like savages, and prior to that, according to the Old Testament, the generation during the 1200’s BC was such that sometimes they slept with animals for carnal fun. So, killing and eating bulls, cows, horses and sacrificing animals was their regular routine). 2. Literature: To despise the authentic greatness of the Sanskrit language and to condemn all the scriptures including the Vedas, calling them a myth and poetical imagination (because they themselves had nothing but myths and the frantic expressions of fighting and killing of demons etc., like their ancient topmost classical book, Beowulf, written around 700 AD, describes about the mythological person Beowulf who went on an expedition and killed a savage monster and fire breathing dragons). 3. History: To reject the authentic history and to fabricatingly reconstruct a false history of India by making Chandragupt Maurya a contemporary of Alexander and making it a fixed point in their writings, and also by fixing the date of Hindu scriptures between 1200 BC and 1000 AD in order to fit in with their Aryan invasion fiction (because their own early history is the history of barbarism, and the later history is the history of lust, greed, cruelty, riots and wars with no spirituality at all). In this way throwing their social and historical dirt on the Hindu culture by mutilating it, and thus, showing themselves that they are better than us, they ruled India for about two hundred years. During the 19th century and the early 20th century almost all of the writers and the historians exactly followed the above guidelines of falsehood as established by the diplomats of the British regime. They were all either employed or appointed and influenced by them to write such books. Thus, there were quite a number of books written by the famous writers of that time with detailed statements and charts that elaborated the wrong descriptions. So, the few, who were independent writers, followed the same wrong tradition because that was the only available material for them to get the information for their writings. In this way the entire literary work of the whole world was infused with such ideas. The Encyclopaedia Britannica was fed with all the wrong information about Indian culture, religion and history as written by Jones, Max Müller and others, and the other encyclopedias blindly followed the same tradition. It should be kept in mind that the British Empire was the most powerful empire in the world in those days. So it was quite easy for them to manipulate all the literary works of that period. We are giving the samples of the writings of a few writers: some of the Asiatic Researches and Pargiter. You will see that their writings bear the motivations of the same class and kind with the same kind of fabrications of Bhartiya history Asiatic Researches group of people. -- Asiatic Society of Calcutta In 1784 the “Asiatic Society of Bengal” (Calcutta) was founded by Sir William Jones under the patronage of Warren Hastings. The Society was formed with thirty Europeans assembled on the invitation of Sir William Jones. In his inaugural speech he told the aims of the Society in the following words, “The bounds of its (Society’s) investigation will be the geographical limits of Asia, and within these limits its enquiries will be extended to whatever is performed by man or produced by nature.” All the thirty European men accepted the membership of the new Society. This included Sir Robert Chambers (1737-1803), Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and Sir John Shore (1771-1834) a high official of the government, H.H. Wilson, J.D. Peterson, H.T. Colebrooke, and F. Wilford, etc. Inspired by the establishment and success of the Asiatic Society in Calcutta, Societie Asiatique was formed in Paris in 1822. A year later in 1823, Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland was formed in London. In 1842 the American Oriental Society was founded in the USA. In 1844 the German Oriental Society was formed. Branches of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland were also formed in Bombay, Ceylon, China and Malaysia. Jones was made the President of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (Calcutta). He held the post until he died. The Society’s general meeting was held every year in the month of February. Jones used to deliver a speech on some topic. From 1784 -1793 he gave ten lectures. One of the main activities of the Asiatic Society was to collect the old manuscripts of India. There was an enormous collection of Sanskrit manuscripts with the Society. By 1849 the Society had its own museum consisting of inscriptions in stone and metal, icons, old coins and manuscripts etc. The Society’s new building was inaugurated by S. Radhakrishnan, the President of India on February 2, 1965. In 55 years a total of 20 volumes were published that contained the essays of its writers. Apart from that, since 1832 ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal’ was published every year, and the Society has also published well-edited old texts of Sanskrit and Bengali etc. The Society’s Library today contains more than 200,000 volumes related to Indology. Behind all those amazingly voluminous activities of the Asiatic Society there was a hidden aim of the English people which was expressed by Jones himself in the writings of his first essay of 1784. Accordingly, in that essay he condemned the Divinity of all the forms of Hindu God and tried to his fullest to destroy Their religious image. In his presidential speech of 1786 he tried to destroy the ancient supremacy of the Sanskrit language, and in his tenth speech of 1793 he tried to destroy the authenticity of the ancient history of the Puranas. Thus, trying to paralyze the total structure of the Hindu religion, he established certain fallacies which were made the guidelines for the activities of the Asiatic Society, its members and its associates. They wrote and worked in that specified direction while keeping an outside image that they were doing some kind of geographical and religious research. A review of the translation of Vishnu Puran by H.H. Wilson (1786-1860). First published 1832. Printed in India by Nag Publishers, Delhi, in 1980, and reprinted in 1989. In the preface of the Vishnu Puran, written by Mr. Wilson, he releases the stress of his heart by using all of his favorite words like, absurd, thieves, imposters, myth, fiction, barbarous, degraded, outcast, puerile and speculations etc., for all the Puranas, and all the scriptures. These are all the words of an English gentleman according to the standard of those days where Wilson criticizes the supreme Divinity of Krishn, disregards all the Puranas by calling them absurd, puerile and imaginative, and condemns the entire history by crushing and cutting the reigning period of all the dynasties of this manvantar (before the Mahabharat war and after the Mahabharat war) into a period of only 4,600 years which is actually 120.5331 million years. It is like cutting an extra large shirt and fitting it to a tiny doll and throwing the rest into the trash can. Now you can see what he writes. He condemns the authenticity of all the Puranas. “The facility with which any tract may be thus attached to the nonexistent original, and the advantage that has been taken of its absence to compile a variety of unauthentic fragments, have given to the Brahmanda, Skanda, and Padma, according to Wilford, the character of being the Puranas of thieves or imposters. Original copies don’t exist, thus all of them are made up and unauthentic.” “There is nothing in all this to justify the application of the name. Whether a genuine Garuda Purana exists is doubtful.” (p. lii) “The documents (the manuscripts of the Puranas) to which Wilford trusted proved to be in great part fabrications, and where genuine, were mixed up with so much loose and unauthenticated matter, and so overwhelmed with extravagance of speculation, that his citations need to be carefully and skillfully sifted, before they can be serviceably employed… legends apparently invented for the occasion renders the publication worse than useless.” (p. lxx) “The Brahm Vaivart, as it now exists… the great mass of it is taken up with tiresome descriptions of Vrindavana and Goloka, the dwellings of Krshna on earth and in heaven; with endless repetitions of prayers and invocations addressed to him; and with insipid descriptions of his person and sports, and the love of the Gopis… the stories, absurd as they are, are much compressed to make room for the original matter, still more puerile and tiresome. The Brahmavaivartta has not the slightest title to be regarded as a Purana.” (p. xl, xli) Condemns the description of brahmand as detailed in the Bhagwatam. “Mount Meru, the seven circular continents, and their surrounding oceans, to the limits of the world; all of which are mythological fictions, in which there is little reason to imagine that any topographical truths are concealed.” (p. lx) Criticizes the supreme Divinity of Krishn. “The fifth book of the Vishnu Purana is exclusively occupied with the life of Krshna. They are the creations of a puerile taste, and grovelling imagination. These chapters of the Vishnu Purana offer some difficulties as to their originality.” (p. lxviii) History: On p. lxii he describes that only 1,100 years passed between the Great War and Chandragupt (Maurya) whereas in the same book (Volume No. IV pp. 643-646) he relates a difference of 1,600 years. Moreover, he randomly fixes the date of Mahabharat war at 1400 BC, disregards all of our Divine records by calling them absurd, and crushes the entire history of all the dynasties of this manvantar (which is 120.5331 million years) into a period of about 4,600 years (1200 + 1400 BC + 1999 AD). We will now take two verses, the very first one and the very last one, of the Vishnu Puran to show the shortcomings of Wilson’s translations. The first verse starts like this: Wilson translates it, “May that Vishnu, who is the existent, imperishable Brahm, who is Ishwar, who is spirit.” The actual meaning of the word puman is the personal form of God. Thus, the meaning of the above verse is, “The eternally existing absolute brahm Who is Ishwar (the creator and maintainer of the universe), has a personal form.” Wilson changed the meaning of the word puman from ‘personal form’ to ‘spirit,’ because the Bible describes God as ‘spirit.’ A line of the last verse is: In this verse, roopam, prakritipar and atmmayam are the key words. Roopam means the form or the body of God. Prakritipar means beyond the realm and the effects of maya, the cosmic power. Atmmayam means that the form of God is the form of His own absolute Divine being. Material beings have soul and body configuration, not God. The body of the personal form of God is eternal (sanatan = eternal) and simultaneously omnipresent. Thus, the meaning of the above sentence is: “The personal form (the Divine body) of God, Hari, is eternal, is beyond maya and is the form of His own absolute Divine being.” But Wilson translates it as: “Eternal Hari, whose essence is composed of both nature and spirit.” How wrong and adverse these translations are, is an example in itself. These translations give the idea that God has no personal form and whatever God is, is only spirit and is of a mayic nature, which means fully materialistic. The God of Wilson, in the holy Bible, is said to be ‘spirit,’ and also it is said in the Revelation that God looks like ‘a jasper and sardine stone.’ Probably Wilson was trying to bring his ‘stone, and spirit’ God into the Puranas. That’s why he has translated the Vishnu Puran like this and has tried to destroy the Divine and the Gracious theme of the Vishnu Puran. F. E. Pargiter (1852-1927). -- I.C.S. (Indian Civil Service), High Court Judge, Calcutta. Retired 1906, Vice President of the Asiatic Society, London. Pargiter writes that: “Ancient Indian Historical Tradition.” The whole of the Sanskrit literature has no historical works. (Chapter 1, page 2) Aryans established themselves in India through long warfare. (1/3) Vedic literature does not give any information who compiled them… No trust can be placed in the Vedic literature as regards any matter which the brahmans found. (1/9,10) The original brahmans were not so much priests… they were wizards… (26/308) These statements of yugas and manvantar are generally worthless for chronological purposes. (15/178) Chandragupt began to reign in or about 322 BC. He was preceded by the Nine Nandas… The reign of Nandas would be 80 years. (15/179) From the Bharat battle to the Mahapadm (Nand) there were 37 Magadh kings… the total of all of their reigns (according to Puran) is (940 + 138 + 330) = 1,408 years. These figures cannot be relied upon. (These figures according to the Bhagwatam are 1,000 + 138 + 360 = 1,498 years.) The reign of Mahapadm (Nand) began in 402 BC (322 + 80) by overthrowing the last king of Shishunag dynasty. From the 7th king of Brihadrath dynasty and up to the last king of Shishunag dynasty, the reigning period was 448 years; and from the 1st to 6th king of Brihadrath dynasty (the first dynasty after Mahabharat war), the reigning period was 100 years. Thus (402 + 448 + 100) 950 BC is the date of Mahabharat battle. (15/179 to 182) “The Purana Text of the Dynasties of the Kali Age.” The Puranas were originally in prakrit (local) language. What we have now is the Sanskritized version of older prakrit shlokas. The Bhavishya Puran existed in the 3rd century AD and Matsya Puran borrowed what the Bhavishya contained before the Gupt era (320 AD). Then Vayu, Brahmand and Vishnu Puran were compiled accordingly. The brahmans fabricated the passages, and the later readers of the Puranas further fabricated the details of the text. The brahmans converted prakrit words of the Puranas into Sanskrit and substituted future tense for past tenses… and altered them to the form of a prophecy uttered by Ved Vyas. (Intro/10 to 27) Comments. Every Hindu, who has some understanding about the Bhagwatam and the Gita, knows that all of the Vedas and the Puranas were written by the descended Divine Personality Ved Vyas in Sanskrit language, and Mahabharat war had happened before kaliyug started. Also, every educated person who has consulted the yearly Kashi Hindu Vishvavidyalaya calendar, called the Panchang, which is a reputed calendar of India, knows that over 5,000 years have passed since kaliyug started because the calendar itself gives the exact year of the start of kaliyug which comes to 3102 BC. Accordingly, the Mahabharat war had happened in 3139 BC. But Pargiter brings the date of Mahabharat war down to 950 BC, kills our historic years right away by 2,189 years and again says that the Puranas were written in local (prakrit or Pali) language around the third century AD by the brahmans who further fabricated and expanded them. If one has a regard for Hindu religion, could he tolerate to hear or read such falsehoods? Yet, the writer of these lines is called a great historian. Even the topmost critic of the Vedic religion, Max Müller, has not written such a thing that the Puranas were written in local language which Mr. Pargiter fabricated from his judicial brain. These are such blunders that instantly reveal the motivation of the writer and without any further evidence they tell that he was doing it on purpose. As he was already in the service of the British government, it is obviously evident that he was working on their instructions, and as such, to mutilate the history and the Vedic culture, he was trying new ways to distort our historic dates and to abuse the Sages and the Sanskrit literature in order to please his superiors. Take the example of the Mahabharat war: 3139 BC is the date that is recognized by all of the acharyas, Jagadgurus and the Divine Masters. But, Pargiter, rejecting all those evidences, assumes a date 950 BC in his mind and, squeezing the reigning period of all the dynasties that ruled Magadh, he just terminates 2,189 years out of his free will and says that Mahabharat war happened in 950 BC. The Bhagwatam says that the four dynasties, 21 kings of Brihadrath, 5 of Pradyot, 10 of Shishunag and Mahapadm Nand Family ruled for 1,598 years (1,000 + 138 + 360 + 100). So, 3139 BC (-) 1,598 years of the total reign of four dynasties comes to 1541 BC, which was the coronation year of Chandragupt Maurya who succeeded after Mahapadm Nand. Instead of 1541 BC, Pargiter took 322 BC for Chandragupt Maurya because it was stated by Sir William Jones, and thus, terminated 1,219 years in one shot. Then he reduced 970 years more from the total reigning period of the four dynasties (1,000 + 138 + 360 + 100 = 1,598). He took only 628 years instead of 1,598 years, and thus, fabricated a round figure of (322 BC + 628) 950 years BC. It is quite amusing how he arrived at the 628 year figure. Pargiter gave 80 years to Mahapadm and his sons, the last of the four dynasties. Then he gave 448 years to the 31 kings of the first three dynasties (at the rate of 14.45 years per king), starting from Sanjit, the seventh king of the Brihadrath dynasty, and up to the last king of Shishunag dynasty. Then he gave the remaining 100 years to the first 6 kings of Brihadrath dynasty which were left out. Thus, he completed the figure of 628 years; 80 + 448 + 100 = 628. (He counted 22 kings of Brihadrath dynasty, 5 of Pradyot and 10 of Shishunag dynasty.) Showing his intellectual skills, he gives an extensive argument telling that the reigning period of the kings according to the Puranas seemed too long to him so he reduced them. Isn’t it ridiculous, that the reigning period of our historical kings is at the mercy of Pargiter which he may reduce at any time according to his whim. To be more practical, why didn’t he argue with his Queen Victoria to resign immediately from her Queenship as she was already over-reigning? (Pargiter was in the judicial services during the period of Queen Victoria who reigned for 64 years.) Thus, it is evident that the writings of F. E. Pargiter were also the exploitations of British diplomacy How did the British fabricate and destroy the historic records of India and misguide the whole world? -- The Divine knowledge of Hindu (Bhartiya) scriptures could have benefited the aspirants of God of the whole world. But, the diplomats of the British, who were ruling India in those days, clouded this opportunity by extensively launching their deliberate false propagation about India and its universal Hindu religion, and not only that, they degraded Hindu culture by all means, and thus, hampered the spiritual growth of the whole world. A fair example is the Encyclopaedia Britannica of 1854 itself in which they fed such derogatory statements about Hindu (Bhartiya) religion. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 8th Edition (1854), Volume XI. Millions of Europeans have visited India and have praised the Indian architecture. The fact is that the melody of Indian classical music is world famous, and the most renowned historical musician, Tansen, of Akbar’s court was the disciple of Swami Haridas. But see what the English people wrote in their encyclopedia, “In architecture, in the fine arts, in painting and music, the Hindus are greatly inferior to the Europeans. ‘The columns and pillars,’ says Tennant, ‘which adorn their immense pagodas, are destitute of any fixed proportions; and the edifices themselves are subjected to no rules of architecture.’ He afterwards adds that the celebrated mausoleum at Agra has little to boast of either in simplicity or elegance of design.” “The music of the Hindus is rude and inharmonious. They have numerous instruments, but those are preferred which make the most noise.” (p. 477) The Hindu science of medicine named “Ayurved” was well established 200 years ago when modern medical technology was still developing; and India has lots of excellent Sanskrit literature. But see what Britannica said, “In the medical art: charms, incantations, exorcisms and the shallowest tricks are substituted for professional skill; and other imposters, generally Brahmins, practise astrology, and cheat them out of their money by pretended prophecies.” “The literature of the Hindus has been generally rated very low by European writers, and has been represented as consisting in long desultory poems, inflated, and extravagant in their style, containing, under the idea of a history, a tissue of absurd fables.” (pp. 474, 477) The topmost English literature, Beowulf, deals with dragons and monsters, the Shakespearean drama displays the tragedies of worldly living, and Wuthering Heights etc., expose the disappointing pains of an ambitious mind; whereas all of the Sanskrit literature is, in some way, related to the teachings of God and God realization. Now see how did they degrade the universal Hindu religion and the Hindu society, and what did they write about Shivaji who was a well known religious, honest and ardent patriot of Hinduism who fought for the protection of our country. “Their religion is that of a rude people, consisting in an endless detail of troublesome ceremonies.” “The state of morals among the Hindus is such as might be expected from a religion so impure.” “The historical poem, the Mahabharat, is a tissue of extravagant fables.” (pp. 467, 470, 478) “The Hindus are by no means a moral people. According to the observation of Orme, the politics of Hindustan would afford in a century more frequent examples of sanguinary cruelty than the whole history of Europe since the reign of Charlemagne.” (p. 472) “The Hindu rulers, however ignorant in other matters, thus appear to have been familiar with all the most approved modes of plundering their subjects. Power was here a license to plunder and oppress. The rod of the oppressor was literally omnipresent; neither persons nor property were secure against its persevering and vexatious intrusions.” (p. 476) “Sevajee, the founder of this new state, was the chief of the Rajpoot princes. In his youth he resided at Poonah, on a zemindary estate obtained by his father. Here he collected around him a numerous banditti, and plundered the country.” (p. 479) Those are just a few examples. More than twelve pages of the encyclopedia are filled with such senseless lies. Anyone who has read the history of Europe knows about the royal disposals in the Tower of London, and the brutal torturing and burning alive at the stake of millions of innocent people during the Inquisitions. He also knows about the bloody conquests of King Charlemagne who once killed about 5,000 Saxons in one day as he enjoyed mass executions in order to spread Christianity. It is thus evident that the English people misguided the entire world by giving a false image of Hinduism and the universal Hindu religion. Fabrication in the Bhavishya Puran. (Bhavishya Puran, Pratisarg Parv, part 1, chapter 6) While going through the Bhavishya Puran at one place I found some discrepancy in the contents of the verses. Again, when I looked at it carefully, I discovered that some of the verses are fabricated. It was not difficult to find out as to who would have done that, because the direct beneficiary of this fabrication was Sir William Jones. Jones, in his tenth presidential speech in 1793, stressed on the period of Chandragupt Maurya to be 312 BC and mentioned that Chandragupt had a treaty with Seleucus. The derived date of Chandragupt in these fabricated verses comes to exactly 312 BC. Thus, to justify his false statement of 1793, this fabrication must have been done according to his instructions. Jones died a year later, so it may have been done after his death. It’s a general understanding that crime always leaves some clue, but here we have more than that. It appears that the learned pandit who was doing this job for the people of the Asiatic Society, was doing it under some kind of social or family pressure and against his conscience. So he did the job and created the verses with the desired dates, whatever they wanted, but he fully messed up the genealogical description of Buddh and Chandragupt. The general meaning of the verses of Chapter 6: “Sage Kashyap begot Gautam who was Hari. Gautam introduced Buddh religion and reigned for 10 years. His son Shakya Muni ruled for 20 years and then his son Shuddhodan ruled for 30 years. Shuddhodan’s son was Shakya Singh who was born at the elapse of 2,700 years of kaliyug. This king was the destroyer of Vedic religion. He ruled for 60 years and converted everyone into Buddhism. Shakya Singh’s son was Buddh Singh who ruled for 30 years. Buddh Singh’s son was Chandragupt who ruled for 60 years. His son Bindusar ruled for 60 years. Bindusar’s son was Ashok…” Comments: These verses were fabricated by the English people. It is an historical fact that Gautam Buddh did not rule any kingdom as he had renounced the world, and the second thing is that he was the son of Shuddhodan. But here Shuddhodan is shown as the grandson of Gautam. Gautam Buddh was during the time of King Bimbsar of Shishunag dynasty in 1800’s BC. But here Buddh’s time comes to 462 BC [2,700 years of kaliyug (-) 60 (10 + 20 + 30) years = 2,640, and subtracting 2,640 years from 3102 BC, which is the beginning of kaliyug, it comes to 462 BC] which was the desired figure by the English people. Another thing is, that each and every writer has accepted Chandragupt as the son of Nand. But here Chandragupt is shown as the son of Buddh Singh and the great-grandson of Shuddhodan (who was the historically known father of Gautam Buddh). The actual period of Chandragupt is 1500’s BC. But here it comes to 312 BC [2,700 + (60 + 30) = 2,790]. Deducting 2,790 years, (the elapsed period of kaliyug) from 3102 BC (the beginning of kaliyug) comes to 312 BC which was especially desired by Jones. From the above discussions it is thus clear that the obedient servants of the British regime, the people of the Asiatic Society and East India Company, fabricatingly muddled up the historic dates of important personalities in our original records. Descriptions of the kings of Magadh in the Puranas were fabricated, historic records were destroyed, false synchronization of edicts and coins were created to connect them to Ashok of Maurya dynasty, and in this way misguided the whole world. -- The fabrications. The example of the mutilation in the Bhavishya Puran is one of the most potent evidences that reveal the style of the working of the British. It evidently surmises that first they fabricated and incorporated the desired date of an historical personality in the original manuscript, whatever they wanted. Then they employed efficient scholars to write the full page or the full chapter that had the fabrication by exactly imitating the writing style of the original. In this way when the imitation was ready to the desired standard, they destroyed the original sheets and replaced them with the imitated ones. Now an original-looking manuscript was ready for circulation which was in fact the fabricated one. When the Venkateshwar Press printed the Bhavishya Puran, as a general professional policy, they must have looked into more than one manuscript to ascertain the correctness of the matter, and because that was the only kind of manuscript available, so it was printed that way. Other printers copied the same thing which was printed by the Venkateshwar Press. With this reference it becomes evident that the dynastical discrepancies in the descriptions of the rulers of Magadh, which are found in the printed volumes of the Puranas like Vishnu, Matsya, Vayu and Brahmand, may also be the work of the same people. There is also a possibility that in certain old manuscripts, while copying, the person may have made some minor mistakes in rewriting the names and the ruling period of the kings. But, in that case, there must also have been such ancient manuscripts of the same Puran that would have correct names and figures, because there were a number of copies available of all the Puranas at that time. So it was fully possible to get the correct version of the names and the ruling period of the kings of the dynasties of Magadh by comparing all the available manuscripts of those Puranas which describe the dynasties of Magadh. But it was not done, because the English people were not interested in correcting the dynastic statements; they were interested in damaging the statements so that they could find an excuse to disregard the authenticity of the descriptions of the Puranas. They had almost all the available manuscripts of the Puranas in their vast libraries and they had all the possible facilities to reconstruct and fabricate the manuscripts. Thus, under the above circumstances, it is most logical to believe that they must have destroyed these manuscripts (the entire manuscript, or only the required part of it) which had the correct statements of the kings of Magadh and kept those few which had some discrepancies; and, at the same time, they must have also added new discrepancies and fabricated the manuscripts of the Puranas according to their desired scheme. In this way, they created a master copy of each Puran with those dynastical discrepancies and, accordingly, fabricated the rest of the copies of those Puranas that were in their possession. These copies were made available for circulation. Later on these fabricated copies were published which are available nowadays. There are only eight dynasties from Brihadrath to Andhra that are described in the four Puranas with the names of the kings and their reigning period. But in the existing available copies they don’t exactly match with each other. The pronunciation of their names and their reigning period varies. They are supposed to be exactly the same, but they are not. At some places this discrepancy is enormous. For example: In the Matsya Puran there is a description of only 6 kings in Maurya dynasty whose names are mostly unmatched and are not in proper sequence and who ruled for (6 + 70 +36 + 8 + 9 + 70) 199 years. But the concluding verse at the end of this description and in the same chapter tells that the total number of Maurya kings was 10 and their reigning period was 137 years. Such drastic discrepancies can never be the copying mistakes even if the most sloppy person is doing this job. It’s a clear case of deliberate fabrication. The last thing is that, except the dynastical discrepancies, all the available Puranas are still in a perfect shape. Their Divine references, stories, teachings, technical descriptions, philosophy and the ancient history, everything is well coordinated and well established. cont. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2004 Report Share Posted February 1, 2004 When were these fabrications done? You may be interested to know when was that done? It’s easy to find out. Jones gives his last statement in 1793, and after 39 years in 1832 H.H. Wilson, the President of the Asiatic Society of London, publishes his commentary on the Vishnu Puran in which he gives a comparative view of the dynastical discrepancies of all the four Puranas. In this way he establishes a ground to criticize all the Puranas. Thus, it is clear that these fabrications to distort the dynastic dates and the pronunciation of the names of the kings of Magadh were done in the early 19th century. Thirty-nine years were good enough time for them to fabricate the Puranas. The ingenious trickeries. (1) The fabrication and the mutilation in the dynastic records of the Puranas, and its subsequent presentation by H.H. Wilson in his commentary on the Vishnu Puran, was such an ingenious work of trickery by the English people that confused every Indian writer and they couldn’t detect the fraud. The writers like Narayana Sastry and Krishnamacharar also got confused by this trickery and all the writers thought that the dynastic descriptions of the Puranas were faulty. (2) Not only that, they did something more which was worse than that. They promoted and produced some of the religious books (the Smritis and Grihya Sutras etc.) that had certain impious interpolations which showed that Hindu Sages killed and ate animals. They destroyed the true originals, kept the corrupted copies of those books for circulation and publication, and then said, “See, your own books are saying that,” and in this way all the western writers got the license to openly abuse the Hindu religion. This trickery also befooled the whole world. Such interpolations would have been done by the Chatriya Kings of olden days as they loved to eat meat. So, to justify their such habits, they employed Sanskirt scholars to add such passages of meat eating in our hand-written religious books, which later on remained as collections in the Hindu society. When the English people came to India and started collecting our handwritten scriptures they discovered those impious interpolations of meat eating in the religious books of rituals and Smritis etc. It was in their favor, because they wanted to destroy our religion and culture. So, using the influence of their ruling power, they enormously collected our books and employed hundreds of scholars to reorganize and sort out the books according to their choice. In that collection there must have been some non-interpolated books in their unblemished form. Those books would prove hazardous to their scheme, so they were later on carefully destroyed. This was the period when the members of the Asiatic Society of Bengal were actively involved in producing such literatures that degraded and abused Hindu religion, and its president Sir William Jones, the obedient servant of the British, was wholeheartedly busy finding ways of how to blemish the greatness of Hindu scriptures and condemn the Divine history. It is thus very obvious that those people, to achieve their aim of defaming Hindu religion, must have also done a lot of fabrications and would have interpolated such verses in Hindu religious books wherever they would have found it convenient to do so; and later on they must have destroyed the true and uninterpolated handwritten books. They knew that Hindus adore their Sages, Saints and acharyas. They are vegetarian and have great regard for the cow. Thus, with one blow, they tried to crumble the faith of the Hindus in their Vedic Sages. They vigorously promoted such ideas which showed that Vedic brahmans not only ate meat but they loved to eat meat as a must. In this way they imposed their personal characteristics upon Hindu Sages. The Greek gods and goddesses were pleased with animal sacrifices, Roman gods were of the same kind, and the God of OT loved to demand frequent animal sacrifices from each and every house. Thus, because such things were in their own religion, the English people, tried to abuse the Vedic yagyas and the Vedic religion in a similar way. Could any sensible person imagine the depth and the extent of the wilfulness of those people who promoted such frauds to delude the minds of the Hindus from their own religion? In those days, in the late 19th century, there were three major publishing companies in India, Shree Venkateshwar Press of Bombay (1871), Nirnaya Sagar Press of Bombay (1864) and Chaukhamba Vidyabhavan of Varanasi (1892). Most of the religious books and scriptures were originally published by them. It should be noted that it was the prime ruling period of the British in India. So it must be understood that the manuscripts that were produced by the English people were unhesitatingly printed by these publishers. Whether they did it knowingly or unknowingly, it can’t be said, but the fact was that for them only those copies were available for printing.* Thus, on one side, the English people got those fabricated religious books published and destroyed the true originals; and, on the other side, they showed to the Hindu community that it is their own religious books that say such things. In this way, their ingenious trickery befooled the Hindu society, Hindu scholars and also befooled the whole world. Now you know the truth. So, wherever such impious verses or passages are seen in our printed religious books you must know that they are the malicious gift of the rulers of India of those days. False synchronization of edicts and coins. To support their fabricated ideology of Chandragupt Maurya being in 300’s BC, they did a lot more fabrications and manipulations. There were two kings in Magadh dynasties: Ashokvardhan, the grandson of Chandragupt Maurya, who was in the 15th century BC, and Samudragupt Ashokaditya (Priyadarshin), the son of Chandragupt of Gupt dynasty, who was in 4th century BC. Samudragupt was called Samudragupt Ashokaditya, or Ashok, or Ashok-the-Great or Ashok Priyadarshin. He was called Priyadarshin after adopting the Buddhist religion. But he was generally known as Ashok. He had a huge empire that stretched up to Punjab, whereas Ashokvardhan’s kingdom was very small. It was the existing Bihar province of India. Ashok (Samudragupt Ashokaditya) established a number of monuments throughout his kingdom. Taking advantage of the similarity of their name, the English people, manipulatingly ascribed all the edicts of Samudragupt Ashokaditya to Ashokvardhan who was the grandson of Chandragupt Maurya. The period of Chandragupt Maurya was already pulled down from 1541 BC to 312 BC by Jones and it was subsequently followed by the other European writers. So, whatever ancient coins and edicts of that period (3rd to 4th century B.C.) were found, they tried to patch it up with Ashokvardhan (Maurya), which, in fact, were related to Samudragupt Ashokaditya. In general, they fabricated and created such records that showed wrong historic dates of all of the important historical figures like Panini, Buddh and Shankaracharya etc. In this way their writers constructed an enormous amount of biased literature against Indian religion and history that flooded all the libraries of India and of the world, which became the basis for all other writers to follow the same line of negative concepts about India; and thus, the glory of our scriptural Dignity was suppressed under the weight of their fabricated net of forged ideologies. from the 'encyclopedia of authentic hinduism' by H.D. Swami Prakashanand Saraswati Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 In this way their writers constructed an enormous amount of biased literature against Indian religion and history that flooded all the libraries of India and of the world, which became the basis for all other writers to follow the same line of negative concepts about India; and thus, the glory of our scriptural Dignity was suppressed under the weight of their fabricated net of forged ideologies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2004 Report Share Posted February 3, 2004 Following quotes relating to Jesus in Bhavisya purana. Jesus is identifed as "Isa" here. Yeah, but none of those quotes say he is a shaktyavesha avatAra. I wonder if the Gosvami would object to such remarks, given the lack of evidence. He ought to, if he is consistent in his standards of criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.