Ancient Arya Culture

I believe Arya culture is a lot more ancient than Westernized Indology suggests; although how old I do not know. Arya is a culture, civilization, philosophy and faith rather than ethnicity. It was geographically spread from Iran, to the southern former Soviet Republics, Afghanistan, Tibet, Thailand, Vietnam, Loas, Cambodia, Malaysia, Sumatra, Java, Bali, Sri Lanka; although I don’t know what geography it was “founded” from so to speak. Its offshoots are the East Europeans, Germanic tribes, Romans, Greeks. Maybe they are more than offshoots and part of the original civilization.

Given how little modern science and archaeology knows; perhaps Western Indology Oriental dating needs to be reevaluated. Only an almost infinitely small fraction of ancient artifacts have survived father time; including 385,000 year old tools found in South Asia recently. Here are other articles about this.

Recent very fine comments at Brown Pundits have discussed the relationship between Buddhism and Sanathana Dharma. I see the Buddhist family of threads as part of the broader Sanathana Dharma family of families of threads. The great enlightened master Shakyamuni Gautama Buddha revived and enriched far more ancient masters and teachings. Buddha said he was Rama and Kapila reborn. Kapila is the founder of Samkhya, one of the ten schools of Sanathana Dharma:

There are significant similarities between Buddhism, Nagarjuna (founder of Madhyamaka Buddhism–a subset of Mahayana Buddhism), and Alatasanti Prakarana, or the fourth chapter of Gaudapada’s  Māṇḍukya KārikāGaudapada is the guru of Govinda, who is the Guru of Shankaracharya. Multiple sourcing from many eastern calendars and records place Shankaracharya’s date of birth at 509 BC, including but not limited to the 5 Shankaracharya maths in India. Since this date comes from so many literary and historical sources from so many places around South Asia, this date might be correct. Which would date the Alatasanti Prakarana significantly before modern historians date Shakyamuni Gautama Buddha. Which is additional evidence that Buddha may have lived before 1000 BC. Some say Buddha lived 1800 BC. If Buddha was a contemporary of Zarathustra, there is some data consistent with Zarathustra being born 1200 BC to 1500 BC.

I suspect but don’t have evidence that Buddha built upon and enriched great existing streams inside Sanathana Dharma. Buddha said he was a reincarnation of Rama and Kapila, the father of Samkhya Darshana and a figure in Jainism.  [The Dalai Lama frequently praises Samkhya philosophy.] Some elements of Buddhism do not have similarities with known Samkhya texts. Could it be that Buddhism has embedded within it some ancient now lost strains of Samkhya philosophy? I do not know, but since almost all Samkhya texts have been lost, it is hard to say. This does not take anything away from Buddha and Buddhism. There is a reason that almost all of Buddha’s disciples were Hindu Brahmins (along with a few Kshatriya Hindus) and virtually all South Asian Buddhists regarded themselves as Hindu Buddhists as recently as the 1941 British Indian census. There is a reason that many Hindu temples and individual Hindu Puja rooms worship Buddha; and why most Hindus so venerate Buddha.

How are Nirvana or Shunya different from Brahman? [Article has been edited to suggest Buddha might have been born before 1000 BC.]

Published by

AnAn

http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/2a60f8ed9535fd0dca77aa3a6fd94018?s=96&d=mm&r=g

0 0 votes
Article Rating
17 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Min mini pucci
Min mini pucci
6 years ago

“I believe Arya culture is a lot more ancient than Westernized Indology suggests; although how old I do not know.”
According to linguists, the Indo-Iranian split that gave rise to Avestan and Sanskrit happened around 2000 B.C. So can’t be more ancient than the 2nd millennium B.C.
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~rnoyer/courses/51/IndoIranian.pdf

Jaydeepsinh Rathod
Jaydeepsinh Rathod
6 years ago

Anan,

The fundamental problem for the Indologists in accepting the great antiquity claimed by ancient Indian tradition, was the fact that 18th century and most of the 19th century Europe was under the Church doctrine that earth was only 6000 years old.

This led to William Jones identifying Sandrocottus with Chandragupta Maurya. This is the fundamental issue that has messed up ancient Indian history ever since. The fact is Sandrocottus is most securely identified with Chandragupta I of the Guptas. When one understands this everything starts falling into place, like why Adi Sankara is dated to 509 BC and why Buddha is dated to much earlier period in the Chinese and Tibetan texts and also why Mahabharata is 3102 BC

Jaydeepsinh Rathod
Jaydeepsinh Rathod
6 years ago

According to Chinese texts Buddhism came to China about a 1000 years after the Paranirvana of Buddha. Buddhism is commonly believed to have come to China after the western regions became known to the Chinese in the latter half of the 2nd century BC. This and other Chinese traditions put the date of Buddha well before 1000 BC.

The Tibetan tradition has several dates for Buddha spanning several centuries, the earliest of which is around 2400 BC.

According to the Puranic tradition, Mahapadma Nanda came to power 1500 years after the birth of Parikshit which was in 3138 BC.

Therefore The Nanda empire arose in 1638 BC and Maurya a 100 years later in 1538 BC. Buddha’s birth according to this comes around 1800 BC

Jaydeepsinh Rathod
Jaydeepsinh Rathod
6 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

The Puranas only talk of the historical Buddha. The concept of multiple Buddhas has come into prominence much later after the demise of Gautama Buddha.

The historical Buddha most likely lived before 1000 BC. There are 3 reasons for my believing so :-

1. The dating of ancient India is based on the sheet anchor of Chandragupta Maurya’s date which is based on assuming that Sandrocottus of Megasthenes’ account was none other than the Maurya king. However, if one looks into this subject in detail, it becomes clear that the Greek accounts tally much more with what we know of the Gupta period than the Maurya period. If Guptas date to the 4th century BC, quite naturally the Mauryas dating will be pushed back several centuries earlier and with it the dating of Gautama Buddha even further.

2. The traditional date of Adi Shankara is 509 BC. But it is also known that Shankara was quite influential in the demise of Buddhism. Adi Shankara clearly lived after Asanka & Vasubandhu and their predecessor Nagarjuna. Mahayana Buddhism is said to start with Nagarjuna. Now Nagarjuna was clearly several centuries later to Buddha. This also puts the date of Buddha before 1000 BC.

3. The unwavering tradition that Kaliyuga started in 3102 BC. The Puranas date the dynasties of the Kaliyuga from the date of the Mahabharata War. Therefore, if we take the no of years given in the Puranas from the date of 3138 BC, clearly the date of Buddha becomes much older.

——-

But Buddha clearly was posterior to Krsna. Quite simply because he lived more than a thousand years after the Mahabharata War which was the era when Krsna lived,

I had started a thread on this subject a few years ago on the historum forum.

http://historum.com/history/42338-great-injustice-ancient-indian-history.html

You will have to register on the forum before you can read the thread.

Ek Chakkar
Ek Chakkar
6 years ago

“It was geographically spread from Iran…”
– Please provide peer-reviewed scholarship for this claim.

I am very sceptical of claims that even remotely imply an Aryan migration (or the now-defeated invasion) theory. First, opponents of AIT were asked to believe concocted foreign origins of Subcontinental cultures. Now, claims like yours appear to suggest that Subcontinental cultures based on Sanskrit have Iranian origins. Yours is a grand claim and requires grand evidence. Please do not cite the name “Iran” as evidence.

girmit
girmit
5 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

“Rajiv Malhotra argues that Bengal might be close to lost and was doing worse than Pakistan. Rajiv might be right. What does everyone think?”

I find that to be a leading question. It implies that Pakistan is in some sort of abyss, whereas I’ve found it to be doing better than many parts of India in certain measures of human dignity. We still have lots to learn from each other. WRT to Bengal, it would appear to be holding its own and outperforming the other states in its neighbourhood according to major HDI indices. If we are speaking about the social life of Bengal and whether they are still imbued with the culture of classical indian civilisation, not only would I say that they are performing quite well, but that the rest of us have a lot of catching up to do. I realize many people want to draw a causality between their experiments with elected communist government and leftist revolutionary sympathies and some sort of social decay, but the irony is that you will struggle to find another people who are as deeply engaged with our literary and philosophical heritage, from antiquity to modern. Furthermore, as someone from the south, I rarely come across people from other states that take an interest in learning local cultural traditions and language the way bengalis do, when there is no livelihood/employment incentive. They do it from a pure love of culture, even as they retain a good (inordinate!)measure of pride in their own.
I’d much rather discuss the Indian epics or Devi Mahatmya with someone with the critical distance to search for meaning in them, to experience them with the openness that people in antiquity would have (which is my guess), rather than with someone for whom these texts are just identity markers they must defend as an act of obedience to the larger group. In my experience, people who don’t enjoy literature tend fall into the latter category of using these classical texts as instruments to achieve temporal advantages.
I worry much more about our self-regarded defenders of hinduism in Gujarat, Rajasthan and Haryana. A greater threat to hindu civilisation is the dissipation of spiritual vigour that comes with the worship of money and power within the religious discourse. What we are increasingly seeing is a kind of hindu analog to the prosperity gospel in evangelical christianity.

Singh
Singh
5 years ago
Reply to  girmit

Minor Hindu girls are abducted & held in muslim majority areas of kolkota।।

Wth progress are you talking about, unless you mean Islamic demographic progress?

See @squintneon or

trackback

[…] Ancient Arya Culture […]

Brown Pundits