RIGVEDA MANUFACTURED AFTER BUDDHISM

RIGVEDA MANUFACTURED AFTER BUDDHISM 

According to the myth the insertion of the “Aryan culture” and the “Vedic period” in the historial sequence anterior to Buddhism is a part of the Vaidik racist designs. The Vaidiks who occupied the apex of the social pyramid could not tolerate their historical inferiority because they knew that if the people came to know that the Brahminical culture came after Buddhism, their Vedas, gods and goddesses would become a bundle of lies.
Even Ayurveda, the science of medicine, was not written by the Aryans, because medical profession was a dirty profession to the Vaidiks. It was a profession of the Sudras.

Charak (1st century AD) who wrote the Charak Samhita was the father of Ayurveda. (Biology NCERT Class XI. p. 160, 1997 Education).

Charak was a Buddhist and was the physician of the Buddhist emperor Kanishka.

The Hindu Nazis usually boast that their Rigveda is the oldest literature in the whole world. They say it is a treasure house of morality, knowledge and science. But the Rigveda itself is the best evidence to contradict all that is claimed above.

(1) It contains references to Prakrit language:
In ancient time the Prakrit language was associated with Buddhism. (MBD History Class XI, P. A-15, 1997).

(2) It contains the Vaidik prayer to their god Indra to kill Dasas and destroy their property:

According to Dr.Ambedkar, Dasas and Nagas were the one and same people. (Untouchables, p, 66, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar).

(3) In the Rigveda, we find the names of some Rishis like Bharadwaj, Vasistha, Bhrigu, Viswamitra etc. (History Sr.Sec.Courses, Open School Class XI, Neeraj Publication p, 29).

According to the Buddhist literature Bharadwaj, Bhrigu and Vasistha were contemporary to Buddha. (Buddha and His Dhamma, Dr.Ambedkar).

(4) The Hindu Nazis boast that their Vedas are the treasure house of all knowledge and sciences. Dr.Ambedkar during a debate on the Draft Indian Constitution asked the Brahmin intellectuals to produce any mantra which could produce gold if their Vedas are treasure houses of sciences. But none came forward. (Twenty years with Ambedkar, Hindi, Sohanlal Shastri).

NO MORALITY IN RIGVEDA

The above evidences from the Vedas prove that:

(1) Dasas (Nagas) were the rulers of this country when the Rigveda was written.

(2) Prakrit was the language of the people which was associated with Buddhism. That
means Prakrit was Buddhist.

(3) Vedic rishis like Bharadwaj, Bhrigu etc. were the contemporaries of Buddha. Thus the Rigveda could not be the oldest document of the world.

(4) The Rigveda is written in Sanskrit. But Prakrit is the mother of Sanskrit.

From this we can safely conclude that:

(i) There was no “Hindu civilization” before Buddhism.

(ii) There was nothing like “Vedic period” before Buddhism because Sanskrit developed after Buddhism.
(iii) The Vedas were manufacatured after the Buddhist period.

What type of knowledge the Rigveda contains is proved by the following reference. In the Rigveda there is a reference to Yama and Yami, the brother and sister.

“…According to this episode Yami, the sister, invites her brother, Yama, to cohabit with her and becomes angry when he refuses to do so.” (W & S Vol. III, p. 165).

Babasaheb devotes several pages in Vol.3 to discuss the sexual immorality, drinking bouts and gambling habits of ancient Aryans.

To justify their claims that the Vedas are the oldest document they create confusion by
saying that the Vedas were not in the written form during the ancient times. They have been passed on from generation to generation in the form of shruties (oral scriptures). This explanation of Vaidiks is again false:-

(i) The shruties of the Harappan culture are anterior to Hinduism. When that is the fact why are they not called the Vedas?

(ii) When there was no Sanskrit before Buddhism which language did they pass on from generation to generation? Without Sanskrit their claim does not prove correct.

HINDU HISTORY IS ONLY 2055 YEARS OLD

Even the name of the famous Vaidik leader, Kautilya, who wrote the book, Arthashastra, in
Sanskrit is not mentioned in the writings of Magasthanese, a Greek Ambassador in the court of Chandra Gupta Maurya. This clearly proves that up to Magasthnese, the Brahminical Social Order (BSO) was not formed. But we find the BSO in the Purush Sukta of the Rigveda. That is why we do not find any archeological evidence of Aryans anterior to Buddhism. The word “Aryan” is a distorted version of the word “Iranian”.

The history of all religions start from their respective supermen. Buddhist Era, Christian Era, and Sikh Era are all associated with the Buddha, Christ, Prophet Mohammed and Guru Nanak respectively. Similarly, the “Hindu Era” begins from Vikrami Samvat and also associated with Shaka Samvat which are 2055 and 1922 years old respectively. The Hindus say that the Vikram Era starts from their Hindu King Chandra Gupta Vikramaditya. In ancient history, Chandra Gupta-II of Gupta dynasty (380-413 AD) is named Chandra Gupta Vikramaditya. So historiacally Shaka Era is anterior to Vikram Era.
We do not want to criticise the Hindu views and accept Vikram Era and Shaka Era as 2055 and 1922 years old respectively.

The question is why the Hindus have two Eras? This needs research and investigation. I think these Eras are not only important but are very significant because they are related to the sabotage of the Buddhist history.

(i) The Shaka Era started from 78 AD related with Kanishka, a Buddhist emperor of the Kushan dynasty. During the Kanishka period, the Hindu Nazis succeeded in their evil designs. To kill the Spirit of Buddhism they divided it on linguistic and racial lines into Hinyan and Mahayan. The Mahayanists were the Brahmins and followers of Sanskrit. It was a fight between Maurya and the Brahmins, Brahminism and Buddhism and finally between Sanskrit and Pali. Therefore, the Shaka Era is associated with the killing of
Buddhist spirit. The Mahayanists were infidels. But in the Spirit of Buddhism there is no place for infidels.

(2) The Vikram Era is associated with Chandra Gupta Vikramaditya, a king of the Gupta dynasty. This was the “Golden Period of Hinduism.” It is called so because Sanskrit was made the state language in place of Pali, the language of the Buddhists. So, the Vikram Era is associated with the extermination of Pali.

Thus the process of Brahminisation which began with the Shaka Era was completed during the Vikram Era.

That means the Hindu history is nothing but the manipulation and patch up from other cultures.

RELATIONSHIP OF GUPTAS AND SHAKAS WITH HINDUS

The riddle which is to be solved yet is:

(i) The Shaka Era starts from Kanishka, a Buddhist emperor of Kushan dynasty. In reality it should be called Kushan Era. Why was it called Shaka Era rather than Kushan Era?

(ii) Why Vikram Era which was associated with Chandra Gupta Vikramaditya (Chandra Gupta-II) was made anterior to Shaka Era?

(iii) What is the relationship of the Hindus with the Shakas and Chandra Gupta Vikramaditya?
The reply to question no. (i) and (ii) is very simple. It appears to be racial. The Shaka Era is related to the killing of the Spirit of Buddhism by dividing it into Mahayan and Hinyan. The Vikram Era is related to extermination of Pali, the language of the Buddhists.

Kanishka was associated with Budhism while Chandra Gupta Vikramaditya was associated with Hinduism (Brahminism). So, to make Buddhism inferior to Hinduism was probably the reason for making the Vikram Era anterior to Shaka Era. Both are called Hindu Eras. Why did they make the Kushan Era? The association of Shaka with Vikramaditya must be examined.

The two are closely related with each other is proved by the following facts:-

(a) No archaeological evidence of Aryans is found anterior to Buddhism.

(b) The first archaeological evidence of Sanskrit, the language of the Brahmins, (Hinduism) called Rudra Danam inscription belongs to the S L haka period.

(c) Mathura, Nasik and Ujjain were the capital of Shaka rulers. They were also the important religious places of the Hindus.

(d) Four branches of Shakas came to India. The number of the Vedas are also four.

(e) That the Shakas and the Guptas were both votaries of Sanskrit is evident from archaeological evidences of Sanskrit.


Follow Us on :Facebook
Follow us on :Instagram

Categories:1.Buddhism
2.Dr. AMBEDKAR