आर्यो के आगमन का सिद्धांत आधारहीन : फ्राली
वैदिक साहित्य का सूक्ष्म अध्ययन करने पर पता चलता है कि भारत में आर्यो के आगमन का सिद्धांत निराधार है। अक्सर यह बातें की जाती हैं कि आर्य दूसरे देश से भारत आए थे, लेकिन शोध के बाद यह बात साबित नहीं होती है। यह दावा अमेरिकी वैदिक अध्ययन संस्थान के संस्थापक डेविड फ्राली ने किया है। दिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय के संस्कृत विभाग में व्याख्यान के दौरान उन्होंने कहा कि आर्यो के आगमन का सिद्धांत खंडित दृष्टिकोण पर आधारित होने के कारण दोषपूर्ण है।
डेविड फ्राली ने कहा कि सिंधु घाटी सभ्यता और वैदिक साहित्य को जोड़कर देखने से सारी समस्या का निदान हो जाता है। आर्यो के आगमन संबंधी सभी सिद्धांतों का वैदिक आधार पर खंडन करते हुए उन्होंने कहा कि युद्ध आर्य तथा अनार्य के बीच नहीं बल्कि आर्यो के ही विभिन्न समुदायों के बीच हुए थे। उन्होंने शिव के अनार्य देवता होने का खंडन भी ऋगवेद के प्रमाणों के आधार पर किया। शिव तथा इंद्र वस्तुत: आर्य तथा अनार्य देव नहीं थे। ऋगवेद में उनकी अभिन्नता के कई प्रमाण मिलते हैं। आर्यो तथा द्रविड़ों की भिन्नता से संबंधित बातें खंडित व्याख्यान हैं।
संस्कृत विभाग के विभागाध्यक्ष प्रो. रमेश सी भारद्वाज ने बताया कि भारतीय साहित्य में कहीं भी आर्य शब्द का जाति विशेष के अर्थ में प्रयोग नहीं है। आर्य शब्द का अर्थ विशिष्ट तथा श्रेष्ठ गुण जन है। आर्यो के आक्रमण से संबंद्धित सिद्धांत औपनिवेशिक भारत के दुष्परिणामों में से एक है। ईस्ट इंडिया कंपनी द्वारा प्रायोजित विद्वानों ने बलपूर्वक आर्य शब्द के जातीय संदर्भ ढूंढ़कर द्रविड़ के सामने खड़ा किया। उत्तर-दक्षिण तथा निम्न उच्च आदि विवाद भारत की अखंडता के लिए खतरा हैं। विभाग समय-समय पर इतिहास और संस्कृत के जुड़ाव से संबंधित व्याख्यान आयोजित करेगा।
आर्यो के आगमन का सिद्धांत आधारहीन : फ्राली
In the colonial era the British used it to divide India along north-south, Aryan-Dravidian lines, an interpretation various south Indian politicians have taken up as the cornerstone for their political projection of Dravidian identity.
The Aryan invasion theory is the basis of the Marxist critique of Indian history where caste struggle takes the place of class struggle with the so-called pre-Aryan indigenous peoples turned into the oppressed masses and the invading Aryans turned into the oppressors, the corrupt ruling elite. Christian and Islamic missionaries have used the theory to denigrate the Hindu religion as a product of barbaric invaders and promote their efforts to convert Hindus. Every sort of foreign ideology has employed it to try to deny India any real indigenous civilization so that the idea of the rule of foreign governments or ideas becomes acceptable.
Even today it is not uncommon to see this theory appearng in Indian newspapers to uphold modern, generally Marxist or anti-Hindu political views. From it comes the idea that there is really no cohesive Indian identity or Hindu religion but merely a collection of the various peoples and cultures who have come to the subcontinent, generally from the outside. Therefore a reexamination of this issue is perhaps the most vital intellectual concern for India today.
The Aryan invasion theory has been used for political and religious advantage in a way that is perhaps unparalleled for any historical idea. Changing it will thereby alter the very fabric of how we interpret ourselves and our civilization East and West. It is bound to meet with resistance, not merely on rational grounds but to protect the ideologies which have used it to their benefit. Even when evidence to the contrary is presented, it is unlikely that it will be given up easily. The evidence which has come up that has disproved it has led to the reformulation of the theory along different lines, altering the aspects of it that have become questionable but not giving up its core ideas.
Yet with the weight of much new evidence today, the Aryan invasion theory no longer has any basis to stand on, however it is formulated. There is no real evidence for any Aryan invasion - whether archeological, literary or linguistic - and no scholar working in the field, even those who still accept some outside origin for the Vedic people (the so-called Aryans), accepts the theory in its classical form of the violent invasion and destruction of the Harappan cities by the incoming Aryans.
The Aryan invasion theory has been used for political and religious advantage
there is no racial evidence of any such Indo-Aryan invasion of India but only of a continuity of the same group of people who traditionally considered themselves to be Aryans.
Current archeological data do not support the existence of an Indo Aryan or European invasion into South Asia at any time in the preor protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural development from prehistoric to historic periods. The early Vedic literature describes not a human invasion into the area, but a fundamental restructuring of indigenous society. The Indo-Aryan invasion as an academic concept in 18th and 19th century Europe reflected the cultural milieu of the period. Linguistic data were used to validate the concept that in turn was used to interpret archeological and anthropological data.
Western scholars are beginning to reject the Aryan invasion or any outside origin for Hindu civilization.
वैदिक साहित्य का सूक्ष्म अध्ययन करने पर पता चलता है कि भारत में आर्यो के आगमन का सिद्धांत निराधार है। अक्सर यह बातें की जाती हैं कि आर्य दूसरे देश से भारत आए थे, लेकिन शोध के बाद यह बात साबित नहीं होती है। यह दावा अमेरिकी वैदिक अध्ययन संस्थान के संस्थापक डेविड फ्राली ने किया है। दिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय के संस्कृत विभाग में व्याख्यान के दौरान उन्होंने कहा कि आर्यो के आगमन का सिद्धांत खंडित दृष्टिकोण पर आधारित होने के कारण दोषपूर्ण है।
डेविड फ्राली ने कहा कि सिंधु घाटी सभ्यता और वैदिक साहित्य को जोड़कर देखने से सारी समस्या का निदान हो जाता है। आर्यो के आगमन संबंधी सभी सिद्धांतों का वैदिक आधार पर खंडन करते हुए उन्होंने कहा कि युद्ध आर्य तथा अनार्य के बीच नहीं बल्कि आर्यो के ही विभिन्न समुदायों के बीच हुए थे। उन्होंने शिव के अनार्य देवता होने का खंडन भी ऋगवेद के प्रमाणों के आधार पर किया। शिव तथा इंद्र वस्तुत: आर्य तथा अनार्य देव नहीं थे। ऋगवेद में उनकी अभिन्नता के कई प्रमाण मिलते हैं। आर्यो तथा द्रविड़ों की भिन्नता से संबंधित बातें खंडित व्याख्यान हैं।
संस्कृत विभाग के विभागाध्यक्ष प्रो. रमेश सी भारद्वाज ने बताया कि भारतीय साहित्य में कहीं भी आर्य शब्द का जाति विशेष के अर्थ में प्रयोग नहीं है। आर्य शब्द का अर्थ विशिष्ट तथा श्रेष्ठ गुण जन है। आर्यो के आक्रमण से संबंद्धित सिद्धांत औपनिवेशिक भारत के दुष्परिणामों में से एक है। ईस्ट इंडिया कंपनी द्वारा प्रायोजित विद्वानों ने बलपूर्वक आर्य शब्द के जातीय संदर्भ ढूंढ़कर द्रविड़ के सामने खड़ा किया। उत्तर-दक्षिण तथा निम्न उच्च आदि विवाद भारत की अखंडता के लिए खतरा हैं। विभाग समय-समय पर इतिहास और संस्कृत के जुड़ाव से संबंधित व्याख्यान आयोजित करेगा।
आर्यो के आगमन का सिद्धांत आधारहीन : फ्राली
In the colonial era the British used it to divide India along north-south, Aryan-Dravidian lines, an interpretation various south Indian politicians have taken up as the cornerstone for their political projection of Dravidian identity.
The Aryan invasion theory is the basis of the Marxist critique of Indian history where caste struggle takes the place of class struggle with the so-called pre-Aryan indigenous peoples turned into the oppressed masses and the invading Aryans turned into the oppressors, the corrupt ruling elite. Christian and Islamic missionaries have used the theory to denigrate the Hindu religion as a product of barbaric invaders and promote their efforts to convert Hindus. Every sort of foreign ideology has employed it to try to deny India any real indigenous civilization so that the idea of the rule of foreign governments or ideas becomes acceptable.
Even today it is not uncommon to see this theory appearng in Indian newspapers to uphold modern, generally Marxist or anti-Hindu political views. From it comes the idea that there is really no cohesive Indian identity or Hindu religion but merely a collection of the various peoples and cultures who have come to the subcontinent, generally from the outside. Therefore a reexamination of this issue is perhaps the most vital intellectual concern for India today.
The Aryan invasion theory has been used for political and religious advantage in a way that is perhaps unparalleled for any historical idea. Changing it will thereby alter the very fabric of how we interpret ourselves and our civilization East and West. It is bound to meet with resistance, not merely on rational grounds but to protect the ideologies which have used it to their benefit. Even when evidence to the contrary is presented, it is unlikely that it will be given up easily. The evidence which has come up that has disproved it has led to the reformulation of the theory along different lines, altering the aspects of it that have become questionable but not giving up its core ideas.
Yet with the weight of much new evidence today, the Aryan invasion theory no longer has any basis to stand on, however it is formulated. There is no real evidence for any Aryan invasion - whether archeological, literary or linguistic - and no scholar working in the field, even those who still accept some outside origin for the Vedic people (the so-called Aryans), accepts the theory in its classical form of the violent invasion and destruction of the Harappan cities by the incoming Aryans.
The Aryan invasion theory has been used for political and religious advantage
there is no racial evidence of any such Indo-Aryan invasion of India but only of a continuity of the same group of people who traditionally considered themselves to be Aryans.
Current archeological data do not support the existence of an Indo Aryan or European invasion into South Asia at any time in the preor protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural development from prehistoric to historic periods. The early Vedic literature describes not a human invasion into the area, but a fundamental restructuring of indigenous society. The Indo-Aryan invasion as an academic concept in 18th and 19th century Europe reflected the cultural milieu of the period. Linguistic data were used to validate the concept that in turn was used to interpret archeological and anthropological data.
Western scholars are beginning to reject the Aryan invasion or any outside origin for Hindu civilization.
No comments:
Post a Comment