B. Walker's Hindu World

[Prasad Velusamy]

>As I recall, V. Raghavan wrote a long review or review article on B.
>Walker's _Hindu World_, pointing out that the author/compiler did not have
>ability to read primary sources andthat his purpose was more to malign
>Hinduism that to enlighten about it. -- aklujkar

>What I was trying to say was that scholars like Walker have presumably not
>read mnay or any of the traditional commentaries -- given that he is
>writing about Hinduism one suspects that while he may read Sanskrit etc he
>probably does not read Tibetan.

Walker may not read any Indian or Asian language, his writing
about Tamil is bad. About Sanskrit, see
http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/cgi-shl/WA.EXE?A2=ind9807&L=indology&P=R657
Was he a missionary? Is his wife Barbara Walker?
He seems to rely on dated Indological output.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin Walker: The Hindu World: An Encyclopedic
Survey of Hinduism, 1968.

FORGERIES: The fact that the Hindu Scriptures bear evidence of
considerable tampering need come as no surprise to anyone acquainted
with the history of priestcraft the world over. The scientific
criticism of ancient writings has brought to light many forgeries
among the works of the Church Fathers, to take Christian literature,
and the texts of the other great faiths are not exempt from this
imputation.

That this mass of Sanskrit texts that had been subjected to
interpolations, tendentious redactions or plain fabrication, should
have escaped detection before European scholarship directed its
attention to them, was largely due to the reverence in which they
were held, and the danger that attended any attempt to undermine
their authority. More than expert knowledge is required to detect
a forgery. What is more important is the secular approach, which
implies a refusal to regard the sacred text with the eye of faith,
and therefore to see in it a document of human origin subject to
the limitations of human scribes, copyists, commentators and zealots.
The onus of responsibility for the greater part of the tampering can
be laid at the door of the brahmin priesthood who in order to support
their claims to superiority and preserve their privileges are known
to have suppressed facts, changed names, and confused places and
periods; who have interlarded fact with fiction in accordance with
their own religious ends. It is to the period known as the
Brahminical Revival  [1-400 AD] that we can trace most of the
counterfeiting of scriptures that has characterized the Period of
Priests throughout recorded history. To this period belong the
accumulations of spurious data and the creation of fictitious
dynastic pedigrees, that have so inextricably interwoven fact
with fancy in Indian historical annals. In short, it was a time for
the wholesale re-casting of Indian life and culture into the mould
shaped by the brahmins.

The whole vast heritage of Vedic and native material was exploited to
buttress up the brahminical edifice. To the Revival is due the
sanskritization of Indian thought and the brahmanization of Indian
social codes by the scribes.

In the words of Dharma Theerta,
`There is hardly any Sanskrit composition which has not been tampered
with,altered or added to by them. There is no famous rishi or teacher
in whose name they have not concocted scriptures. There is no sacred
book into which fiction and legend and imaginary history, have not
been interpolated.'

Among the scores of forgeries that have been brought to light a few
of a particular heinous character deserve to be mentioned. Thus,
there is evidence to show that the famous "Purusha-sukta" of the
Rig-Veda, on which the whole issue of Hindu caste is based and
from which the lucubrations of the commentators on caste separation
commence, is of very questionable authenticity.

It is suspected that in spite of their reverence for the sacred
hymns, the priestly scribes like their counterparts of other faiths,
were not above a little textual manipulation if it served to enhance
their prestige. In all likelihood the Purusha-sukta and certain other
verses were interpolated into the text long after the canon of the
Rig-Veda was finally closed.
According to Colebrooke, `That remarkable hymn, is in language, meter
and style, very different from the rest of the prayers with which it
is associated. It has a decidedly more modern tone.'
To this Max Muller adds, ` There is little doubt that it is modern
both in its character and its diction.'

It is remarkable that the term "sudra" (servile caste) occurs only
once in the Rig-Veda and that is in the section of the Purusha-sukta.

Tinkering with the texts of the Mahabharata is also evident from
scientific scrutiny. In this case the conversion of the original
heroic adventures into a sort of brahminical bible was not always
cleverly done, for in the pandit redactions the religious and the
priestly interest overshadows the heroic, and the legends related
are often distorted to suit the brahminical viewpoint.

`Everything', says Sidhanta, ` is viewed from the angle of the
priest, and instead of a straightforward narrative, we have didactic
digression on the sanctity of the priestly class.' As Pargiter points
out, ` The brahminical versions are a farrago of absurdities and
impossibilities, utterly distorting all the incidents.'

The Ramayana similarly betrays signs of priestly editing. It is
generally agreed that the pronounced brahminical tone did not
characterize the original work, but was given to it at the time of
the Revival, when much additional material was also introduced.

It should be borne in mind that Sanskrit was not originally the
medium for profane literature, for which the vernacular Prakrits were
generally employed. The Epics were long current in the Prakrits
before they were rendered into Sanskrit. We have the opinion quoted
by Keith that the Epics were first written in Sanskrit in the early
years before and after the beginning of the Christian era, and that
they were in fact translations and elaborations from Prakrit
originals. And not only the Epics, but Sanskrit secular poetry,
lyric poetry, the beast fable and the fairy tale are all
indebted to translations from Prakrit originals. The
Katha-Sarit-Sagar, a Sanskrit collection of stories, is believed
to have been based on an earlier work composed in Prakrit.

The period of Brahminical revival was the age that fixed the
criterion for every subsequent interpretation of Hindu life and
culture. It was the time when the ancient Indian traditions as they
existed in the regional languages were taken over, adapted to the
priestly bias and hammered into the new mould of Sanskrit. Into the
sacred tongue the earlier tomes wer transcribed for the deification
of brahmins and the damnation of sudras. Under heavy pressure of
brahmin orthodoxy the indigenous writings were first sanskritized
and then the whole of Sanskrit literature brahminized.
It was in many ways a calamitous substitute. Local nomenclature was
altered to fit the Sanskrit alphabet; native sentiments were put
through the mill of Sanskrit syntax, and a great deal of indigenous
material irretrievably lost. Interpretations of pre-Sanskrit and
what might be called `un-Sanskrit' life were further distorted by
wilful tendentiousness that shaped into orthodox form the mythology,
history and even the geography of ancient India. Its corruptions
crept into the regional languages by its insistence on its own
sanctity and stilted rules. And in most cases it debased what it
influenced. The noble early poetry of Tamil, characterized by
simplicity and realism, never recovered its freshness after contact
with Sanskrit, and Tamil literature was thereafter
subjected to the artificialities of the northern tongue. Practically
every vernacular literature has suffered in like manner as long as it
lay under the influence of Sanskrit.

An analysis of epigraphic inscriptions prior to the Gupta age reveals
that more than ninety-five percent are written in Prakrit and concern
non-brahmin- ical sects, mainly Jain and Buddhist, and only five
percent in Sanskrit concern brahminism. The position is almost
entirely reversed in the favor of Sanskrit and brahminism in the
post-Gupta age. The power of the priesthood must have been
tremendous, almost tyrannical, to have achieved this phenomenal
reversal. The number and nature of spurious inscriptions after the
seventh century AD confirm the continuance of this tendency.

The full story of forged texts in Hinduism has yet to be written. It
would make a decided contribution to the lengthy chronicle of
misplaced piety the world over. The Purusha-sukta is only the most
conspicuous of a long list of fictitious texts purporting to be
genuine. Max Muller has shown how the brahmins `mangled,
mistranslated and misapplied' the original word `agre' [dwelling] to
read `agneh' [fire] in order to provide Rig-Vedic support for
the burning of widows. As already stated, the Epics were drastically
overhauled, while the corruption of the Puranas and Dharma-sastras
continued till after the Muhammadan conquest. Dr. Ambedkar refers
to the well-known case in the time of the East India Company,
where an entire smriti was concocted to support a particular
lawsuit. And K.M. Pannikar refers to the fabrication of a Sankara
text by the brahmins of Malabar to sanction the inhuman custom of
unapproachability.

Books:
Ambedkar,B.R., Who were the Shudras ? , Bombay, 1946.
Bhandarkar, D.R., Some Aspects of Ancient Indian Culture,
Madras, 1940.
Keith, A.B., A History of Sanskrit Literature, Oxford 1928.
Panikkar, K.M., Hinduism & the Modern World, Allahabad, 1938.
Pargiter, F.E., Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, 1922.
Theertha, Swami Dharma, The Menace of Hindu Imperialism, 2nd Ed.,
Lahore,1946

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.