We do not find the word “Hindu” in any ancient Hindu (Aryan) literature. Even then the Hindu Nazis propagate the falsehood that 85% of the Indians are the Hindus and India is a Hindu nation.

When a lie is repeated 99 times, it becomes truth at the 100th time. But the history of India says the Hindus have no history. They have only manipulated history to suit their sinister designs.

Whenever the question is asked who are the Hindus, the familiar reply is the Hindus are none other than the Aryans. If asked what is the evidence to claim that they are Aryans, then they will produce their Rigveda to prove that they are Aryans.

FALSE CLAIM ON RIGVEDA

But what is the evidence to prove that the Rigveda is anterior to Buddhism? Do they have any archaeological pieces of evidence of Aryans? Do they have any literary evidence that Sanskrit is anterior to Buddhism? Do they have any writings of any foreigners anterior to Buddhism? The answer to these questions is in the negative. Then what is the basis for calling the Rigveda the oldest document in the world?

A noted Hindu historian, Dr. Majumdar, says:

“Seventy-five per cent culture (contents) of the Hindu culture belongs to Dravidian culture.” (Hindu samaj Ke Pathbrastak Tulsi Das.P.205)

The Brahminical Social Order (BSO) comprises the Brahmins, the Kshatriyas, the Vaishyas and the Sudras. This is Chaturvarna. According to Brahminical literature, all the Kshatriyas were exterminated by the Brahmin leader, Parasuram. The Brahmin sacred text, the Gita, says the Vaishyas, Sudras and women belong to papyoni (Gita 9/32). That means the Vaishyas, Sudras and women (including Brahmin women) also automatically become non-Hindus.

Even the famous Muslim historian of the 11th century AD Alberuni says that up to the Muslim Period, the Vaishyas had no right of hearing and reciting the Vedas. If charges were proved against them they were liable to capital punishment as the Sudras were, He writes:

The Brahmins teach the Vedas to the Kshatriyas. The latter learn it but are not allowed to teach it, even to the Brahmins. The Vaishyas and Sudras are allowed to hear it, much less to pronounce and recite it. If such a thing can be proved against one of them, the Brahmin may drag him before the magistrate and get him punished by having his tongue cut off. (History of Sikhs, Vol.1.p 22, Hari Ram Gupta).

VAIDIKS AS MYTH-MAKERS

Keeping in view the above evidence we can safely conclude that only the Brahmins are Hindus since they are the descendants of Brahma and Brahma himself is an illusion. Therefore, Brahmin is a person who creates an illusion.

The Vaidik Brahmins create a myth in the society to appear as a majority in the name of Hinduism. If we go through the Brahminical literature we find nothing except myths and
illusions all through.

The Hindus, therefore, have no history. The Muslim historian Alberuni rightly comments:

Hindu historians do not care about the historical sequence of incidents. They are careless in producing date-wise chronological order of historical evidence. Whenever they are forced to produce evidences they become confused and do not know what to say. Then they start telling the stories (MBD History BA-II, KU,p. 39.)

The question is how the propaganda gained currency without any archaeological and literary evidence that the Rigveda and the Hindu culture are anterior to Buddhism. Do they have any carbon dating of the Rigveda? The Rigveda is written in Sanskrit. Do they have any archaeological and literary evidence that Sanskrit is anterior to Buddhism?

PRAKRIT, MOTHER OF SANSKRIT

In spite of having no archaeological and literary evidence, Vaidik historians inserted “Aryan civilization” and “Vedic period” in historical sequence anterior to Buddhism while the truth is that there is nothing like Aryan civilisation and Vedic period in Indian history anterior to Buddhism. Prakrit was the language of the indigenous people. In ancient times it was associated with Buddhism.

Sanskrit is the language of the Vaidiks. It was synthesized from Prakrit by Panini who was the contemporary of Patanjali. Patanjali was the Guru of Pushya Mitra Sung who killed the Buddhist (Mayuran) emperor in 185 BC in broad day-light while taking the salute of a parade.

The Indus Valley Civilisation is the oldest civilization of the indigenous people (Dravidians). The famous English historian, Cunningham, says that the Brahmi inscriptions, in which the great Buddhist emperor, Ashoka, propagated his message to the people, were derived from the language of the Harappan people. So, the Buddhist language is associated with the Harappan culture.

RIGVEDA MANUFACTURED AFTER BUDDHISM

According to the myth, the insertion of the “Aryan culture” and the “Vedic period” in the historical 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 the 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 ones and the 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 evidence from the Vedas proves that:

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

(2) Prakrit was the language of the people who 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 manufactured 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 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 archaeological evidence of Aryans anterior to Buddhism. The word “Aryan” is a distorted version of the word “Iranian”.

The history of all religions starts 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 historically 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 to 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 Mahayana. 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 the 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 Mahayana and Hinayana. The Vikram Era is related to the extermination of Pali, the language of the Buddhists.

Kanishka was associated with Buddhism 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 to 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 Shaka 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 Vedas is also four.

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

CONCLUSION

Keeping in view the above historical pieces of evidence, it is clearly proved that Hindu history is just 2055 years old. It was manipulated to kill the “Spirit of Buddhism,” to exterminate Pali, and to destroy the cultural and religious identity of Buddhism.