Right from our first school to our last university class, we are taught that in ancient times Vedic-ism had spread in India numerous centuries before the birth of Buddha and that the Vedic saints who were called Rishi used to do yagas i.e. they would ignite a fire, throw butter and nuts into it and chant hymns; and that all the Indians had formed a beeline for those yagas; and that with the passage of time, the yagas had turned sacrificial i.e. cattle were being sacrificed in the yagas; and that the killing of the cattle in the yagas went so enormous that Buddha had to stand up against this bloody custom and thus sprouted Buddhism in India.  

This is the most common theory, belief, history rather propaganda that is “taught” to every student of every class in India. This propaganda has been so immense since the last quarter of the nineteenth century that every history-writer of India has accepted it as God’s word. Even those history-writers, who have been adorned with the highest civil titles, make such claim without verifying the historical facts.

What do the historical facts convey?

First and foremost, the historical fact is that the relics of Buddha have been found at various places in India. It proves that he ventured on the earth in flesh and blood. The edicts of Emperor Asoka read with Greek writings prove that he lived between 563 and 483 BCE.

The second historical fact is that Buddhist Emperors viz. Varihadartha, Rajyavardhana, Harshavardhana and his two sons were murdered by their Brahman courtesan. On numerous occasions, the Boddhi tree under which Siddhartha attained Buddhahood, was burnt down by the Brahmanic rulers. And the Digvijaya of Brahman Sankar was aimed at pushing the Buddhists out of India. Sadly he succeeded. Therefore, Baba Sahib Dr. Ambedkar rightly said that the history of India is the history of a mortal conflict between Buddhism and Brahmanism. 

Now let’s examine their claim that Buddhism sprouted as Anti-Vedicism movement. My claim is that it is false and fabricated propaganda. The truth and fact are that Vedic-ism, Sanatana Dharma, Hinduism or Brahmanism, by whatsoever name it might be known, has been generated as a counter-mechanism to defeat Buddhism. I tender evidence for my claim:

1. The most prominent Hindu scholar has been S. Radhakrishnan who happened to be a Vice-Chancellor as well as the President of India. He defined Hindu as one who believes in the supremacy of Veda, leads life for Dharma, Arth, Kama, Moksha observing four Ashramas (Brahmacharya, Grihastha, Vanaprasatha and Sanyas) and adheres to Varanasharama i.e. perform the duties assigned to his caste. His definition of Hindu has never been challenged by anyone.

(Dharma = performing duties assigned to one’s caste, Arth= make money, Kama= sex/lust, Moksha= merger of the human soul into God. Four ashramas are celibacy, married life, living in jungle, asceticism respectively each equals 25 years).   

1. The first book of the Brahmanism is the Rigveda. It does not mention anything like Soul (Atma), God (Parma-atma), salvation (Moksha), pilgrimage (Teertha), Caste, Prayer (Arti), four ashrams of life or any other Brahmanic ritual which are fundamental pillars of Brahmanism as per Mr. RK. 

Thus we may safely deduce that these ingredients were not part of Brahmanism when the RV was composed. Now the question arises: when did these ingredients sprout in it?  Let’s examine historical data.

Let’s begin with the Buddha-era. 

• After leaving his home, prince Siddhartha wandered for 6 years from one Guru to another in quest of a solution to his questions. He met some of the Brahman Gurus also. No Guru asked him to do study veda or do yaga or lead life as per Dharma Arth Kama Moksha. Nor anyone objected to his becoming ascetic before completing the first three ashramas. He was told only “how to control breath to tame the mind”. And the Veda is completely unaware of this technique too. If the Brahmanism had become the religion of the laity, a few Gurus must have asked Siddhartha to study Veda.  
• He preached Dhamma for 45 years wandering from one place to another after attaining Buddhahood. During this half-century, only one case of Kutadanta Brahman came to him where he counselled him to not do a bloody yaga and got released the animals brought for slaughtering in the yaga. The rational deduction is that yaga was rare of the rarest ritual. If all the Indians had adopted bloody yagas, Buddha would have not got just one single case in 45 years!!   
• None of the Brahmans, who came to Buddha for debate, ever claimed supremacy of the Veda, yaga or any of their rituals or fundamental principles. WHY? Because none of such ritual/ principle had cropped up in it by then. Even the initial Upanishads were not composed by the Brahman. 
• The Brahmans who came to Buddha for debate discussed ONLY one point with him that they be treated “Brahman” because a Brahman woman has given birth to them. Some of them revealed/accepted that their mothers were maids (dasis) in the house of non-Brahman Indians. And that they did not know as to who of the Indian employers impregnated them. The children so born were accepted and treated as “Brahman” by the Brahman group. 

It means even the supremacy of the Brahman too had not been accepted by the Indians by that time. If their Vedic-ism had spread in India, they would have been revered as Priest. 

• Therefore, a simple question arises: if the ingredients that make Hinduism were not in existence, how could Hinduism or Vedic-ism be in existence? If Vedic-ism was not in existence, how could Buddha oppose a non-existent system?
• The first book written on the history of India is Indika of Megasthenese who was a Greek courtesan in the Court of Emperor Chandragupta Maurya. He writes that Brachman i.e. Brahman came to India three centuries prior to Alexander. He wrote about rituals and customs adopted by the Indians but he nowhere mentioned about yaga or any other Brahmanic ritual. Thereafter, Emperor Asoka inscribed Edicts on the rocks and pillars. He too did not mention any of Brahmanic rituals.
• The Brahman or Arya had come to India as a desolate lot and not at all as invaders/warriors. Their RV is full of their sobs, bawls due to the beatings by the native Indians. There is not even a single instance mentioned in the RV that the incomers dared to fight against the native Indians. From 650 BCE to 184 BCE, only the native Indians (Nagas, Nandas and Mauryas) had ruled over India.  Their anti-Vedicism attitude has been denounced in almost every book of the Brahmanism. Hence the Brahman had not been able to spread their ism or rituals among the Indians till 184 BCE.
• Since the known history of India, there existed a governing Council of people, called Parisa in India. It was so powerful that it could direct King Shuddhodhana to exile his son Siddhartha, King Dhanananda to hand over throne to Chandergupat Maurya, Emperor Asoka to not to donate all his property; and Emperor Chandergupat to hand over throne to Samudargupat. The remarkable feature of the Parisa was that No Brahman was allowed to be its member. Just compare their presence in Cabinet, judiciary, executive etc. as on date. The answer tells the Truth.  

These facts prove that neither the Brahmanism had sprouted nor the Brahman was given any special status upto the end of Maurya regime i.e. three centuries after the Buddha. It was only after the treachery of 184 BCE, that the Brahman gained upper hand in the political power and thereafter they declared the Vedas to be Supreme in their Manu Smiriti. After that, they composed all sorts of scriptures and epics to lure and impose their religion on the Indians.

The question arises why this false theory was propagated? There were chiefly two reasons: the first and foremost reason was that due to the implementation of Manu Smiriti, there was no literate except Brahman when the European scholars started their exploration into the Indian history. Hence whatsoever the Brahman teachers told them about their scriptures, they had to accept it true. 

Secondly, apartheid or racism was at its peak among the Whites who had been ruling over the Blacks in whole of the world. The Indian literate class too wanted to be among the elite White race. This want suited the policy of Divide and Rule the Ruling Whites of Europe. They knew that Brahman was greater than his Gods here. The king also knelt before him. They grabbed the golden message: make the Brahman happier and rule over the Indians. Such theories did the trick!

Hence the Maxmullers Smiths Princeps …. vied with each other to eulogize the Vedas. Everyone went far and farther to claim that Vedas were composed hundreds and thousands of years before the Buddha. They even did not object to Dayanand’s claim that the Universe and the Vedas were created the same moment. Radhakrishnans, Kanes, Tilaks and ….. belonged to the upper caste. They took shelter behind the Gore Sahibs’ claim and propounded the theory that their religion is the Sanatan i.e. eternal; as old as the world. Veda was declared the most ancient book of the world through its oldest manuscript found so far, has been written in Devanagari which took centuries to develop from Dhammalipi of Emperor Asoka’s Edicts. 

Author – Kuldip Kumar