Pseudoscience & Religion

How Ashoka The Great Gave Brahmins A Song With Which They Conquered India

(Note: This is the 8th article in the series on the evolution of early religious thought in India, by Dr. Prabhakar Kamath. The previous article in the series can be accessed here. All Dr. Kamath’s previous articles can be accessed from this page where you can also sign up for Dr. Kamath’s RSS feed.)

We all know that Ashoka the Great gave Buddhism the gift of making it the dominant Dharma of India for a thousand years and one of the great World Religions to this day. However, few people know that he gave a wonderful gift to Brahmanism as well. He offered them his personal image of a renegade and fallen Kshatriya as the blueprint on which to base a parable in the form of a beautiful song, the Gita, by which Brahmins conquered back everything they had lost and more. A remorseful Ashoka overwhelmed by sorrow, self-doubt and the horror of war on the battlefield of Kalinga became the model for distraught Arjuna overwhelmed by sorrow, self-doubt and horror of war on the battlefield of Kurukshetra in the parable of Arjuna Vishada. This is a classic example of how Brahmanism used their adversaries themselves to beat them over the head. As we go along, we will study several more examples of such incredible feats by Brahmins in the defense and promotion of their archaic Dharma.

Ashoka Ascends The Throne Of Magadha

The Mauryan Empire during the rule of Ashoka stretched from modern day Iran and Afghanistan to Bangladesh and Tamilnadu.

The Mauryan Empire during the rule of Ashoka stretched from modern day Iran and Afghanistan to Bangladesh and Tamilnadu.

In 298 B. C. E. Chandragupta abandoned Brahmanism and became a Sramana of Jainism. He retired to Sramana Belagola in what is today Karnataka State and starved himself to death. His son Bindusara abandoned Brahmanism and embraced Ajivika sect. Bindusara’s son Ashoka usurped the throne of Magadha following the death of his father in 272 B. C. E. even though his older half-brother Susima was ahead of him in line for it. His claim to the throne was based on his assertion that he was a better administrator than Susima on account of his being posted to Taxila and Ujjain for many years during his formative years. That there was a succession struggle between him and his half brothers is suggested by the fact that he was not formally crowned till around 269-68 B. C. E. He killed almost all his half-brothers and exiled his only younger brother. One half-brother escaped to the neighboring kingdom of Kalinga. Sri Lankan legend has it that Ashoka’s path to his throne was liberally stained with “the blood of his hundred brothers.”

Ashoka was no different than any other king during his early years of rule. True to Kshatriya Dharma he was not averse to whatever means necessary to gain wealth and consolidate his power. He was both Dhananjaya (Conqueror of Wealth) and Paranthapa (Scorcher of Foes), the epithets by which Krishna often addressed Arjuna in the Gita to remind him of the true nature of Kshatriya Dharma. There is no evidence that Ashoka was ever engaged in a truly ghastly war before he ascended the throne of Magadha. Apparently his reputation preceded him wherever he went to quell uprisings and the rebels surrendered without a fight.

Carnage Of Kalinga

Eight years after ascending the throne of Magadha, Ashoka attacked Kalinga to his east. The exact reason for this attack is not clear. Perhaps he literally saw Kalinga as a thorn on his side, being the only unconquered kingdom in the north. Legend has it that he was in hot pursuit of his half-brother hiding there. Ashoka considered Kalinga as practically his second home having spent two years there in exile a few years before he came to power, and having married a fisherwoman from that region by the name of Kaurwaki. Being a proud, freedom-loving people, and in a display of extraordinary courage or foolhardiness, Kalingans put up a brave fight against the mighty Maghadan. Ashoka was merciless in wreaking vengeance against his weaker adversary. Sheer bloodbath followed. Legend has it that his wife Devi, a Buddhist at heart, was so horrified by the devastation that she abandoned Ashoka forever.

Ashoka’s Remorse

As the legend goes, Ashoka went to the devastated battlefield to inspect the valiant deeds of his brave soldiers. He did not see any sign of victory. All he saw were heaps of rotting and burning corpses and half-dead bodies of injured people wailing in pain. Severe sorrow and remorse gripped his conscience. Ashoka himself pours out his heart in these words:

Ashoka’s Rock Edict 13: “Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, conquered the Kalingas eight years after his coronation. One hundred and fifty thousand were deported, one hundred thousand were killed and many more died (from other causes). After the Kalingas had been conquered, Beloved-of-the-gods came to feel a strong inclination towards the Dhamma, a love for the Dhamma and for instruction in Dhamma. Now Beloved-of-the-Gods feels deep remorse for having conquered the Kalingas.

Ashoka’s Famous Dwandwam

What Ashoka meant was, “If this is my Dharma, what then is Adharma?” This sight of devastation of men and materials made him sick and he cried the famous Dwandwam-ridden monologue:

What have I done? If this is a victory, what’s a defeat then? Is this a victory or a defeat? Is this justice or injustice? Is it gallantry or a rout? Is it valor to kill innocent children and women? Do I do it to widen the empire and for prosperity or to destroy the other’s kingdom and splendor? One has lost her husband, someone else a father, someone a child, someone an unborn infant…. What’s this debris of the corpses? Are these marks of victory or defeat? Are these vultures, crows, eagles the messengers of death or evil?”

Ashoka’s Obsession With Karmaphalam Of War

Artistic Representation of the Kalinga War

Artistic Representation of the Kalinga War

The horror of this ghastly war was a life-altering experience for Ashoka. Apparently he had severe flashbacks of the tragedy till the very end of his life. It is very possible that this war, instigated by his desire to kill one of his surviving half-brothers, brought up to the surface repressed guilt over killing his own siblings to gain his throne during the struggle for succession ten years earlier. Modern psychiatrists would certainly diagnose him as suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder, a serious anxiety disorder often seen in soldiers severely traumatized by the horror of war. As if to atone for his horrible deeds he let his sorrow and remorse known to all his subjects personally, by designated messengers, and by means of his Rock Edicts. He explained the horrible consequences (Karmaphalam) of any war:

Ashoka’s Rock Edict # 13: Indeed, Beloved-of-the-gods is deeply pained by the killing, dying and deportation that take place when an unconquered country is conquered. But Beloved-of-the-gods is pained even more by this – that Brahmans, ascetics, and householders of different religions who live in those countries, and who are respectful to superiors, to mother and father, to elders, and who behave properly and have strong loyalty towards friends, acquaintances, companions, relatives, servants and employees – that they are injured, killed or separated from their loved ones. Even those who are not affected (by all this) suffer when they see friends, acquaintances, companions and relatives affected. These misfortunes befall all (as a result of war), and this pains Beloved-of-the-Gods.

Philosopher-King And A Transformational Figure

Ashoka became a philosopher-king, who ruled by being an example of rectitude and selfless service to the people. He embraced the basic principles of Buddhism. Ashoka’s Dharma was based on the principles of non-violence, tolerance, piety, mercy, kindness, generosity, truthfulness, forgiveness, purity, gentleness, goodness and peaceful coexistence of all religions. He made known Buddha’s philosophy to the population across the land by a cadre of special agents known as Mahamatra, Yukta, Rajjuka and Pradesika. In the manner of newly converted zealots, he even sent emissaries to foreign countries to spread the message of Dhamma. He discouraged people from killing animals for food and sacrifices, and even burning kernel of grains. He declared that good behavior earns fruits here on earth and hereafter far better than performing Yajnas. He had his edicts carved in stone all over his kingdom. In these edicts, he spoke plainly in their own language. He made sure that all people across his vast empire knew exactly what he thought and what he expected of them.

How Brahmins Avenged Ashoka The Great

Ashoka vastly underestimated the weed-like sustaining power of Brahmanism. Brahmins hated Ashoka and everything he stood for. In their eyes he was a renegade and fallen Kshatriya. To them a Kshatriya, who grieves on the battlefield, suffers self-doubt and worries about the consequences of war, is unmanly and cowardly. Since they could not resort to their usual cloak and dagger methods of getting rid of him, Brahmins’ invented a stealth weapon to destroy him and promote their own Dharma: A parable in the form of a beautiful song. The palm leaf became their bow, the quill became their arrow, and a song became the arrowhead. Like a haunting song of a Bollywood movie, everyone could easily remember and sing it. They inserted this brief parable into the body of the ever-expanding Mahabharata epic, which by now was very popular with the masses, like its serial would be on television 2250 years later. In this parable, known as Arjuna Vishada, (Arjuna’s sorrow, despondency, dejection) the brave and noble Kshatriya prince Arjuna suddenly becomes distraught just as the Great War was about to begin on the battlefield of Kurukshetra, and he wishes to abandon his Kshatriya Dharma out of compassion for his ninety-nine cousins and one brother, close relatives, friends, Gurus and elders. In contrast to Ashoka, however, Arjuna redeems himself by surrendering to Varna Dharma after being shamed, scolded and lectured to by prince Krishna.

Remorseful Ashoka Becomes The Model For Despondent Arjuna

  1. Whereas, according to the legend, Ashoka had to get rid of “ninety-nine half-brothers and one real brother” to inherit his father’s kingdom, Arjuna had to get rid of ninety-nine cousins and one brother to regain his father’s kingdom.
  2. Whereas Ashoka spent thirteen years in exile before ascending his throne, Arjuna spent thirteen years in exile before waging the war to gain back his throne.
  3. Whereas Ashoka inspected the carnage on the battlefield after the war, Arjuna inspected the battlefield before the slaughter began (BG: 1: 21-25).
  4. Whereas Ashoka lamented over killing innocent people living in his enemy’s kingdom, Arjuna’s despaired over having to kill his own people who had turned against him, living in his own lost kingdom (BG: 1:26-27, 33).
  5. Whereas Ashoka suffered from severe posttraumatic stress disorder after witnessing the slaughtered enemies on the battlefield, Arjuna suffered a massive panic attack (BG: 1:28-30) anticipating the slaughter of his enemies on the battlefield.
  6. Whereas Ashoka suffered from severe remorse and sorrow on the battlefield after the war, Arjuna suffered from severe despondency and sorrow before the war (BG: 1: 27, 47).
  7. Whereas Ashoka suffered from severe Dwandwam of mind while inspecting the carnage on the battlefield, Arjuna suffered from severe Dwandwam while inspecting the enemy arrayed against him on the battlefield (BG: 1:31-36).
  8. Whereas Ashoka expressed horror over the consequences (Karmaphalam) to himself and the society as a result of war, Arjuna expressed fear of serious consequences (Karmaphalam) to himself (1:36-37, 45) and to Brahmanism (1:38-44) that might result from the war.
  9. Whereas Ashoka expressed that killing people was Adharma and felt enormous remorse for doing so, in his distraught state of mind Arjuna thought that killing his own people was Adharma for which he would incur great sin (1:36, 45).
  10. Whereas Ashoka gave up violence and embraced nonviolent Dharma after the war, Arjuna threatened to give up violence and embrace nonviolent Dharma before the war (1:46, 2:5).

Prince Krishna As The Counterforce To The Buddha

In this allegorical parable, Arjuna’s discomfiture on the battlefield gives prince Krishna, as the defender of Brahmanism and counterforce to the Buddha, the opportunity to give him a sound scolding and a crash course on the fundamentals of Varna Dharma. Note here that in the story of Arjuna Vishada, Krishna is merely a wise prince of Yadava tribe, somewhat like Chanakya in temperament. Like Chanakya he is not averse to trickery and scheming to achieve his goals. To him ends should justify means. He is not yet the Upanishadic Guru (2:7), Lord of beings of the Upanishads (4:6-8), or Parameshwara (11:3) of the Bhagavathas. These stepwise enhancements in Krishna’s stature were made later on by anti-Brahmanism revolutionaries for the purposes of using him to overthrow Brahmanism. From the beginning to the end of the Arjuna Vishada parable, Krishna is equal in stature to Arjuna. The only difference is, whereas in the beginning Arjuna was tainted (Chyuta) due to his Ahamkara (I, me and mine), Krishna remained Achyuta (untainted) from the beginning (1: 21) to the end (18: 73).

The Original Gita: The Essence Of The Varna Dharma

Now prince Krishna delivers his lecture to sorrowful Arjuna: Your dejection is unmanly, shameful, Unarya, heaven barring, cowardly and is indicative of krishna-and-arjunaa feeble heart not befitting a Kshatriya noble (2:2-3). Nothing should be more desirable to a Kshatriya than a righteous war (2:31). You should look at it as an unsought opportunity to gain heaven (2:32). Victorious you would inherit your kingdom; dead you would go to heaven (2:37), which means there is no loss of attempt either way. If you gave up fighting, people would mistake it for cowardice and your peers and enemies alike would forever hold you in contempt; such a situation is worse than death (2:34-36). Thus forfeiting your duty and honor, you would incur sin (2:33). None can ever refrain from performing his Dharma-bound Karma, as one is totally helpless in the face of Gunas of Prakriti (3:5). One’s Ahamkara makes one think he is the doer (3:27). Even wise people conform to the dictates of their Guna; what is the point of resisting it? (3:33). When even the Devas are subject to the Gunas and Karma, how could you not be? (18:40). When you give up your Ahamkara and perform your duty as per your Guna, you would not incur sin even if you kill your own people (18:17) because it is not Adharma to do so. If you still refused to perform your duty due to your Ahamkara, you should remember that by the dictates of your Guna and Karma, you would helplessly perform your duty even against your own will (18:59-60). Remember that one’s own Dharma performed however imperfectly is better than performing another’s Dharma perfectly; for, dying in another’s Dharma is full of fear of going to hell (3:35). As regards the evil of animal sacrifices, all Dharmas are attended with evil of one kind or another, like fire is enveloped with smoke; that is no reason to abandon it (18: 47-48).

Prince Krishna then goes on to explain the distinct duties of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Sudras as per the Varna Dharma in 18:42-44, and declares that only by performing one’s own Varna Dharma could one attain perfection (18:45). He follows this lecture by asking Arjuna if his teaching had removed his ignorance engendered by his Ahamkara (18:72). A shamed, humbled and browbeaten Arjuna meekly affirms, claims that he has regained his memory of his Dharma, and he no longer suffers from panic and doubt. He thanks Achyuta (one who is not tainted) for his grace (18:73). Now you know the historical context of the Original Gita.

The Original Gita Becomes Manifesto of Varna Dharma

Ashoka's Lion Capital at Sarnath, now the National Emblem of India

Ashoka's Lion Capital at Sarnath, now the National Emblem of India

This brief parable of Arjuna Vishada in the form of a song, then known simply as the Gita, became Brahmanism’s Manifesto of Varna Dharma and clarion call for Kshatriyas and people of all classes not to abandon their Dharma, and to return to the fold of Brahmanism if they had already done so. Ashoka’s Edicts carved in solid rocks were no match to Brahmanism’s Song seared on the impressionable and confused minds and malleable brains of generations of Hindus. Brahmanism has hung on to this Manifesto of Varna Dharma, Ashoka’s great gift, with dear life for 2250 years. Even though anti-Brahmanic forces (The Upanishadists and Bhagavathas) made two successive attempts to overthrow Brahmanism by interpolating hundreds of anti-Brahmanic shlokas into the Original Gita, Brahmanism managed to neutralize them by launching its own counterrevolution in the text. Brahmins hid both anti-Brahmanic revolutions by masterful editing of the text; by adding counterrevolutionary shlokas; and by obfuscation, misinterpretation, and misrepresentation of the true intent and spirit of the revolutionary shlokas. Due to these socio-religious revolutions and counterrevolutions, over the centuries the 76-shloka long Original Gita bloated to 700-shloka long incoherent and disjointed collection of contradictory shlokas, which came to be known as the Bhagavad Gita. The fact that Sanskrit language is extremely complex, and that there were not many non-Brahmins who had mastery over it, helped them in this process. People’s irrational respect for anyone wearing saffron clothes also contributed to acceptance of any Brahmanic statement, however ridiculous, without critical scrutiny. Besides, in a highly shame-oriented society, anyone questioning Brahminic interpretation of shlokas could risk being accused of suffering from the delusion of Ahamkara. That fear was enough to silence any inquisitive mind.

Ashoka’s Pyrrhic Victory

As for Ashoka the Great, for all his heroic efforts to cleanse Brahmanism of its worst aspects, his name disappeared into the dustbin of history for over two thousand years until it was discovered in Buddhist literature of Sri Lanka less than one hundred years ago. Indians honored him rather belatedly, and that too only after foreigners did so first, by adopting his Lion Capital as the Emblem of Republic of India and his Chakra (Wheel of Righteousness) as the centerpiece of India’s flag. Be assured, you will be hard put to find politicians (modern day Kshatriyas) or bureaucrats (modern day Brahmins) in India who follow the principles of Ashoka’s Dhamma. Hindus have perfected the art of paying lip service to all those myriad of people who tried to reform Brahmanism -Upanishadists, Bhagavathas, Buddha, Ashoka, Kanakadasa, and Gandhi- while continuing to do exactly what they have been doing for over three thousand five hundred years: Preoccupation with Jati, Kula, Yajna, Pooja, gods, rituals, temples, Swamis, astrology and whatnot.

In my next article I will reveal how some bold Upanishadists launched a revolution to overthrow Brahmanism by using the Original Gita itself as the vehicle.

(To be continued)

Dr. Prabhakar Kamath, is a psychiatrist currently practicing in the U.S. He is the author of Servants, Not Masters: A Guide for Consumer Activists in India (1987) and Is Your Balloon About Pop?: Owner’s Manual for the Stressed Mind.

About the author

Prabhakar Kamath

Dr. Prabhakar Kamath, is a psychiatrist currently practicing in the U.S. He is the author of Servants, Not Masters: A Guide for Consumer Activists in India (1987) and Is Your Balloon About To Pop?: Owner’s Manual for the Stressed Mind.

Links to all articles in Dr. Kamath's earlier series on Heretics, Rebels, Reformers and Revolutionaries can be found here. Dr. Kamath' series on The Truth About The Bhagavad Gita can be found here.


    • Surprised how quickly, so called rational thinkers have accepted this hypothesis as truth,

      It is a fascinating hypothesis but I am sorry, where is the proof? Where is the smoking gun that says that yes Geeta borrowed from Ashoka?

      All I see are a lot of probably and maybes. Is this how rationalists think in India? suggest something opposite to established dogma and run with it without evidence?



      • Read the article. Smoking gun? Proof? Are you not aware that historical analysis is a carefully patched together tapestry using many bits of evidence? Look at Dr. Kamath’s citations of the Bhagavad Gita and the rock edicts of Ashoka. Its funny how you ask for absolute proof in such a case, in defense of your favorite religious ideology.

        • Lol, I do not have any favourite religious ideology. I am merely a sceptic and continue to be in everything presented to me. You are obviously selective about your scepticism, which is ok by me. The citations of rock edicts and from the Geeta while plausible are only that, a possibility not a definite “So Ashoka’s story was co-opted into Hinduism …”. To me it is mereley, So Ashoka’s story may have been co-opted into Hinduism ….

          • Of course you have a favorite religious ideology- the one you are rigorously defending in multiple articles here. We have seen many like you, so don’t think you atheist Hindu apologists are a rarity.

            And you’re no skeptic when it comes to your religion. I agree that what Dr. Kamath has presented is not proof-positive. As I have already said “Smoking gun? Proof? Are you not aware that historical analysis is a carefully patched together tapestry using many bits of evidence?”. What you are doing by pretending I am making a 100% “proof” assertion is simply misrepresenting me disingenuously. But the fact is, often when a certain truth is being ascertained, the most plausible answer is accepted until evidence to the contrary is available. You, of course, would rather ignore the evidence at hand and pretend that the plausibility is not significant despite the evidence.

          • You need to recognize that you’re not actually addressing any of the evidence, the speciic claims in the article. What you’re doing is defending your religious group by waving your hand.

      • You are deliberately misrepresenting rationalists, probably for some short term ego massaging. I’m fairly sure you know what evidence is considered as “conclusive” for rationalists. So stop with the strawman arguments and then maybe some fruitful discussion can take place.

        But something tells me that you are just here for the kicks of trolling, going by your antics elsewhere.

  • Never read the gita in this context. Ashoka and Buddhism must have posed a serious threat to Hinduism’s authority. So does this mean that the entire Arjuna Vishada or Gita was written well after Ashoka’s period? Are there any studies to verify the historicity of this?

    On a not so unrelated not, I often hear the words “santana Dharma” tossed around recently. Usually people say this in a context that embraces both Buddhism and Jainism into its fold, sometimes juxtaposing with semitic religions. What does this Santana Dharma mean?

  • Excellent Posting. Certainly out of box thinking. Maybe some of it can be backed with research like dates of Bhagvata Geeta. To Bala, Jainism and Buddhism are not part of Sanatana Dharma also known as Hinduism. They are part of ancient Sramana order. Anish Shah

  • You have not heard anything yet! One cannot understand the Bhagavad Gita unless one studies it side by side with India’s ancient history; categorizes every shloka as representing one of the three sects (Brahmanism, Upanishadism, Bhagavathism) and interprets it in its proper context (Arjuna Vishada versus Historical). None of the Brahmanic loyalists have ever done that. So, when a shloka meant to overthrow Brahmanism is interpreted as related to Arjuna, out of ignorance of the historical context, the result is utter nonsense. We have all been brainwashed into believing whatever Brahmanic loyalist said it meant. As I will demonstrate, in the future articles, the Upanishadic and Bhagavatha shlokas in the Bhagavad Gita had nothing to do with Arjuna. They were added to overthrow Brahmanism resting on the dotrine of the Gunas and Law of Karma and held up the sanctity of the Vedas, Varna Dharma, Yajnas and supremacy of Brahmnins.

    Regarding the term Sanatana, it simply means ancient. Hindus have no sense of history. Everything is ancient. Ancient in relation to what? If you ask a Hindu how old is the Sanatana Dharma, the usual answers are 5000 years, 10,000 years, 175,000 years or some such nonsense.

    Regarding the fact that whatever I have written and will write in the future has never been heard or read before, let the reader know that there is still room for original thinking, insights and research in this field. It took me over 15 years of diligent research to solve the riddle of the Bhagavad Gita. And that, too, only after I came out of the “Vedic box thinking.” Had I been tutored by a Brahmanic Guru, I would be still writing nonsense like most commentators have. Of course, my writings will be considered as nonsense by many Hindus whose cup is already full and cannot take one more drop of any new insight or knowledge. The poured concrete has already hardened. Now its shape cannot be changed.

    Now sit tight and hold on to your railings as I take you to newer insights into India’s and Brahmanism’s history side by side.

    K. P. S. Kamath

  • I`ver readed the term Sanatana Dharma is “eternal path”.
    Bala and me have very similar opinions.
    And now, I feel confused.
    Cause, until now, I`ve readed Buddha was born 5 or 6 centuries before christian age.
    So, if Ashoka king become budist, and after this king came Kuruksetra war (5000 years ago???), then that war was very earlier than a lot of people tougth.
    Vaisnavas say Buda was a Krishna encarnation.
    Similarities between buddhism and hinduism are evident.
    So,I think this is very interesting and I can`t wait until the next article.
    Just like Bala I`d like to see a study to put the facts in chronologicall and irrefutable order.

    • Kenji, The date of Mahabharata and Bhagvat Geeta is between 3rd Century BCE to 1st Century CE, which is after Ashoka. Although it claims to narrate events that happened thusands of yeats back, it itself was written somewhere at the start of Christian era. So probably the events were modified to take the Ashoka story into consideration. Anish Shah

    • Kenji,
      Sanathana dharma is eternal law which needs to be followed throughout life by one who follows hindu traditions which are diverse and which has been changing constantly over the years basing on tne need of the hour for survival and power struggle.

      Buddha was added as a reincarnation of vishnu much later. in fact the 10 avataras have been added over a period of time not at one go. The brahmins felt threatened with the increasing buddhist influence so the best way was to make him one of them!

  • Even if the exact dating of Mahabaratha is not possible, it is very easy to see the unmistakable parallel between Arjuna and Ashoka as described here. Its a pity that many readers, including me, failed to spot this before even though it was right before our eyes.

    One thing I’d like to know is, if the present version of the Gita is a modified counter to Ashoka, then what was it before it was modified? Was there a “Gita” at all before the spread of Buddhism?

  • Originally, the Mahabharata epic was only 9000 shlokas and was known as Jaya. It was composed by one author sometimes between 800 and 500 B. C. E. Subsequently, over the next thousand years, many, many authors added various stories to it such as story of Nala and Damayanti. Adding the parable of Arjuna Vishada was no big deal at all. Those days they had no copyrights. Any person of authority could add his version to any document. In fact, every single ancient document was modified by vested interests to suit their agenda. Sankhya Darshan, Yogasutra of Patanjali, the Upanishads, the Vedas and every other documents were “Brahmanized.” Even Mahabharata epic, which was originally a secular story of a great war that took place probably around 1000 B. C. E, was Brahmanized. For example, just about every character was given a genetic connection to a Vedic divinity:Yudhistira was son of Yama; Bhima was son of Vayu, Arjuna was son of Indra, etc.

    All our ‘sacred’ documents are sacred only because their thoroughly corrupted forms have been preserved from antiquity, Lucky that no major changes were made by more recent authors, mainly because of their sacredness.The Bhagavad Gita is a classic example of corruption of an original document by various sects to further their own agenda. That is why the text is so disjointed, incoherent and confusing to people who do not know this fact. Not only that, even specific shlokas were altered to give a different meaning to readers. For example, shloka 9:20 was altered by replacing the word Devas with the word Me by some idiotic author who had no clear idea of the real intent of the shloka. Thus he neutralized its real intent, which is apparent in the following four shlokas. It is unbelievable that a document so corrupted as the Gita is held in such high regard. This is only because few people took time to study it diligently. One ignorant Guru passed on his ignorance to the next who unquestioningly accepted it and passed on to his student.

    In our next article, we will read how the Upanishadists took advantage of the fact that the Gita was a Smrithi, a remembered scripture, which could be heard and read by anyone, and ow they revealed their Secret Doctrine to the public on the pretext of addressing Arjuna’s Shokam, Dwamdwam and fear of Karmaphalam. These anti-Brahmanic Secret Doctrines had been kicked upstairs as Shruthis (revealed) scriptures and thus neutralized by clever Brahmins.

    Whereas the Mahabharata story was that of a great war fought on the battlefield of Kurukshetra by the cousins of Bharata clan for possession of the kingdom of Kuru, the Bhagavad Gita is the story of a great sectarian war of wits fought on the battlefield of the Gita by the cousins of Brahmanic clan for the Soul of Sanatana Dharma. Even though the Upanishadists and Bhagavathas won the battle as evidenced by the Gita’s new title, ‘The Bhagavad Gita Upanishad’, they lost the war as evidenced by the fact that today Brahmanism is stronger than ever!!!!

    Such is the genius of Brahmanism. Pay attention Atheists!!!!

  • A very well researched article by Dr. Kamath on the ‘the Bhagavad Gita’. Intellectuals including Buddhist scholars knows these facts to some extent but seems to be still ignorant of the historical details in such length. Interesting reading ! I’d like to read strategies to destroy Brahmanism again rather than history of regaining their dominance in Indian society and culture as majority of this section of Indians are still the mighty force against emergence of a science based new humanistic social order.

  • I think I must ask how can we know the dates are modified.
    I ask because it`s the very first time I read something like that.

  • Almost everything you will read from now onwards will be new to you, Kenji, because it took me a lot of research to connect the dots and discover new facts. All the information is there right before our eyes. However, we must train ourselves to put the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together. As a psychiatrist, it is my job to put together pieces of information people give me to make them into a coherent picture. Likewise, unless we develop an eye to see the whole picture, we will be seeing everything with a tunnel vision. The story of Elephant and Six Blind Men of Indostan’ comes to my mind. I recommend that you start by reading the ancient history of India. A lot of good books are available in the library.We cannot study any ancient scripture without studying India’s history side by side. To do this, first you have to wipe the board clean and read everything with an open mind.

    Regarding Siddharth’s suggestion, I personally believe that one of the things we must do is to teach these deluded people that whatever they have heard or learned so far from Brahmanic people is nothing but falsehood.However, they must know that the person who is telling them that is not a fraud himself. He must be perceived by these people as honest, erudite, scientific and trustworthy. There are enough people out there who condemn Brahmanism not knowing anything about it. Such tactics yield no fruits. We must resort to thorough research before we tell people that they are being deluded by Brahmanism. I do agree that we must come up with a set of strategies and tactics to tackle this truly mind-boggling problem.

    K. P. S. Kamath

  • Well, when I`ve read about histor of India, the budist period is always after the vedic period.
    Any book you suggest to read?

    • Kenji, I think Dr. Kamath has explained above how this is a distortion, because the vedic works were constantly being modified, added to and even parts removed. Let me give you an analogy with Christianity.

      The New Testament was supposedly written a few years after the death of Jesus, right. Wrong. The bible as we know it is a fairly recent book that underwent many drastic changes. to begin with, there was a huge sorting of what should and what should not be included. By the time of Constantine, probably many new things were added and many were rejected. Int he eayrs that followed there was no standard for the Bible, and it was constantly being modified by translators and priests. By the time of king James, it was probably already unrecognizable from the original manuscripts and parchments. There were also many versions, with many different stories added to them over the years. King James, as you may know, commissioned a huge number of translators and clergymen to compile an authoritative version of the bible. This is the history of the most sold book in thw world. The vedas, if anything, went through more of an evolution.

      The timeline of India’s vedic period has little to do with what the vedas are today. The vedas evolved, like any ancient set of ideas. Another example is Buddhism. Do you think Buddhism today, practiced from Tibet to Thailand to Srilanka to China and Japan, has much resemblance to what the Buddha himself said 2600 years ago?

    • One might refer Romila Thapar’s
      Early India: From Origins to AD 1300, 2002; Penguin and any of her books give an insight into the origins of Hinduism as an evolving interplay between social forces. other books of interest are Ashoka, and decline of maurya; Somnath (Gujarat Temple destruction”)

  • Yes, Ajita, but that`s my point.
    Today you can see how Bible has been modified across thetime, but reding not only religion books, until now I always have read budism is younger than hinduism.
    It`s the first time I read something like that.
    It`s lke today somebody told me judaism is younger than islam or christianity.
    Don`t get me wrong, I ask and ask cause I don`t know enough about religion in India.
    But my opinion I see, is not so different to Bala`s.
    I`m very interested in reading the next article.

    • I see the confusion better now. You have been told the lie that Hinduism is older than Buddhism.

      Well, its not.

      Some elements of Indian culture from 3000 years ago are part of the modern religion called Hinduism. Many texts that were for centuries part of Indian culture are today claimed by the label of Hinduism. Most of these texts have not remained unchanged, much like the Bible. However, Hinduism in its present day form is a fairly recent concept. It is the institutionalization of the collective response against the invasion of Islam and Christianity. Before these religions came to India, there was just Indian culture, with various small sects and some more widespread beliefs. There was a strong philosophical tradition containing both atheistic and religious schools.

      Anyway, you may be interested in my article here that explains this. Its a long article, but I explain why Hinduism is actually not as old as you think it is.


      • Its similar to hijacking idealogies of Bhagat Singh by RSS and Bajarangis to suit their needs.
        On contrary Bhagat Singh was an Atheist.
        Who would have abhored every moment in the midst of these guys

  • And yes, by watching budism in Japan, China, Tailand, Tibet, or India, I imagine it`s have been very changed during centuries.
    And exist different schools. So, it must be very changed.
    The book Jataka… where and when was it written?
    They say Buddha appears as Krishna in a part of the text…

  • “10. Be careful: While attempting to reform society, all rationalist must keep in mind the dictum that all solutions for societal problems, no matter how noble their original intents were, become problems themselves sooner or later. This is especially true in India. Don’t be surprised that someday in the future Rationalism will become a religion riddled with gods and mindless rituals! People bring into organizations their own unconscious beliefs and behaviors rooted in them and destroy the original goals of the organization. That is exactly what happened to Buddhism, which was born from revolt against ritual-ridden Brahmanism. Brahmins infiltrated Buddhism and made it into the mirror image of Brahmanism.”

    Ajita, I`m gonna read your article. Thank you for your kindness to me.
    Cause I`m a litle confused.

  • Dr Kamath,
    Is there historical evidence that ‘Arjuna Vishada’ was introduced (or significantly enhanced) after Ashoka’s lifetime? For e.g the earlier editions of the epic didnt feature it, whereas subsequent editions do.
    (A quick look at indicates that there were previous editions dating to 400 BC. Also there was a seperate book called ‘Bharata’ apparently before that)

  • thanks to Dr. Kamath giving a wonderfull truth about King Ashok,and Buddha .I feel my country is celebrating a hell out of ignorence. who is going to save us?!

  • Thanks for your wonderful article, I just want to know what evidence are you using to describe Gita text changes through time, are there historical, anthropological or maybe hermeneutics studies?

    • Sachin, if you read the article, you should have seen a number of specific quotes from Hindu scripture that Dr. Kamath presents as evidence for his conclusions. You are just making a blanket accusation without pointing to exactly what it is you disagree with. This is called a drive-by-shooting. You really do not have an argument, but you just want to smear the entire article because it makes you angry. Well, too bad it upsets you, but if you want to be taken seriously you will have to actually address at least one of the things that the article talks about.

      • Firstly! This looks like cooked up from imagination. Though I am a rationalist and I love the story of the Mahabaharata. And Arjuna’s breakdown is in keeping with his character in the rest of the epic. Though I believe that the original Geeta would have been about 200 verses or even less and not the elaborate mess which exists now. It was part of the original plot. Arjuna had no own brother fighting on the other side that he was aware of. He came to know about Karna only after the latter’s death. And he had 100 cousin brothers-not half brothers. If the author wants to make a point, he should at least do some proper research!.

  • It is not easy to date these particular periods in Indian history. While the Vedic age may have even begun in the period before Gautam Buddha is alleged to have started preaching the Philosophy that was turned into Buddhism, i highly doubt that vedic culture would have been as widespread as its supporters claim it to have been. This is for one simple reason. If we closely examine the differences in Hindu worship across the country we will start to see that many of these differences are the parts that were assimilated with Vedic philosophy. This speaks of a slow, gradual occupation of indegeneous religious customs by the vedic people, often of customs that were animist in origin. During Asoka’s own rule this brahmanic religion had already been established in several places. It is this period that has often led to much conjecture. This is because most of the information available to us is of two types: Foreign sources (Sri Lankan, Greek, etc.) and “Administrative records” (stone edicts and the like that were “approved” by the king and his administration). It is obvious that in this period while there may have been much animosity between the two religions and its followers there may have been considerable influence that went both ways to shape what they are today. Indeed at many Buddhist sites you will find several deities associated with the Hindu pantheon (eg. a statue of nagaraj at Ajanta). While i believe that this article makes for good reading, i would like to see some of the sources that it is based on referenced, especially when speaking about the killing of his brothers and the years in between his fathers death and his ascension to the throne. Keep in mind one very important factor to dating kings reigns. For a very long time it was very difficult to place the reigns of various kings in our modern timeline. Often references to time that were available would only include data such as “in the fourth year of the reign of king ____”. The dates of the rule of kings were painstakingly arranged in colonial times by one single event the forays of Alexander and his army which was recorded by them in histories that could be dated fairly accurately. This dating has given us what we know today about who ruled these lands and when, however as you can imagine the technique makes the most out of the sparsest of evidence pools and thus is extremely inaccurate and debatable but can be said to have been placed within a century (two in some instances such as Kautilya/Chanukiya’s dates) give or take.

  • I enjoyed this article, but I am also concerned by the lack of citation. Historical dates notwithstanding, you should put the sources of your information such as ’76-shloka long Original Gita bloated to 700-shloka’. Where can people see the original? Is there any documentary evidence about the rising stature of Krishna with dates?

    I always thought of the Mahabharat as a basically loose aggregate of oral tradition which eventually coalesced into a single narrative. Eventually someone somewhere must have started to publish ‘authoratitive’ versions based upon what plot devices had the desired effects (i.e. to their own interests). But there again, I’m speculating. I’d like to see evidence.

  • Hi

    Very intresting article. very facinating coparission between ‘What we know abot Ashoka’ and the plot of Geetha. however we dont know how historically correct this comaprision is.there might have been some folk tales or songs mentioning mahabharta or krishna before. We can see there are many parts of article where it appears that events are assumed instead of any historic proofs. but never the less good read and a rational kind of explantion for the origin of Geetha.
    (p.s. Can you please tell me where I can find these original geetha scriptures etc. i am intered in finding about the social life of people at that time.)


  • sir,
    I read your article.It is interesting to note that the great kurushetra war took place in Dwaparayuga some thousands of years before. As per your articel King Ashoka story is only 2000 thousand or 3000 years before.In your article you have mentioned kureshetra war took place before kurushetra.Brahminism is the oldest and from kritayuga some thousands of years before and Buddhas birth is only 3000 years before as per your articel. There are people who modify every thing and tell what they discovered is correct and reat. Does it not look absurd to give such statements. christianity came to India only from 1600 when British entered India,
    and other communities came to India only some 900 to 1000 years before. Hinduism and hindu community are there some thousands of years before that. We donot know at what state we were. commenting on BHAGAVAT GEETA and HINDUISM is the business of opportunists to gain name and fame and also for money and wealth and also the popularity. We took birth only in 1930s and 1940s or some 10 to 20years before or maybe maximum 120 before became in yahoo news I read 120 years old man married to 60years lady. so we cannot talk or comment on BHAVATGEETHA AND Buddism, LORD KRISHNA AND BUDDHA THE INCARNATION OF KRISHNA (SOME THOUSANDS OF YEARS after SRI KRISHANA).If we like any community or ISM be sincere to it and dont comment or criticese others which the GOD SAYS.
    some 60 to 70 years before

    • Dr. Kamath is using historical dates, whereas you are talking about mythological dates. The later are a fiction because they go against all known evidence (like evolution) .

    • – An actual historical conflict may indeed have happened in India’s northern plains in deep antiquity and inspired later stories in the post-Mauryan and Gupta era when the ‘Purana industry’ flourished. This is not too different from how many 20th-century wars were given silver screen retellings in Hollywood and Bollywood. The Battle of Longewala was fought in 1971. The movie ‘Border’ was made in 1997.
      The attack on Pearl Harbor happened in 1941. The movie ‘Pearl Harbor’ was made in 2001. Granting for argument’s sake that a Kurukshetra-like conflict happened, why would it mean that no stories about it can be written in the post-Buddha period?

      – Christianity came to India not with the East India Company but as early as 52 AD with Thomas the apostle. Judaism had come even earlier for it was a Jewish colony that Thomas came to in India. Interestingly, 52 AD significantly predates the most commonly accepted date (788 AD) for the birth of Adi Shankaracharya, the closest modern Hinduism has to a founder.

      • @Arvind Certainly the battle indeed happened. Aryans were engaged in intra-tribal conflicts. Initially, divided into 5 tribes called “Panchjana”, the Aryans fought amongst themselves. The Bharatas were one of the ruling classes supported by priest Vasishtha. It is interesting to note that Bharatvarsha is named after the tribe Bharatas. This tribe is first mentioned in Rg Veda which is dated to about 1500 BCE. The Bharata were opposed by a host of 10 chief – 5 Aryan chiefs and 5 non-Aryans. The battle was fought between Bharata and the host of ten chiefs and the battle is known as Dasarajna battle. This is described in Mandala 7 of Rg Veda. Bharatas won. OF the defeated tribes an important one was Purus. Bharatas and Purus joined to form a new tribe called Kurus. Kurus combined with Panchalas and established their rule over Ganga-Yamuna doab in Later Vedic times. The history of Kuru is important for the battle of Dasrajana and is supposedly fought in around 950 BCE. This battle later became the main theme of epic Mahabharata.

  • I do not think that Mr Kamath is telling something new. There is no opposition to this fact. GOD is just a concept to understand the things that were found difficult to understand and this concept was later changed and utilized by many religions and their priests for their betterment. Same thing happened with Brahamanism which later after much wider assimilation came to be known as Hinduism.

    I go to the extent that if Ashoka would not have been a Buddhist, then we certainly would not have to create Rama, the protagonist of Ramayana. Ashoka had all the qualities that Rama was to have in the later centuries when Ramayana was to culminate in around 4-5th century AD.

  • I think more than the God concept, this horrible concept of Rebirth and Reincarnation which again the credit has to goto the great Brahmins has ruined countless lives.

    • ##this horrible concept of Rebirth and Reincarnation which again the credit has to goto the great Brahmins has ruined countless ##

      Ironically “Rebirth i.e. Samsara” had no origin in Vedas, & surprisngly the Buddha (the one whom many paint as an Anti-Caste Revolutionary was one of the earliest proponents of that Rebirth idea , alongwith the Upanishadic & Jain philosophers.

  • Interesting article at the best. As always, creative brains can manufacture new stories with pseudo research on almost anything. Regardless of what might have really happened, which at best can be a conjecture based on our limited readings, observations, understanding and pre-biased positioning on what we want to believe in. I read another article on reference to Mahabharata, & Ramayana in Sangam literature which are placed in BC some 300 to 500 years before the birth of. Read.

    There are also assumptions about there were no “scripts” to capture ideas before Ashoka, which seems highly idiotic proposition. Chankya who was Ashoka’s grand father’s teacher, could not have written Arthasastra without a written script form that was well developed by his time. For languages to form and become somewhat into a literary standing, it should have taken at least a few centuries.

    Easy to just debunk everything by reading books that favor our thoughts and assuming that we have come up with something extraordinary. But the true research as Thiruvalluvar says in Thirukkural, regardless of source or how it is presented, wise must scrutinize everything said or shown. As another popular tamil adage says, “Kannaal Kanbadhu poi, Kaadaal Ketpadhum poi, Theera visaarippade mei” (what you see or hear are lies, true inquiry can only reveal the truth!.)

    My fellow truth seekers, don’t buy in to everything said by anybody who has a forum and tool to put forward what they surmise. Read for your selves and understand. Above all, If you are stand on the side of seeking, you will always find there are more things connect and compare than to be conclusive and condemning what you don’t agree with..!

    • – The conjectures in this article and this series are about redactions and interpolations in the epics and scriptures, and these can happen irrespective of the antiquity of the original narratives. Check this comment.

      – There is a followup on the Chanakya objection here.

      – As for the gratuitous advice to ‘fellow truth seekers’, this entire series of articles is an attempt to challenge several myths about an important text; especially the claims about it being a monolithic text. As for ‘reading to connect’, critical thinking necessarily involves avoiding suspension of disbelief and cultivating healthy mistrust for authority.

    • i agree with you. But you have to understand discussion is the root of intelligence and discoveries. Our great sages followed this path. Only through discussion and debates can you only arrive at a conclusion. Logic needs debate, that’s why we have “Tharkashastra”.

  • Nice article. I think “Chilapathikaaram” by Ilamgovadikal also gave some hints about this big Brahmanic intervention. He hinted that there were big disputes between some of those sages who supported bhramins and those who hate their prejudice.
    And I think someone mentioned in the commentabout the date of christian’s arrival, well actually St.Thomas reached India (in kerala)before British, in some 52 AD.

  • Very good!! fed by your mother and in turn you people are spitting and shitting on her face! the so called atheists, rationalists are super brains-intelligents- you are really great! you criticise hinduism, brahmanism, insult hindu gods as the mental disorders do everything and anything anywhere! can you criticise or open your mouth towards islam or christianism! if you feel hinduism a false ideology then i challange other relegions also has the same value! if you are abandoning your culture, identity it is not a loss for the history!you people (athiests) have no fear of doing crimes, frauds, stealing others and have no self morality in mind.

    where there is good things -also there are evils like you thinkers! God will finally correct your evil minds!

  • Mr. Kamath is making some sweeping observations. If he wants to say that Arjuna’s character was fashioned on that of Ashoka and the Geeta is a fabrication of brahmins, then he has to produce a hell of a lot of proof. Some atheists may acept his conjectures but a rational atheist can not believe mere conjectuures. Atheism does not mean rejection of everything that a religion says. The route from to atheism is well defined. Skeptism and free thought, rational thinking, secularism and then atheism is the true route to atheism. Hate of god or religion is not needed to become an atheist. So, rationally acceptable prof is needed for Mr. Kamath’s historicl discoveries.

    • Your point about this being a conjecture has been raised multiple times in the comments below. And your lecture on what atheism is unneeded. I don’t even see the need for your comment except as an apologist rant.

  • I just have a simple question. If you are claiming that all the scriptures were written by people with vested interests just to bias the society and gain a higher hand then why cant it be true for you as well? You never saw what had actually happened in the past. Why are people supposed to believe you? What authority do you have to claim the veracity of what you have written here? If those people behind the scriptures were trying to manipulate the beliefs of people in the past, so could be you in today’s date. Its just like Einstein claiming that nothing could go faster than light and people believing him just because of his scientific reputation. If you claim to be writing with help from your scientific mind/temperament, then you must first understand that science hasn’t seen it all and perhaps will never. So all I want to request is perhaps a softer presentation of your propositions.

    I apologize for my weak vocabulary and writing style but I sincerely hope I have made my point.

    • Einstein’s theories were not accepted due to his reputation. When he published his papers in 1905, he was a mere patent clerk. His theories were initially laughed off. Only in 1908, he got some reputation and was hired by University of Berlin. Yet, scientists like Paul Dirac kept trying to disprove him until 1950s. His theories have been both mathematically and experimentally proved, several times.

      • There is a fact that Einstein has got many of his ideas and theories from Indian vedas…

        See below as one example how much he involved with then Indian scientist..

        It is also untold truth that Einstein assistance have lived and visited India for more then 20 years during his research to get knowledge about science and math.

        Main article: Bose–Einstein condensation
        In 1924, Einstein received a description of a statistical model from Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Bose, based on a counting method that assumed that light could be understood as a gas of indistinguishable particles. Einstein noted that Bose’s statistics applied to some atoms as well as to the proposed light particles, and submitted his translation of Bose’s paper to the Zeitschrift für Physik. Einstein also published his own articles describing the model and its implications, among them the Bose–Einstein condensate phenomenon that some particulates should appear at very low temperatures.[81] It was not until 1995 that the first such condensate was produced experimentally by Eric Allin Cornell and Carl Wieman using ultra-cooling equipment built at the NIST–JILA laboratory at the University of Colorado at Boulder.[82] Bose–Einstein statistics are now used to describe the behaviors of any assembly of bosons. Einstein’s sketches for this project may be seen in the Einstein Archive in the library of the Leiden University.[66]

  • Hello Dear Dr. Prabhakar Kamath,
    I want to just apply purely reasoning about why I have firm stance on what all Bhagwad Geeta verses you claimed are wrongly alleged to what you wanted to prove. I want rest of people to just go by true & unbiased rationalism & then reach to conclusion what is the fact!
    In my article I will quickly give rebuttal to the claims you made about the great scripture of Hinduism “Bhagwad Geeta”.

    Rebuttal to analogy given in “Remorseful Ashoka Becomes The Model For Despondent Arjuna”

    1. Great Lord Arjuna, Sri Krishna or Panadavas were not performing Kurukshetra war to regain kingdom of their father, as they already begged for worth five villages from Duryodhana in place of their own “indraprastha” which was of their own according to distribution legislated before they lost it wrongly in gamble & duryodhana was not ready to return them their indraprastha after pandavas fulfilled conditions of gamble by passing lives in jungle for 13 years. So your this statement “Arjuna had to get rid of ninety-nine cousins and one brother to regain his father’s kingdom” is absurd, as pandavas were in war for getting indraprastha & not “Hastinapur” which was Yudhisthira ready to give to Dhritrashtra even after victory in war.

    2.Lord Arjuna was not going to get throne of Indraprasth anyway , he never had experience in past as well, he was performing his “Bhrata Dharma” or “Duty of helping one’s brother”, which he was performing without any self-purpose–this thing is really hard to find in Buddhism or any other abrahmic religions–But Hinduism is distinct!

    3. 4. 5. 6. –> These statements pointed out by you are the perfect reflection of the fact why rational people always consider Buddhism as a religion for pessimistic persons whose souls have fallen in everlasting & ever increasing darkness or who has much impact of attraction or “Rajo Gun:” as described in holy bhagwad geeta. Bhagwad Geeta is greater scripture which has contained message of invoking a dead minded person or lazy guy & it rekindles his spirit about purpose of his life on earth by emphasizing on carrying out his karma without worry of result. While on other hand, buddhism takes person’s truthful desire to more darkening state so that he doesn’t care or work for evolution of world but can run away from his duty! So Buddhism is perfectly suitable for persons having retired life. But pragmatic message can just be found in unique message given by Lord Krishna!
    B.G. 1:42 “dosair etaih kula-ghnanam varna-sankara-karakaih utsadyante jati-dharmah kula-dharmas ca sasvatah”–this verse perfectly shows how genius lord arjuna & he was aware of how badly kauravas had violated family tradition or “kula-ghnanam” & thus if it continues like this then “varna-sankara” or “untrained or evil offsprings” will born in families who might have got samskaras or “tendancies” from their fathers like not caring “jati-dharmah” means violating women & children rights which kauravas have done by insulting draupadi in public & so as elder person like vidura.—there is nowhere any kind of even indication of “brahminism” or “Birth based casteism” which you blindly trying to allege anyway from nowhere,

    9. 10. The things which you are trying to prove by comparing stress disorder found in both arjuna & ashoka is absolutely fallacy, as Arjuna was seeing large army gathered from every part of the world-from iran(madra), afghanistan(gandhara), europe(Harivarsh), america (patal-desh)etc.Arjuna was predicting possible downfall of moral values in every part of world due to such violent war which was going to effect & produce imbalance in other kingdom of globe as they might be killed. While, ashoka has nothing to see much in comparatively tiny kalinga war. which is possibly over-exaggerated by buddhists all the time, which sounds rhetoric as even latest date wars Iran-Iraq wars & world-war 2 were million times more murderous as hyped one kalinga war. Take other evidence from mahabharata war, in rajsuya yajna of yudhisthira, kings from china bhagdatt, from Patal-desh( current U.S.A.) Babhruvahan, from Harivarsh(eurpe) bidalaksh etc. kings had gathered & in mahabharaat kurukshetra war . Ashoka’s remorse after kalinga war sounds as fairy tale like many other of jatakas in which buddhists tried to master in parallel to wonderful hinduism of contemporary time by imitating them, as history of the wars on earth has been always full of murderous & violent scenes where there is not sanatan dharma (vedic dharma or hinduism) rule going on in particular part of world. Not on many instances that we find monarch ending up being repentant. So first we all need to check up your true history behind remorseful ashoka, which buddhists monks have exaggerated in attempt to match with hinduism, so its buddhist scriptures which has got influence of hinduism.

    Refuting “The Original Gita: The Essence Of The Varna Dharma”:-
    This article is trying to allege verses of bhagwad geeta as if Lord Krishna should have agreed with lord arjuna in case of abandoning war. Article is concluding as if lord krishna had not tried earlier, watch out for some previous days of beginning of kurukshetra war, lord krishna himself personally requested hastinapur king dhritrashtra about ordering his insane son duryadhona to abolish decision of fighting battle, infact he even asked for worth just five villages should be given to pandavas as if not that then adharma or injustice will cover the destiny & future of bharatvarsh(india)& it will fall in dictatorship of one-man show duryodhana & other kauravas. Article is trying to prove as if arjuna was always happy to fight the battle, infact arjuna himself was in confusion from the day of decision to fight mahabharata war, he had asked about this situation to pitamah bhishma, dronacharya & kulguru Kripacharya as well, so on first day of mahabharata war, it was just he showed his concern to his great friend lord krishna, as it became reality & he had perception that it might have been avoided.

    Once again false analogy by saying that both Dhananjaya (Conqueror of Wealth) and Paranthapa (Scorcher of Foes), the epithets by which Krishna often addressed Arjuna in the Gita to remind him of the true nature of Kshatriya Dharma & concluding that same applies for ashoka as well!! Which comparison that one will make in verses where lord krishna called lord arjuna by words, “Panduputra”(son of pandu), “kuntiputra”(son of kunti), “bharatvanshi”(descendants of bharat), “aryaputra” (noble person), “partha”, “mahabahu”!

    Please take care of forceful translation made in this article about B.G. 3:35.
    Read First 3:34 “one should not fall under the control of senses and sense objects because they are stumbling blocks on the path of self-realization”, lord krishna was trying to explain arjuna that plausible sounding duties which strike the sense organs, which are immaterial to present situation leads one to act in purposeless way, which is adharma, which he gave clarification in B.G. 3:35 “sreyan sva-dharmo vigunah para-dharmat svanusthitat
    sva-dharme nidhanam sreyah para-dharmo bhayavahah”,, here it is translated forcefully this “bhayavah” word in “going to hell” situation which is just referenced to fearful situation & limited to only that extent, in case of running away from conducting dharma duties in the verse. Therefore, Hell situation was never there this verse, in fact it doesn’t include any “hell” sounding word in verse. Moreover it is wrong in trying to give 18:42-44 & 18:45 to conclude that holy bhagwad geeta supports varna dharma! Of course bhagwad beeta is such a perfect scripture which applauds even a below ranked work which might not be considered as skillful or intelligent work in perception of other skillful working people class, but lord krishna was applauding even a fraction of helpful work done for society regardless to quality, level or demand of task but was recommending strictly doing unselfish karma by not keeping much attraction to fruits of them. Moreover, article should not have omitted B.G. 18:41 which clearly refutes the conclusion, that verse clearly says “Brahmanas, ksatriyas, vaisyas and sudras are distinguished by their qualities of work, O chastiser of the enemy, in accordance with the modes of nature”, note here, lord krishna said, “by their quality of work, in accordance with mode of nature with which their souls are influenced”, here show me word that it says “birth-based”, here it clearly says on other hand, “any one can change his quality of work by removing influence of natural characteristics such as attraction & darkness which is suggested in other parts of geeta for every human & arjuna as well . And one can chage his varna & thus can become brahmin from shudra if he improves his intellectual level by doing deeds in intelligent ways ” . Look for this one, B.G. 16:24 “One should understand what is duty and what is not duty by the regulations of the scriptures. Knowing such rules and regulations, one should act so that he may gradually be elevated”,, which clearly refute your all claim why those four varnas are not birth based but just a state of person in evolution stage. The actual word used for Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra is ‘Varna’.

    The word ‘Varna’ is used not only for these four, but also for Dasyu(evildoers) and Arya(noble persons) in vedic literatures.
    Since, ‘Varna’ means one that is adopted by choice. Thus, ‘Varna’ is our own choice.
    Those who choose to be Arya are called ‘Arya Varna’. Those who choose to be Dasyu become ‘Dasyu Varna’. Same for Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra.

    That is why Vedic Dharma is called ‘Varnashram Dharma’. The word Varna itself implies that this is based on complete freedom of choice and meritocracy.

    It will be only dumb intellectual level which cant decode such a great scripture Bhagwad Geeta of sanatan(eternal) dharma Hinduism which at one hand gives great respect to each rank of task i.e. shudra or vaishya as you yourself pointed out. And on other hand it boosts oneself to commit tasks which benefit their intellectual level & messages ways to achieve improved position of oneself by getting read of ignorance.

    I would like to make few points here, because article speaks out mahabahrata history, by considering even the same time situation when condition was worse at its best according to vedic civilization tradition. Why Vidura who was Dasiputra “Shudra” by birth , but due to his smart way of working & his analytical skills, because he received great education from brahmin acharya of his time was appointed as advisor of hastinapur monarch Dhritrashtra, which is exemple of how “shudra” by birth migrated his varna to “vaishya”. if there has to be any birth based casteism in hinduism as you buddhists always cry for, just to promote your dhamma, why we are getting these cases. Why lord krishna was calling vidura as mahatma vidura & stayed in house in place of duryodhana palace. Who was Lord Krishna himself by birth? & also author of mahabharata sri vyasa!

    Matter of fact is that, hinduism or sanatan(eternal) vedic dharma never supported birth based casteism in their scriptures but it was produced in middle age as result of tiffs with anti-vedic religions such as jainism & buddhism, who rejected vedas to propagate their evil agenda. Further, it was more overtaken by quack like Dr Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar during independence time to find one’s authority in constitution by bringing such points like birth based casteism & actually implementing himself by distinguishing people by birth based caste!

    • @SD,

      There is so much obvious nonsense in your comment that it isn’t even worth responding to (ex: America=Patal Desh).

      As to the standard anthem of the Hindu apologist – “Varna is not birth based”, I’ll copy a comment from elsewhere:

      That what a person becomes is heavily dependent on the environment they grow up in and the opportunities they get. That is an obvious fact we know today. Given that the logical conclusion to be drawn is a system which relies only on “aptitude” without providing a system which gives equal opportunity for everyone to develop “aptitude” will necessarily become birth based.

      • Namaste Dear Satish Chandra,

        Patal Desh(Patal means below foot, Desh means province) . Spherical shape of Earth & its rotation which was discovered from the Divine Rig Veda Mantras by ancient sages gave very cogent name to American subcontinet with respect to its position from AryaVrat(India). If we geographically see then we will find that American continent is just below the Indian Subcontinent. As if Americans are living under feet of Aryas(indians). Since when it is night time in india then it is day time in America.

        Comment will surely look like obvious nonsense & surely it cant be given response as one who has not read mahabharata will surely feel surprise to come up to such geography terminology used in ancient world. Lets look at Shanti Parva, Mahaabhaarat. “Once upon a time the sage Vyaasa lived in Paataala (America) with his son and pupil Shuka. The son asked his father if spiritual science was only what he had him or something more. Vyaasa intentionally did not answer that question. He had lectured on that subject before. So in order to have his teaching confirmed by the testimony of another man, he addressed Shuka thus “O my son, you go to Mithipapuri and ask this very question of King of Mithilapuri. He would give you the right answer.”
        Having heard what his father said, Shuka left America for Mithalpuri. He first visited the continent that lay to the North and North-West of the Himalayas and was called Harivarsha ( now called Europe)(Hari a monkey, Varsha an abode. Hari-Varsha therefore literally means abode of monkeys, so-called because its inhabitants have red lips and brown eyes like those of monkeys), then the countries of the Jews called Hoon (Asia Minor, etc.)sometime also called “Yahoodis”, then he came to China, from China he proceeded towards the Himalayas and thence to Mithilapuri (in India). It is recorded in the same book that Krishna and Arjuna went to America in an Ashwatari vessel (Nauka i.e. boat)(i.e., one propelled by electricity) and brought the sage Uddalaka back with them on the occasion of the Rajasuya Yajna of Emperor Yudhishthira. Again Prince Dhritraashtra was married to a princess of Gandhaar (Kandhaar). Madri, the wife of King Paandu was the daughter of the King of Iran (Persia), Prince Arjuna was married to Princess Ulopi of Paataala (America).
        Again ther is mention of a tax in the Manu Smriti which was taken on all vessels leaving Indian ports. What was that tax for!

        When Emperor Yudhishthira performed his Rajasuya Yajna (coronation), he sent his brothers, prince Bhima, prince Arjuna, prince Nakula and prince Sahadeva with invitations to all the kings of the four quarters of the globe to join the Yajna.

        Take some references from Ramayana:-

        1. beautiful girl in Mexican tribal area till today are called as Ulopy. If we see in Mahabharata we find reference of Arjuna marrying girl named Ulopy who was daughter of King of Patal Desh (America).

        2. W H Prescott in his book , ‘ History of conquest of Mexico’, provides various reference which prove that earlier civilization of American subcontinent have major similarities with that of Indian (Aryan) civilization. According to writer of the book there is popular legend in Aztec community which state that a beautiful person named Quevtsal Katal came there from east and taught them various aspects of advanced civilization as a result his period was treated as golden era. He then went back to his original homeland because of persecution by some divine creature. This legends surprisingly does not throw light on the reasons why he returned.

        Another interesting fact that has been stated by Prescott is that this legend is available in documented form. Now, none except Indian tradition can claim that they bear root to this legend. The same story has been narrated in Valmiki Ramayana, in uttarkand where it is mentioned that Salkantak Rakshas who dwelled in Lanka were persecuted by Vishnu. Due to this persecution they left Lanka and went to Patal Desh. The leader of this group was Sumali. According to Ramayana they lived in Patal Desh for long time. When they found condition congenial they returned to their homeland.

        3. Till today play named Ramasitotav is
        played in various communities of Mexico.

        A real sensible or “rationalist” writer should publish some comments on Bhagwad Geeta after reading Mahabharata. It appears as if this article has been compiled superficially on merely biased knowledge & interpretation of Bhagwad Geeta & that too taking all alleged verses without context as I explained in my previous comment. And author has still to read Parvas or books of Mahabharata of which bhagwad geeta is merely a fragment, & who does not know even what stands for “Patal desh” as it is mentioned many times throughout Mahabharata.
        What I or rest readers of this Nirmukta site conclude from this- Is this article written by person having done reasonable Mahabharata study ? if yes then what he understood by those geographical locations depicted over in mahabharata such like patal desha? , if no then this article is already absurd as, can mammoth mahabharata war be given analogy to tiny local war between local tribes of India like Kalinga war & that too very critical as per historians as it sounds really exaggerated one & prejudiced enough to produce sympathy towards Buddhists & intentionally malign Hindus.


        • //If we geographically see then we will find that American continent is just below the Indian Subcontinent. As if Americans are living under feet of Aryas(indians). //

          India lies to the north of the equator between 6° 44′ and 35° 30′ north latitude. The “48 contiguous United States” range from approximately 24.52° N latitude to 49.38° N latitude. If this what is meant by a head and foot arrangement, then the world is in ashtavakrasana!

          Straightening out these contortions of geography and history every now and then is tiresome when apologists won’t go through the trouble of checking their numbers and will never care about dates. If engaging in a genuine Indology discussion is desired, then a pre-requisite is to tell apart legend from history, like in the discussion here. If Hindu apologists insist on getting offended by recorded history and insist on being comforted only by imagined geography, then I am afraid they have to endure many lifetimes (or if they insist, many reincarnations) of being offended.

          • Just one point, I thought you call the whole continent as “America” not just United States of America as America.

          • Amit,

            Arvind merely pointed one inconsistency in the barrage of nonsense dumped by SD. How did Americans travel to India at the time of Mahabharat? Wait, I know the answer. In Pushpak Viman. In fact George Lucas copied the entire Star Wars from Mahabharat. Here is the evidence. Notice the Pushpak Vimans?

          • Namaste Dear Arvind Iyer,

            My comment lines were “ If we geographically see then we will find that American continent is just below the Indian Subcontinent. As if Americans are living under feet of Aryas(indians). Since when it is night time in india then it is day time in America”, you didn’t include last part of my comment in your response “Since when it is night time in india then it is day time in America”. Standard time zone of Boston is UTC/GMT -5 hours, while perfectly opposite of it Standard time zone of Lucknow is UTC/GMT +5:30 hours. So this nearly exact 12 hours time gap from India made ancient time America as Patal desh. It is evident fact that there is situation many times like 12 a.m. in india at same moment will hit clock in several locations of America 12 p.m.

            One can verify above fact from . Where it shows how provinces of American continents on that UTC -5 column will be antipodes in time zone of Indian provinces of UTC + 5 column even in sunrise or sunset like daily events.

            “Ashtavakrasana” comment will stand true in case if one considers shape of mother earth as flat according to Abrahmic religious scriptures & not spherical! But thankfully, Hinduism hasn’t these kind of crazy scriptures but scriptures which possess divine wisdom.
            Rig Veda Mandala 1, Sukta 33, Mantra 8:
            “Cakracasah parinaham prthivya”
            It says “people who reside on the surface of earth circumference”
            This is what I am giving a fraction of overview of how metaphysics is described in Hinduism scripture Vedas which gives spherical shape of earth. Our modern science books teach us that it was kepler,copernicus and Galileo who first discovered this fact in 16th and 17th century AD!
            “India lies to the north of the equator between 6° 44′ and 35° 30′ north latitude. The “48 contiguous United States” range from approximately 24.52° N latitude to 49.38°” which is legislated in response itself reflects that if we take intersection of two sets 1. Latitudes of locations of India & 2. Latitudes of locations of America, we will get many places of common latitudes. But this is not enough to prove how people of America live under feet of Indians (please, by considering shape of earth as sphere), response didn’t include Longitudes of both continents. Verification from , will prove how locations of America under column 75°-90° West longitude are again on opposite sides from those of India under 75°-90° East longitude.

            The above fact is true for many other locations of earth as well according to contrast between characteristics of their longitudes & latitudes, but as knowledge & language both were spread from ancient India to rest of world, that’s why Aryas of India were labeling location of America as “Patal Desh”. Same terminology can be applied reverse way. But Mahabharata & Ramayana were Indian History.
            AUM Shanti: Shanti: Shanti:

          • If both North and South America are considered, then the continent extends both ‘above’ and ‘below’ India. By the way, what is above, and what is below? This map and this one too, can serve as perfectly legitimate navigational aids! BTW, all maps here are of a spherical earth.

            The Ashtavakrasana wisecrack was a response to your ludicrous anthropomorphic description of the Earth in head-foot terms. Since you insist on a privileged co-ordinate system where India is always ‘above’ and at the ‘head’ of the world, now I must ask you if the world is in Shirasasana for people using the above maps. If you insist that the current format of maps is the only right one, you are playing into the same Eurocentric bias which all Sanatana Dharma apologists claim to be countering.

            Besides the geographical and anatomical mischaracterization, apologists even manage mythological mischaracterization! When Patala Loka (nether region) is described mythologically as a distinct realm from Bhooloka (Earth), how come so many Sanatana Dharmic apologists insist that Patala is an earthly location on this very planet?

            We now await more apologetics about how Continental Drift can be found in the Puranas and how India was at the ‘head’ position even then somehow.

            The point is this: Co-ordinate systems are chosen by convenience and convention. There are no privileged reference frames that accord supremacy to observers from any nation on Earth.

          • Hello Arvind,

            Yes exactly, coordinate systems are chosen as per convenience. So why is it not possible for our ancestors to have chosen India as their reference point on a sphere in space (please note that on a sphere in space there is nothing called up or down. its all relative.) and hence the opposite side being the American continent may have been referred to as pataal desh? I have very limited knowledge of our scriptures as I spend most of my working as a scientist but that doesn’t make me simply trash the scriptures because I do not understand them fully.


            I appreciate your knowledge of the Hindu scriptures but our scriptures also advise us not to argue with half-witted people because they get down to “Kutarka” due to their ignorance. So I think we should let them live peacefully with their ignorance and misconceptions as we have done for hundreds of years.

          • Namaste Dear Arvind Iyer,

            1.Map links which you gave me neither mentions neither spherical shape of earth nor true Geopolitical distribution of earth. By the true info that India is the 7th largest country in the world in terms of geographical area & Greenland is 12th largest country in the world in terms of geographical area. So your maps were showing Greenland larger than India in size which is untrue, in terms of geographical area Greenland is 20% smaller than India, but on the world map it is larger than India! See the very first map of your link which is not showing projection of a rectangular world map & also the larger blocks near the equator become smaller as you move towards the poles.

            2.Now you have asked me for world maps in Shirshasana case so I would also ask myself further question on your behalf that even in case of Shavasan means in sleeping position of body where feet are in some other direction too! The argument here is that if we call footwear as “Paduka” then the same terminology will remain true in case of it is not being worn by one at particular time. Example if one has kept his “paduka” in trunk then should we call it by other name & not footwear or “Paduka” because it is not worn under feet at then time?

            3.I can see now you are taking shelter of Puranas. The evident fact lies that Puranas were compiled way after Ramayana & Mahabharata history so one should not give reference to history in Mahabharata or Ramayana from puranic terms. Purans were started compiling after murderous Mahabharata war & before birth of Vardhamana or Buddha to rekindle Vedic wisdom among Indians (aryas) & also among other world people.
            So in a way to rebuild vedic knowledge, it was determined to compose scriptures which can be helpful to understand for laymen or common people in best simple language as possible in contrary to rigorous Vedas study. So in earlier puranas, we can see many sections as representation of vedic mantras in form of a moral stories etc. Same in case of reflection of Mahabharata & Ramayana’s moral message in puranas, which may sound as mythology because it was subjected to be understood by concluding moral message from it & not a real history.
            There is no doubt over what is meant by “patal desh”. As Hinduism scriptures doesn’t borrow words from other religious scriptures as in case of Janism & Buddhism who borrowed all vocabulary from scriptures of Hinduism. It is truly shame for a religion who hasn’t their own language or vocabulary & it has to depend on other religion’s scriptures for interpreting their own texts! So we have word “bhootal” for labeling core surface of earth. We use term “Bhookamp’ for earthquake & not “PaKamp” if Patal has to mean imaginary province beneath earth. Moreover, there is not any kind of patal desh or mythological beneath earth location mentioned in Vedas. So you can’t argue about beneath earth location from Vedas or even from Mahabharata & Ramayana history. Because strictly looking to Ramayana event, there is Patal Desh – location on earth.
            Twist in history started to arise after some so called Brahmins (but actually shoodras as per vedic classification) started to use purans for self-benefit & self-purpose by performing non-vedic animal sacrifice rituals, whom we term as “Vam-Margis”. Further purans became more non-authentic when it started to include verses to confront evil Buddhism or Jainism. Therefore if you keep quoting me histories & other stuffs from non-authentic later day puranas then it will result in endless debate.
            4. Your last comment itself answers the first claim you made. If you have taken complete look at my response to satish chandra about patal-desh. Then you may have found reference to Latin Ameriacn locations as Mexico. So I would suggest you to scroll up. There was nothing which I mentioned about “head” stuffs in response to satish chandra. You by yourself invoked it from nowhere. Continental Drift among continents in past is always possibility , there is nothing much surprise about it. What my all point was what we call current day India was possessing the great ancient “Himalaya” mountain & was termed as “Aryavrata” sometimes. The indications of patal desh in Ramayana & Mahabharata just proves that not only Aryas or Hindus were knowing about spherical shape of earth & about its rotation & revolution but also have migrated to a location which was offset from theirs in time-zone. Which they meticulously & technically called “Patal Desh” , as this term can be only labeled by those real genius people who are aware of rotation of earth & also its real shape as spherical. That location Patal Desh is most probably among American continents of today. Because Continental Drift may have happened or not in ancient time puts question about exact location as per ancient texts in current time. But still west longitudes of American continents which are in contrast from east longitudes of ancient mountain Himalaya approximately points to America as Patal Desh.

            5.I would like to discuss with you one day about mythological Buddhism in which they managed to bring 15000 buddhas before Siddhartha Gautam Buddha! Similar mythology is there in case of Jainism too. It is now worthless to ask about justification of Jatakas fairy tales in Buddhism!

          • Since when did citing obvious inconsistencies between variants of Puranic narratives become ‘taking shelter in the Puranas’? It is a better idea to judge a map by its effectiveness as a navigational aid rather than by what tenuous anatomical metaphors it supports. Maps of the sort cited above were good enough for the likes Magellan and Vasco da Gama who opted for exploration and enterprise over the sort of stick-in-the-mud insularity that would have kept them at home arguing that their ancestors chose the best names for the continents.

            It is interesting how apologists insist that criticism of the Puranas is misplaced because they were myths and never supposedly never the real deal about Sanatana Dharma, but also simultaneously insist on the use of mythical names of earthly locations.

            If you self-labeled Sanatana Dharmikas indeed think that Puranic narratives are a fraud, then why don’t you try arguing as vociferously that there is no such thing as a Puranic Ayodhya in Faizabad district? At least that way, you may help some degree of reform and help prevent some social unrest, rather than expending 2253 words in comments here trying to convince us why we must think of America as Patal Desh. If it is indeed the greatest flower of civilization, Sanatana Dharma deserves better advocates than those with such misplaced priorities and a willingness to waste inordinate amounts of time on such trifles.

          • By the way, here is a quiz question: Who among the 33 crore Gods/Goddess from the Indian pantheon uses Kangaroo as his/her vehicle?
            Answer: None. Reason, our great Aryans “conquered” America but somehow didn’t notice Australia on the Bhoogola.
            In fact, ancient Indians knowledge of geography did not extend even to Africa let alone America, Australia or Antaractica. Though it would be very much possible for certain people including from India who could have travelled to far corners of the world but probably did not return.

    • I could appreciate most of the comment because it puts, things including Varna concept in right perspective. But this concept got outdated and should not have been followed, since modern era, say 20th Century. Untouchability and exploitation and abuse backward classes did and is doing more than enough to damage the shine of Sanatana Dharma. Freedom of choice and ignorance, made people to interpret scriptures to their likings and interests, resulting growing occult practices like animal and human sacrifices. Buddhism and Jainism got strengthened due to such unhealthy trends in Sanatan Dharma. Babasaheb Ambedkar, did a mighty favour on our country and the ruling class by setting right the follies, without violence (recall what happened in South Africa). I strongly object to the words you have used against this Avatara Purusha.

    • SD , Repeated lies in different angle will surely fool the mass, but your lies superbly end up with Rama Rao K. Who is quack? and what is quack? just be honest, have you read your veda, Upanishad, mahabharath, Ramayana with human consciousness of 21st century? I doubt your credibility of depending a blather oration, accidentally included some advises. Need not be a rationalist but don’t try to protect the lies by new quack theories of your own invention.

      • Pannichan: I don’t understand what you want to convey. Do you mean to say that ancient Indians knew about the entire world as we know today? With my limited knowledge, I understand that not only Indians but rest of the world also did not know about the entire world geography in the ancient times. Since you seem to be erudite and read all the scriptures, may I mention that ancient Indians perceived 14 worlds viz. Bhooloka, Bhuvarloka, Suvarloka, Mahaloka, Janaloka, Tapoloka, Satyaloka, Athala, Vithala, Suthala, Rasathala, Mahathala, Thalathala, Pathala. Do you really believe in these lokas to exist except the first one i.e. earth?

    • Namaste Dear Ravidassia,

      You should have brought evidence by quoting from authentic valimiki ramayana verses.Those myths have been propagated by both shramanic religions jainism & buddhism. How one can even think about this when we all know about very ancient & greatest epic of the world “Ramayana” which describes glory of “maryada purushottam” Lord Rama & gives us tremendous moral message how to live with power of strong ethics regardless to unfavorable conditions. How can one even think about discrimination by Lord Rama when we all know author of Ramayana Maharshi Valmiki was himself born shoodra but was no more after he received knowledge & higher intellect throgh his own efforts & desire(sankalpa) & changed himself in Brahmana!

      Matter of fact lies in Rig Veda itself which expresses abysmal wisdom in mantras about “All humans are shoodras from birth whatever they are offsprings of brahmins, kings(or Kashatriyas) or vaishyas & shoodras” One has to pursue efforts in order to reach brahmin or kshatriya like degree , & on other hand vedic system is flexible enough to give open choices to all humans of less or high skills, intellect to opt his varna as per individual wish.

      People though wont observe that Ravana who was himself son of great vedic brahmin is actually termed “Dasyu” or rakshas means evildoer. Father of lord Rama , Maharaja Janak himself fought war with ravana before Lord Rama in order to help the nearby kingdom as Ravana had wrongly attacked. Where is caste system here where a kshatriya attacked brahmin! Lord Rama himself did same. Critics of Hinduism or Sanatan(eternal) Dharma or Vedic Dharma will never provoke these argues in which it is categorized for evildoers, varna like Dasyu & for noble persons, varna “Arya” which is nothing like race or community of particular province but a metaphor to express virtue or color of nature of individual, i.e. “varna”. So i would rather suggest the critics of Hinduism to expand their theory of “Caste-system in Hinduism” further more to advanced level. Since then it will become much testy as one can say that actually in ancient time Hinduism was more orthodox as it included not 4 but 6 varnas “Arya, Dasyu, Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shoodra”–

      Ex.1 Funny story could have been– all who were descendants of dasyus were kept on attacked & killed by aryas–Buddhists & Jainis in past should have added these verses & presented as contaminated Ramayana . Lord Rama actually killed Yuvraj Angad who was son of Dasyu Vali whom Lord Rama sentenced death for his evil acts & oppression was actually not given his kingdom but rather Lord Rama ruled himself & later day killed Yuvraj Angad as he was son of Dasyu Vali & Sri Rama was “Arya”-as per called & addressed by Mother Sita on many occasions in Valimiki Ramayana.

      Ex.2 -Funnier Story: Lord Vibhishana who was brother of Ravana was enforced by Lord Rama to join his force because he was brother of “Dasyu” & Lord Rama’s actual mission as Arya was to eradicate & slave Dasyus & later day Lord Rama killed Vibhishana too. Although real history lies in greatness of Lord Rama who gave Lanka to be ruled by Vibhishana after the great one conquered Ravana & thrashed his ego & power.

      I feel sorry for inability of founders & leaders of Sharmanic Religions Buddhism & Jainism about how they neglected these varnas-as it could have been better helpful to propogate myths on name of 6 varnas than as they did on name of 4 varnas. And hence they could have attracted more customers in india & outside world on name of “Sangha” & “Dhamma”. Although if once they might have asked for what is meaning or definition of “Dhamma” they would have to refer to what they took it from Sanskrit words & hence Nighantu Grammar of Sanskrit which is Hinduism scripture & was being taken care by brahmins of contemporary time of those shramanics whom they were cursing badly because of just seeing some fanatics doing nonsense animal sacrifices rituals etc. on name of Vedas & coming to conclusion as if they were really Veda mentioned! One should at least take care of reading or confirming what others tell about something & whether it is true or not. Is it this kind of person whom you call “Unique unprejudiced one” or “Sensible Rationalist”?

      • Killing of Shambhuka by Rama was not in Ramayana but described in a poetic work of Bhavabhuti who wrote the famous “Uttararamacharitam” which is considered the best work in Sanskrit on the Karuna Rasa. In this work, the ‘samvada’ between Rama and Shambuka is described in depth; though Rama agrees that Shambuka did nothing wrong (by studying Vedas) according to him, but as per the prevailing rules i.e. varna dharma, he had no alternative to behead Shambuka.

  • How do you say that brahmins copied the ashok story? How can you not say that the reverse had happened?, The copying of lord Krishna’s and Arjuna’s interaction into Ashoka’s legend to make Buddhism look divine?

    • Scholars roughly date the Bhagavad Gītā to the period between 200 BCE and 200 CE. Ashoka was born in 302 BCE and died in 232 BCE. Thus, Gītā was written after Ashoka’s death or during his lifetime.

      • Brahmins cant have written it (as you assume) during Ashoka’s life time.
        What is the proof that brahmin’s have written it?
        If as you suggest “Brahmins have written it”, there was a buddhist regime for several hundred years in India, how come there was no opposition to it? .
        There was also no mention of it in any of the nayanmar text (Not even mentioned in the life history of adi shankara, Sambandar & many more There were several arguments between them during those periods., there should also have been an argument related to this during those periods, if the texts were copied.

        Quote one arguments between the buddhist saints & the hindu saints related to your assumption, rather than quoting scholarly beliefs.

        To actually date the bhagavat gita, first its essntial to date the mahabharata war which is again difficult because of the disappearance of Saraswati river

        • I said only what I said. Nothing more or nothing less.

          I didn’t say “Brahmins wrote it” nor that Buddhism reigned in India for hundreds of year. You said that.

          My lack of proof doesn’t prove your assertions as the truth.

  • I think you should consider the recent results from CERN. There is a chance that the people at CERN have discovered particles faster than light in reality( it is being checked and rechecked at present). Great theories explain data to a great extent. Hence experiments have shown Einstein’s theories to be valid. But it does not mean that they can never fail. That is my point in the post. Similarly the theory proposed in the original post by Mr. Kamath might be untrue.

    • Congratulations, for you have discovered a great truth. Science changes on the basis of evidence. But, religion does not change in spite of evidence.

      • So may I ask what “concrete” evidence do you or Dr. Kamath or some of the other people here have to outrightly reject Krishna and the Bhagvad Gita. I can only see some speculations based on an incomplete picture of the past. Its very easy to take bits and pieces of information and put them together to make up a credible looking story. And if you say whatever is written here is evidence then the opposing group also has enough evidence to prove their point. Please go through all the posts.

        • I do agree that this a speculation on how the Gita might have been produced. We reject Gita and Krishna because they do not have concrete evidence supporting them. As for the posts “supporting” the other side with “evidence”, I have read them all. The cases they are making are based on theological myths, not evidence.

          • You may say, Krishna may or may not have existed. But you can’t say either of it for certain. Bhagavadgita exists and is available. What is that you are asking?

  • Respected Kamath sir,

    It is a astonishing to read such a beautiful ancient truths. It is said in your post that many slokh of bhagavat gita had been manipulated, It is truth only, because what is need of a language been prevented from learning and spoken? What is need of its dignity drama? And now it is readily forced to feed even into the very low caste(fake claim)? Mostly the Sanskrit Vedas are only around Brahma! Who is not the uniquely accepted god of Hindus, and the god brahma is brought up by Brahmin, on failure of induction of Brahma, they depended the characters like Rama, Siva and many! Most of the Siva, Rama, Pandava stories are stories of then rulers of India. It is a tantric game by the lazy mass of the land, owned all the thought of others in the banner of divine language and safe guarded it until the common man acquired reading knowledge. What was actual state of education in India? Education was denied to vast mass in the name of varna! It was an unjust to nature, It is unforgivable sin ever registered in the indian pages, may be we forget it, but truth is an ugly one. Few people are now in the need of the recognition for their foul ethics. Many of the commands in this post are in badly support of varna theory, their minds still holding it and try to correct that in the same way like what they did with Gita as you written.

    • Many claims in this article have no basis, at the most strong resemblances. Ashoka’s and Arjuna’s remorse to violence could be similar. The nature of Mahabharata is of a literature and not history. Gita is suspected to be a later addition to the Mahabharata (no patents). Gita for its time and for long time and to considerable extend to the present time, hold relevance. It gave a logic and philosophy. The concept of Varna, lost it’s validity after industrial revolution, except to be continued by self serving few. This article looks to be over enthusiastic to debunk, ‘brahmanism’ and ‘brahmanic intentions’

      • Brahmin also human, most of Their present DNA (Hapla D and sub group)analyses goes along with other indian population including dalits. There is no personal hate game or some thing like that, It is a matter of self realization by exploding old beliefs. The need of the time is, every one should realize the truth and reexamine the old belief. We cannot simply ignore that religion is the cause for the major terror outbreak. If it is so, why cannot we think for a peaceful solution like religious free society? Try to be rationalist!

  • Dr Kamath is doing a great service to the Indian nation by rationaly analyzing our historical behavior that is responsible for India’s current misery. Many thanks to enlightened writers such as Dr. Kamath. Thank you sir – from a Bahujan.

  • He alone governed the area of around 4 countries (present map) and our politicians are so much learned but they can’t even run a state properly.

    Learn something Sibal sir. 🙂

  • The historical evidences available with us today as per my assumptions also point it towards the same.

    The rule of Chander Gupt & subsequent influence of Ashoka also proves that India in the past has been highly developed in comparison to other vicinity areas. The Brahmins who invented & adapted reference in linguistic (even today) Grammar , must have been highly knowledgeable indeed. Panini the inventor of Grammar is the creation of same period.

    Brahmins by confining their knowledge to themselves with the intent to maintain their superiority bought fall of their faith as well. As knowledge is their to share for growth not to confine & kill its essence.

    Though fissures within Hinduism were already visible as deviations in Brahminical cult were visible by the formation of Buddhism & Jainism within it.

  • I hope you do find my post as rational as yours . While your commitment to rationalism is commendible rationalism just does not mean concotinating theories and pushing them as truth in abscence of evidence.

    Can you please put a disclaimer in begining of this article that it is your speculation and hypothesis ? At best it can be your belief in abscence of any concrete proof. So your belief is as good or as bad as other’s belif nothing more nothing less.

    Now from my point of view.
    1. Krishn and Arjun may or may not have been real person but a poem called Geeta with deep philosopical underpinnings exists.

    2. It is obvious that a poem can not be recited on battlefield so it is composed afterwards taking incidences from some war.

    3. This war could have been any war and If The Geeta states it is from great war in Kurukhsetra there is no perticular reason to deny that story.

    4. I have strong doubts against the remorseful warrior being from Magadha in Kalinga war from Historical point of view.

    Mahabharat actually pretty accurately defines the geography and warriers who participated. It also describes non-Aryan tribes living northwards to the Country who participated in war such as Kambojas ( northern Afganistan) , Turushas ( Turkik tribes), Pehelvas ( Iran). These people in immdidate vicinity of India had long history of being in military services and mercinaries both in pre-Islamic world and after it. Since the description matches with geographical discription and also the people I see no reason to assign Geeta to a war which happned some 1500Km away.

    6. The warrier in Geeta is a reluctant warrier before war and not a remorseful warrier after war which is the context of Shantiparv in Mahabharat.

  • All the comments made above are quite interesting. To the comment made by Amit, I would like to point out that Kambhoja is certainly not Northersn Afganistan, but modern Kampuchea (Previously called Cambodia). In fact, modern Kandhahar in Afghanistan could well be the Gandhara of Mahabharata.
    About BG, one can be certain that it was not delivered on the Kurukshetra battlefield for the simple reason that it would take at least two days to recite it entirely.
    But consider for a moment what happened after the recital of BG – the war ensued with total annihilation of both the armies. From Kaurava’s side only four warriors survive the battle and on the other hand Pandavas also suffer equally – apart from Pandavas and Krishna only one Satyaki survives the war. All the upapandavas, Abhimanyu, Ghatotkacha, Draupadi’s brother and Commander of Pandava army – Drishtadrumya, Draupadi’s father Drupada, Pandavas’ host during the year in hiding viz. Virata and his son Uttara Kumara – all perished in the war. Surely Arjuna would have taken his ire on Krishna at his ill-founded advice in going to war when he (Arjuna) at the nth minute was willing to call off the war. In fact, Arjuna would be echoing the words of Ashoka (post Kalinga war) “If this is victory then what is defeat?”

  • The author has mentioned that the Gita was an invention of brahmins , ” They inserted this brief parable into the body of the ever-expanding Mahabharata epic, which by now was very popular with the masses, like its serial would be on television 2250 years later. ” i would like to know the references for this conclusion.


    • Roshan,

      The beauty is that he doesn’t have any references.
      What Kamath wrote is largely nonsense that makes Glenn Beck look good– he is not a historian, but more seriously, seems to be blissfully unaware that history as an academic discipline exists.

      As far as the Gita being “inserted” into the epic goes– yes, it certainly was, but this is neither a conspiracy nor an extraordinary event. The entire Mahabharata (Mbh) is a stratified text, as is the Ramayana. Both epics were oral, and bards felt no compunction in retelling the story and adding interesting bits where they saw fit. Krishna coming to Draupadi’s aid durin her disrobing is not found in certain manuscripts of Mbh, for example, but this is only one example among many.

      More academic versions of the Gita and the Mbh’s respective textual histories can be found in the works of John Brockington and Alf Hiltebeitel. Edwin Bryant and Laurie Patton have translated the Bhagavata Purana and Bhagavad Gita respectively and touch on the topics.

      This essay reads like a high school project asking to compare the legend of Arjuna to the legend of Ashoka (although the latter has a historical kernel). It is not, however, wise to take it seriously. The moral of the story is that losing one’s faith does not automatically lead one to reason– hence my distaste for Nirmukta, despite my atheist leanings. Shout out to Nirmukta– do dissociate yourself from this man, you seem to like him a lot. Invite people like Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib, or someone from abroad if you can (most social sciences academics in India being subpar).


      • Kindly read our comment policy, available next to the comment text area. No sarcastic belittling of the author is permitted. If you disagree, make your argument in a respectful way. You may attack the idea, not the author of that idea.

  • Getha was inserted in mahabartha during GUPTHA period the so called golden age of India when vast majority of buddists either killed or forcibly brought to vaidikadarma ,THIS IS A PLOT HATCHED BY BRAMINISM

    • Sir,
      You directly ‘DECLARE ‘ ” Getha was inserted in mahabartha during GUPTHA period the so called golden age of India when vast majority of buddists either killed or forcibly brought to vaidikadarma ,THIS IS A PLOT HATCHED BY BRAMINISM ”

      Is it true because you said so ?? or you have any proof or REFERENCE to it ???

      Thank you

    • Well, we don’t know exactly when the Gita was composed.
      We can only give a range, which gives us a window of 500 years, hardly good to pinpoint it to the Gupta Era. Buddhism did not die out in the Gupta Era though, as you assert. It held quite strongly in India through the 10th century, 600 years after you killed it off.

      And Buddhism didn’t die out because of pogroms against Buddhists either, there is very little historical evidence to support that. Even the so-called anti-Buddhist Pushyamitra Sunga (who ruled after the Mauryas) was in reality not so (see the works of Romila Thapar).

  • I don’t know, it sounds too much like a conspiracy theory to me. (I’ve read the whole series)

    My biggest problem is this: The Gita was written over a period of 400 years. No one “group” wrote it. The author makes it seem like a single group wrote it in a relatively short period of time for a single telos, but this can’t be the case.

    Also, the Gita would be a poor choice to conquer India with. Apart from the philosophical elites, it was a relatively unknown text until Orientalists wanted to find a “Gentoo Bible.”

  • This article is not merely individuals’ ideology but a suppressed truth. A truth which outcasts bitter policy adopted by ancient priests to take control over. Moreover many documents, great inventions and scripts were let to burn for 6 months in a conspiracy
    Yes, a great well planned conspiracy to burn down NALANDA UNIVERSITY LIBRARY. For 6 months it builds red hot flames and surprisingly none of person were around to shut off the fire. And they patent some foreign forces behind it. There were more documents regarding this conspiracy which was demolished in early 19th century so that they still hold superior position in modern world. I being ashamed of these facts, one can hide truth but can’t change truth.

    • ### There were more documents regarding this conspiracy which was demolished in early 19th century so that they still hold superior position in modern world.###

      Can you cite sources or is this another conspiracy theory . Plz do reply.

  • What happens if the assumed time periods of gita and ashoka turn out to be false. How can the author say for sure that ashokas story is itself not copied from someone else. And the blind assertions of this article might also be based on the fact that no body can verify the past and hence he may get a benifit of doubt. If there is caste system in place and many are victims of it then solutions should be found and not spinning some fake stories and constantly blaming brahmins for that. Also how to know the intensions of the articles is genuine and not perverted. Are rationalist on this site trying to act that way (ie are you really rationalist?). Think again.

  • Kamath says (hypothesis):

    ” Since they[brahmanas] could not resort to their usual cloak and dagger methods of getting rid of him[Ashoka], Brahmins’ invented a stealth weapon to destroy him and promote their own Dharma: A parable in the form of a beautiful song.”

    Sorry Kamath, I found evidence against that hypothesis:
    asmākaṁ tu viśiṣṭā ye tān nibodha dvijottama
    nāyakā mama sainyasya saṁjñārthaṁ tān bravīmi te (Bhagavd gita 1.7)

    So, How is possible to promote Brahmanism and at same time to promote killing a Brahmana? See verse 1.7, Drona is called dvija-uttama, the best of the dvijas(brahmana, ksatrya, vaisya), that is : brahmana.

  • Congratulations, for you have discovered a great truth. Science changes on the basis of evidence. But, religion does not change in spite of evidence

  • Scholars roughly date the Bhagavad Gītā to the period between 200 BCE and 200 CE. Ashoka was born in 302 BCE and died in 232 BCE. Thus, Gītā was written after Ashoka’s death or during his lifetime.

  • Mr Kamatji, excellent and correct analyses with strong support and knowledge. Buddhism can be a base of Indian culture.

  • Why do U see Brahmins in lens of scheming evil..

    Assume if Asoka & Buddhism philosophy of that Era had been continued without challenge, would all people now keep meditating without doing any work or no war happened in world or Indian subcontinent not colonized ?

    Actually it is not just Asoka, but Shramanic traditions which may have been target that gave rise to Bhagvadgita as pointed by many scholars before your enlightenment !!.

    Why postmortem of history should be taken in academic context and not bring it to settle scores in present.

    Wishful thinking of both liberals & conservatives for historical events in their favor or opposite..

Leave a Comment