Understanding the Indian word " Aadivaasi " :
Various names of Scheduled
Tribes (aadivaasi)
Various scholars have given different names to
the population which is popularly called "aadivasis" in India. , Nadgonde [p.1] has
summarized these terms:
(1) "Aboriginal" or "Aborigines"
by Riseley, Lassi, Elvin, Grigson, Shuburn, Talent, Martin and A. V. Thakkar
(2) "Primitive Tribes" by Hutton (3) "So called aborigines"
or "Backward Hindus" by Dr. G. S. Ghurye. (4) "Submerged humanity"
by Dr. Das. (5) "Vanavasis" is a new name given to them by
"Sangh Parivar", against which the tribal leaders are agitating as
they feel it as insulting as "Harijan" to the dalits. (6) Some
Adivasi leaders do not like the term "Adivasi" also, as they feel it
originates from Brahmanic texts and has an effect like "Harijan" for
untouchables. [L. K.Madavi, p. 10] (7) "Scheduled Tribe" is the term
used in the Constitution, the reason as explained by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, was:
"the word Adiwasi is
really a general term, which has no specific legal dejure connotation, whereas
the word 'Scheduled Tribes' has a fixed meaning, because it enumerates the
tribes. In the event of the matter being taken to a court of Law, there should
be a precise definition as to who these Adiwasis are. It was, therefore, decided
to enumerate the Adiwasis under the term to be called "Scheduled
Tribe" [Madavi: 1998:17]
Who should be called Aadivaasi
Nadgonde gives the following as distinctive marks of tribal society as distinct
from Hindu population:
(1) Separate
location
(2) Small
number
(3) Common
blood relationship
(4) Absence
of own dialect and own writing
(5) Own
life style
(6) Simple
Economics
(7) Limited
technology
(8) Common
religion and
(9) Integrated
social life
Differences between Castes and
Tribes:
1. Caste
is based on birth, and there is no entry to caste without being born in it.
Basis of tribe is not birth, but it is a group of people inhabiting in a
particular area and are related by blood.
2. Caste
is an endogamous group, but tribes do not oppose strongly the inter-tribal
marriages unlike caste. Inter dining also is allowed unlike caste.
3. Caste
has obligations to follow hereditary traditional occupations, tribe does not.
4. Castes
are spread on many areas but tribe stays at a place and has territorial
integrity.
5. Castes
have graded inequality in status, even subcastes have it, but not so in tribes.
Origins of
various names:
Various
tribes have their own legends about their origin. One example is about origin
of the word "Korku" - a legend says, once upon a time there ruled a
king in Vidarbha at Nagpur, called Koram. Renouncing his home and kingdom, he
went to forest with the intention of taking "sanyas". A young Kol
damsel fell in love with him and prayed for his love. King accepted after due
consideration. The progeny of this union was called "Korum" or
"Korku". The area where they stay in large numbers is even now termed
as Chota Nagpur. [Risley, "Tribe and Caste of Bengal, Appendix V.,
Chaure:1987:12]
Prehistoric
Period It is held by scholars like Sankhalia, that the people of Neolithic age
understood the use of fire, made pottery, cultivated grain and domesticated
animals. The potters wheel and the art of spinning and weaving are also traced
from the Neolithic period. [Mahajan:1972:28] .Some scholars believe that
present day Adivasis are the survivals of the Neolithic Age, some of the
Neolithic people were driven into hills and forests by later invaders and they
are at present represented by the Gonds, Bhils, Santhals, etc. and a number of
superstitious along with the worship of manes and spirits and Phallus images of
stone and wood and the the use of amulets, beads, sacred threads, shells,
stones, etc., for curing diseases and keeping away the evil spirits can be
traced to the Neolithic period. [Mahajan:1972:28]
Adivasis are
post Buddhistic :
The idea that
present day Adivasis are the "Original inhabitants" or "Mul
Nivasis" and are remnants of the Neolithic Age is a popular theory of many
activists. But it is far from the truth. Sociologists do not believe that the
present S.T.s are that ancient, as mentioned by Nadgonde, who avers that sociologists do not think them to be the
most ancient society or the most original residents. [Nadgonde:1986:2]
At the time
of rise of Buddhism, the society was so much intermixed that no trace of
"pure" Aryans, or pure Dravidians for that matter, was left.
Rhys Davids
has observed:
"It is
generally admitted that there are now no pure Aryans left in India. Had the
actual custom been as strict as the brahmin theory this would not be so. ... in
Northern India the ancient distinction, Aryan, Kolarian, and Dravidian, cannot,
at the time of the rise of Buddhism, any longer be recognized. Long before the
priestly theory of caste had been brought into any sort of working order, a
fusion, sufficient at least to obliterate completely the old landmarks, was an
accomplished fact; and the modern division (on caste), though race has also its
share in them, use different names, and are based on different ideas. [Rhys
Davids, "Buddhist India",p. 59]
Dr. Ambedkar
also has expressed the similar opinion. It follows, therefore, that the
creation of S.T.s is a post Buddhistic phenomenon, and the present day Adivasis
are descendants of population, who were called Naagas and were Buddhist by
faith, and after the fall of Buddhism were degraded to the present status by
the ruling priestly class because Naagas had the enmity with the Aryans, did
not worship Aryan Gods, did not perform yadnas but were devotees of Arhats, and
chaiytas.
Indus Valley
civilization was not of Aryans:
The present
Brahmanic scholarship is bent on proving that Aryans are the original residents
of India and that there was no "Aryan Invasion". They try to prove
that Aryans were a civilized people and were the builders and not the
destroyers of Harrapan Civilization. What is the reason, that they wish to
somehow prove this? To us, it appears that, since Mahatma Jotirao Phule
criticized the "Arya Bhats" for the atrocious behaviours of these
people towards "shudras and ati-shudras", in this "Land of
Bali" - BaliSthan -, and organized the masses against the Aryabhats, the
latter felt that they will loose the supremacy, which they had achieved and
very jealously
guarded. So it became eminent for them, they prove that they are not aliens,
they belong to the soil, and that Aryan Invasion is just a myth. Voluminous
literature is being created by them and every method is being used to promote
through the media, print as well as electronic, to put forward their view. Not
withstanding all this, it was the Naagas who were the original residents of
this land and Aryans were the invaders. That is the verdict of the history.
India was
land of Naagas and its language Tamil:
Who were the
people inhabiting India during the Indus Valley Civilization? The modern
scholars like Karan Singh and Dasaku Ikeda think that the Dravidians are the
descendants of people from Harrapan Civilization. In his opinion, "...the
creators of the Indus civilization were the forefathers of the Dravidians, who
today mainly inhabit southern India." [Karan Sing and Daisaku
Ikeda:1988:2]
Like many
others like Gail Olmvet, Datta Ray Chaudhari and Majumdar also opine that, the
main basis of Indian social cultural system is presumed to be Vedic Culture. This
presumption is baseless, and unacceptable. There is no doubt that, the Indus
valley culture played a great role in the development and preservation of
Indian culture.[Kosare:1989:263]
Dr.
Ambedkar's views:
That these
people were the Naagas is clear from the account by Dr. Ambedkar, who observes
that the students of ancient Indian History often come across four names, the
Aryans, Dravidians, Dasas and Naagas.
The Aryans
were not a single homogeneous people, being divided into at least two sections.
A greater mistake lies, he says, in differentiation of the Dasas from the
Naagas. Dasas are the same as Naagas, Dasas being another name for Naagas. Dasa
is the sanskritised from of the Indo Iranian word
Dahaka, which was the name of the king of the Naagas. The following points
emerge from his writings:
1. Undoubtedly
the Naagas were non-Aryans. A careful study of Vedic literature reveals a
spirit of conflict, of a dualism, and a race superiority between two distinct
types of culture and thought. The mention of the Naagas in the Rig Veda shows
that the Naagas were a very ancient people.
2. It must
also be remembered that the Naagas were in no way aboriginal or uncivilized
people. History shows a very close association by intermarriage between the
Naaga people with the Royal families of India. Not only did the Naaga people
occupy a high cultural level but history shows that they ruled a good part of
India.
3. That
Andhradesa and its neighbourhood were under the Naagas during early centuries
of Christian era is suggested by evidence from more sources that one. The
Satvahanas, and their Successors, the Chutu Kulu Satkarnis drew their blood
more or less from the Naaga stock.
4. Contrary
to the popular view is that Dravidians and Naagas are the names of two
different races, the fact is that the term Dravidians and the Naagas are merely
two different names for the same people.
5. The word
'Dravida' is the Sanskritised form of the word Tamil. The original word Tamil
when imported into Sanskrit became Damila and later on Damila became Dravida.
The word Dravida is the name of the language of the people and does not denote
the race of the people.
6. The thing
to remember is that Tamil or Dravida was not merely the language of South India
but before the Aryans came it was the language of the whole of India, and was
spoken from Kashmere to Cape Camorin. In fact it was the language of the Naagas
throughout India. ["The Untouchables", pp. 56, 58, 59, 63, 66, 75]
Vratyas were
Naagas:
Before
seventh century B.C., i.e. before the rise of the Buddha, all the ksatriya
dynasties of Mahabharata times had been ruined, shattered and destroyed. They
were replaced on one side by the Dravidas - Naagas in Taxilla, Patalpuri,
Udyanpuri, Padmawati, Bhogpuri, Nagpur, Anga or Champa, and
in various places in the south; and on the other side by ganas or republics of
vratyas like Licchavis, Mallas, Moriyas etc. [JyotiPrasad Jain, quoted by
Kosare:1989:42]
Brahmanic
literature calls the various clans like Lichavis, Mallas, Moriyas, etc. as
"Vratyas". The Shishunakas are called as "Ksatra-bandhus"
and not as Ksatriyas. According to Prof. Jaychandra Vidyalankar, this term is used
to describe the ignoble origin of these people. They were the warriors among
the vratyas, and the vratyas were those people who inhabitated the east and
north-west of madhya-desha. They were not followers of Vedic brahmin culture.
Their cultural language and day to day language in use was Prakrit. They did
not respect the brahmins, instead they
respected the arhants and worshipped the chaityas. [Kosare: 1989:42]
He further
avers that there was no pure progeny of Aryans alone. Because of inter
marriages, cultural interchanges and religious conversions, a new class of
Indian people was emerging, which comprised in majority of followers of
shramanic Naagas or Dravidas or Vratyas as they were called by the followers of
chaturvarnya. There used to be inter marriages among the Aryans and Dravidas,
and the ethnic differences were getting eliminated. All those who followed the
profession of ksatriyas, may they be descendants of Vedic Aryans, or
Manav-vamshi Aryans, or Vratyas, or Naagas or Vidyadharas or Dravidas, they all
called themselves as Ksatriyas, and were having marriage relationship among
themselves very freely. [Kosare:1989:42]
Sisunaaga
Dynasty:
The name of
Sisunaaga is applied to first king of dynasty by the Brahmins, but Buddhist
tradition, as seen in Mahawanso, applies it to tenth and narrates a legend,
that he was a son of a courtesan from a Licchavi king ( erstwhile in Nepal ),
was thrown on a dung heap as an abortion, a certain Naaga Raja revived and
protected the male child, who ascended the throne of Magadha. [Fergusson: 1971:
63]
Second
Buddhist convocation was held hundred years after the Buddha, during reign of
King Kalashoka. He and his successors, including nine Nandas, till Chandragupta
Maurya came on throne, were all Naagas, and were considered of very low caste
and hated by Brahmins. Maha Padma and Nanda, the only two of their names, certainly
known to us, are both names of serpents and their coins depict the serpent as
principle symbol. [Fergusson:1971:64]
After the
Shishu-Naagas, the Nandas ruled Magadha. Their founder was called by many
names, including "vratya-nandi Shishu Naaga", the term according to
K. P. Jayswal denotes of their being the vratyas, which meant that the Nandas
like their predecessors, Shishu Naagas, were also from the Naaga descent.
[Kosare:1989:43]
Naaga worship
is non-Vedic:
Fergusson
explains, though the serpent worship is found as traces in various places, it
is "diametrically opposed to the spirit of Vedas or of the Bible",
and it is prevalent among the Turanian races and essentially only among them
only. By Turanian he means Dravidians, in Indian context.[Fergusson:1971:3]
Like Vedas, Zend Avesta also records the religious beliefs of Aryans, and they
"are not, and never were, serpent worshipers anywhere" and that
"serpent worship is essentially that of Turanian, or atleast of non-Aryan
people." [Fergusson:1971:40]
Naagas were
Buddhists:
That the
Naagas were sympathizers and followers of Buddha is well known. Dr. Ambedkar in
1956. while converting half a million of his followers to Buddhism at Nagpur,
had remarked that his selection of Nagpur, was due to the historical association
of the area with the Naagas, who were friendly towards Buddhism. His opinion
that we all are the descendants of a Naaga Takshaka saved by Rishi Astika from
the genocide of Naggas, in the "Sarpa yadnya", performed by
Janmejaya, the great grand son of Pandavas, is also well known. We might also
quote a Buddhist tradition from Mahavatthu:
"Naagas
are generally devoted to the Buddha. The enthusiastic devotion that our
compilers believed Naagas to possess towards the Teacher and the Teaching finds
expression in the popular episode of Muchalinda's extraordinary way of
protecting the Exalted One during the seven days of untimely rain. They were
also among the beings who formed a body of guards protecting the Bodhisattva
and his mother. At the Bodhisatva's birth some Naagas came to bathe him, a
scene that had long been a favourite among sculptors. On the magnificent
demonstration of bearing parasols. From other sources we learn how they
happened to obtain relics of the Buddha, which they jealously guarded for a
long time." [Bhikku Telwatte Rahula: 1978:172, K. Jamanadas:1991:108]
While
describing the birth of Bodhisatta, Paul Carus mentions about Naaga kings:
"The
Naaga kings, earnestly desiring to show their reverence for the most excellent
law, as they had paid honour to former Buddhas, now went to greet the
Bodhisatta. They scattered before him mandaara flowers, rejoicing with
heartfelt joy to pay their religious homage." [Paul Carus, p.11]
That
"Naaga" was an honorable appellation used in ancient Indian society is
clear from the description of the rite of initiation of Buddhist Bhikku. Dharmanand
Kosambi mentions that the shramner desiring upasampada was being addressed as
"Oh, Naaga". [p. 57]
Diggha Nikaya
has two poems, which describe "how all the gods of the people come to pay
reverence, at Kapilvastu, to the new teacher", as Rhys Davids observes,
among whom were four kings, which included the King of Naagas. While explaining
the relationship between worship of Naaga, tree
and river, Rhys Davids observes:
"Then
come the Naagas, the Siren serpents, whose worship has been so important a
factor in the folklore, superstition, and poetry of India from the earliest
times down to-day. Cobras in their ordinary shape, they lived, like mermen and
mermaids, more beneath the water, in great luxury and wealth, more especially
of germ, and sometimes, as we shall see, the name is used of the Dryads, the
tree- spirits, equally wealthy and powerful. They could at will and often did,
adopt the human form and though terrible if angered, were kindly and mild by
nature. Not mentioned either in the Veda or in the pre-Buddhistic Upanishads,
the myth seems to be a strange jumble of beliefs, not altogether pleasant,
about a strangely gifted race of actual men; combined with notions derived from
previously existing theories of tree worship, and serpent worship, and river
worship."
But the
history of the idea has still to be written. These Naagas are represented on
the ancient bas- reliefs as men or women either with cobra's hoods rising from
behind their heads or with serpentine forms from the waist downwards."
[Rhys Davids, "Buddhist India", p. 223]
Though
"scarcely noticed in the Vedas", as Rhys Davids mentions, the Tree
worship formed an important part of the beliefs of peoples of Northern India at
the time of the rise of Buddhism, and the tree deities were called Naagas. As
to why tree gods are not mentioned separately, in Diggha Nikaya, Rhys Davids
observes:
"... The
tree-deities were called Naagas, and were able at will, like the Naagas, to
assume the human form and in one story the spirit of a Bunyan tree who reduced
the merchants to ashes is called a Naagaraja, the tree itself is the dwelling
place of Naaga. This may explain why it is that the tree-gods are not specially
and separately mentioned in the Maha Samaya list of deities who are there said
by the poet to have come to pay reverence to the Buddha. ..." [Rhys
Davids, "Buddhist India", p. 232]
Rajwade's
Opinion:
About the
existence of the Naagas in this country, shri V. K. Rajwade mentions that
'Rajtarangini' describes in detail about the Naaga kingdoms in Kashmir in olden
days. Astik parva of Mahabharat is related to Naagas from beginning to end. It
mentions the inhabitation of Naagas in the Khandava-prastha and Khandav vana
situated to the south of Yamuna river. Harivamsha mentions the of Naagas
residence to be in Nagpur.
Therefore,
there is no doubt that in olden days, during the Pandava times and there after,
there were Naagas residing on a vast territory of India. It can definitely be
stated on the basis of description of 'sarpa satra', that there was a fierce
war between the Naagas and Manavas for some time.
Arjuna
married a Naaga princess Ulupi. From this it can be inferred that some Naagas
were friendly towards the Manavas. [Kosare:1989:270]
Views of T.A
Gopinath Rao:
While
discussing hindu iconography he has agreed that majority of Buddhists were
Naagas, as he said, quite a long time back, that many regions of India, in
historical times, were inhabitated by the Naagas and they are said to have
formed the majority of persons who joined the newly started Buddhistic
religion. [p.554] He further states:
"Some
scholars of Malabar are inclined to believe that the modern Nayars (Sudras) of
Malabar might be descendants of early Naagas as name within modern times might
have been corrupted into Nayars. The hypothesis is more fictitious and fanciful
than real and tenable." [Gopinath Rao:II,2:554]
Prof. Rao,
who categorically mentions Nayars were sudras, finds the theory that they were
Buddhists, untenable. It is difficult to understand what faults Prof. Rao found
with the theory. At least, we do not find any particular reason to disbelieve
this theory. One thing is certain that the Nayars were
the original inhabitants of the region, they did not come from outside. Before
the Brahmins came from the North and establish 'sambamdhams' with the female
folks of Kerala, and thus dominated over the Nayar community, the original
inhabitants were the Naagas only.From 'Naaga' they could have become 'Nayar'.
What is so peculiar in this, that Prof. Rao finds, is hard to understand.
Let it be as
it may, the fact remains that the Naagas became Buddhist in great numbers, is a
fact that is certain, as admitted by him. Today's Indian society is made up of and
is developed from the erstwhile aboriginal tribal people, is a fact recognized
by all the scholars. Then what is the difficulty in accepting that the word
'Nayar' could have come from 'Naaga'?
The relations
of Nayars with low caste Pullayas, who were undoubtably Buddhists originally,
can also be judged by a well known, and now banned by British, custom of so
called "Pullaya scare", where a Nayar woman had to go with a Pullaya
man, if touched by him outside the house while alone, during one month in a year
after Makar Sankrati. This custom is recorded by Barbodosa, a Portugese
traveller comming to India.
There was a
casteless society among the Naaga culture:
The non-aryan
Naaga people were believers in Buddhistic social culture. During their rule,
there was a society based on social equality in India, because their cultural
values were influenced by the Buddhist traditions.
This social
system of Naagas, even in those early days, is noteworthy in contrast to
Brahmanical social system of inequality. It is unfortunate that the modern high
caste scholars, while narrating the greatness of ancient Indian culture, ignore
this fact. Shri H. L. Kosare opines:
"As all
the elements in the Naagas society were treated with equal status, casteless
social order was the main basis of social system of Naagas. As the Naaga
culture was based on Buddha's principles of equality, it received the status of
Buddha's religion. Thus, Naaga culture played the greatest role
in the process of establishing a casteless egalitarian and integrated society
in Indian cultural life." [Kosare: 1989: 256]
"Basham
has shown that there is no mention of caste anywhere in ancient Tamil
literature. But after Aryan influence increased, and political and social
system became more complex, caste system which was somewhat more severe than in
north, evolved even here. The period of Sangam literature is third century
A.D., This shows that during the Satavahana rule there was no caste
system." [Kosare:1989:251]
Naagas had
their Republics:
Not only
their social system was public oriented, but unlike the brahmanical system,
their political system also was designed to give social justice to all sections
of people. It is well known that during pre- Gupta era, from first to the
beginning of fourth century A.D., the central countries in India comprised of
strong Republics of Naagas.
Samudragupta
destroyed these republics. About the system of administration of Bharshiv
Naagas, Dr. K. P. Jaiswal has observed that their social system was based on
the principles of equality. There was no place for any caste system in them.
They all belonged to one and the same caste." [Kosare: 1989: 251]
There were
independent kingdoms of Naagas in South India also. These kingdoms came
together and formed a federal republic. This federal republic of Naagas was
termed as Fanimandal or Naagamandal. This Cheromandal republic of Naagas of
South India was very powerful and indivisible at the time of Periplus, i.e. in
80 A.D. Later during Ptolemy's times, i.e. 150 A.D., north eastern part of
Tondemandalam became separate. (J.P.Jain, 'bharatiya itihas', p. 239). This
Cheromandal or Fanimandal was a federation of separate kingdoms of Naagas
coming together to
form a united national federation. In reality, it was a united Naaga Nation of
South India. [Kosare:1989:179]
Naagas in
Mahabharata:
It is an
accepted fact, that Mahabharata had minimum three revisions as per brahmanic
scholars, along with Gita in it. As a matter of fact, scholars like Khare, an
ardent student of Gita from Pune, has differentiated the verses of each of
three authors, in his book. Western scholars like Kaegi believe that the epics
continued to be interpolated upto 13th century and even to the beginning of
current century.
Therefore, it
is no wonder that Rhys Davids finds it difficult to assign particular verses to
Mahabharata depicting state of affairs in seventh century B.C. at the time of
rise of Buddha. [Rhys Davids, p. 214] He feels the changes made by priests were
"because the priests found that ideas not current in their schools had so
much weight with the people that they (the priests) could not longer afford to
neglect them." The objects of priests in doing so were:
"...in
the first place to insist on the supremacy of the brahmins, which had been so
much endangered by the great popularity of the anti-priestly views of the
Buddhists and others; and in the second place to show that the brahmins were in
sympathy with, and had formally adopted, certain popular cults and beliefs
highly esteemed by the people. In any case, there, in the poem, these cults and
beliefs, absent from the Vedic literature, are found in full life and power.
..." [Rhys Davids, "Buddhist India", p. 214]
Mahabharata
is a story of feud between Kurus and Pandus, and Pandus are unknown to early
literature, either Brahamanas or Sutras. Mahabharata was originally a story of
war between Kurus and Panchalas.
But
Mahabharata without Pandus is 'like an Iliad without Achilles and Agamemnon'.
In the epic, Panchalas are allies of Pandus. Pandus are for the first time
mentioned by Katyayana (c.180 B.C.). Pandus first come to view in later
Buddhist literature, as a mountain clan. Epic Pandus is not a people but a
family. [Cambridge hist. of India, p.226] But who were Panchalas?
Presumably,
they were Aryans and the epic represents the 'fight between Aryans after the
original inhabitants were overthrown and Brahmanised'. But the author says this
is doubtful, and speculates:
"It is
possible that the Panchalas represent five Naaga clans (with ala 'a water snake'
cf. Eng. eel) connected with the Kurus or Krivis (meaning 'serpent' or
'Naaga'), and that none of the families is of pure Aryan blood, for the Naagas
in the epic are closely related to Pandus ..." [Ibid., p. 227]
Mahabharata
opens with a curse on Naagas:
Fergusson
avers that, to start with, this epic poem opens, with a curse on the serpents.
Poet uses the words so cleverly that, if carelessly read, the curse could
appear to be on reptiles and not on human worshipers. But in reality it is a
curse on the Naaga people. In Adi parva the word used is "Naaga" and
in Vana parva, where Bhima gets in trouble with Nahusha in the form of a real
serpent, it is "sarpa". [Fergusson:1971:47]
"the
story of great sacrifice for the destruction of the serpents is so mixed up
with historical and human action that it is evident at once that the ambiguity
about the name is only seized upon by the Hindu poets as an excuse for
introducing the super natural into an ordinary human transaction, ..."
[Fergusson: 1971:47]
Immediately
after the introductory passages, the story Naaga races starts with two sisters
Kadru and Vinata marrying Rishi Kashyapa. Kadru, the eldest, becomes mother of
1,000 Naagas, from whom originates the whole Naaga race. Important among the
names of her decedents are Sesha, Vasuki, Airavata, Takshaka, Karkotaka,
Kaaliya, Aila or Elaapatra, Nila, Anila, Nahusha and others. The younger
sisters gives birth to garuda, who becomes a powerful enemy of Garuda race.
"When divested of all poetical garb and mythological rubbish", the
heroes Mahabharata, "Lunar race" are of second horde of Aryan race
comming to India, comming about 1000 years after purer "Solar race",
their original seat traced near north of Peshawar, however, has shown all of
Buddhistic sculptures of Bactrian influence. [Fergusson:1971:59]
They passed
through Punjab and settled at Hastinapura. In the first transaction with
Naagas, they burn the forest Khandava, for making place for a second capital
and dislodge the Naagas there. The Naagas were protected by a Buddhist deity
Indra. But attacked by Vedic god Agni, the brahmin poet
depicts that all Naagas perished except their king Takshaka. [Fergusson: 1971:
60]
The relations
with the Pandus and Naagas were most friendly as seen by Arjuna, marrying first
Ulupi, the daughter of a Naaga king at the foot of Himalayas, near Hurdwar, and
marrying Chitrangada, daughter of Chitravahana, the Naaga king of Manipur. By
her, he had a son, Bhabravahana, who played a strange part subsequently, during
Arjuna's Ashwamedha. From these and other minor particulars, Fergusson feels,
"the
author of Mahabharata wished to represent the Aryans of that day as cultivating
friendly relations with the aborigines." [Fergusson: 1971: 60]
The quarrel
between Aryans and Naagas started when Parikshit insulted a hermit by hanging a
dead snake around his neck. Hermit's son invoked Takshaka, who is represented
as king of Takshashila. Takshaka bit the king to death to avenge the insult.
Janmejaya started the great sacrifice for destruction of the Naagas to avenge
the assassination of his father.
Thousands -
myriads - had already perished when slaughter was stayed at the intervention of
Astika, a Brahmin, though nephew of Vasuki, a Naaga king of east. Probably, the
remnants got converted or promised submission to Aryans and for next 3 or 4
centuries, we hear nothing about Naagas until 691 B.C., when we find Naaga
dynasty on the throne of Magadha, and in reign of sixth king Ajatshatru, the
Buddha was born in 623 B.C., and "regeneration of the subject races was
inaugurated." [Fergusson: 1971: 60]
About
Manipur, he feels it curious to observe that in Manipur, the scene of Arjuna's
marriage with Chitragandha, and his slaughter by her son, that at present day,
the peculiar God of Royal family is a species of snake called Pa-kung-ba, from
which family claims decent. [Fergusson: 1971: 61] In the immediate neighborhood
of Manipur, there are numerous tribes of aboriginal people still called Naagas,
though they are not serpent worshipers. [Fergusson: 1971: 61] The site of the
Naaga sacrifice of Janmejaya is said to be Kurukshetra, but it is more probable
that the site is in Orrisa, at Agrahaut. Here the tradition of Mahabharata is
preserved by images of kings, who could not be present on the occasion. And the
serpent worship is still prevalent in the region.[Fergusson: 1971: 61]
Naaga Rajas
in Kashmir:
Fergusson
believes, "Kashmir has always been considered, in historical times, as one
of the principle centres of serpent worship in India", and whatever
knowledge of Naagas has been gathered is from its legends.
Though Naaga
worship prevailed from ancient past, it is certainly seen from a century before
Christ, when king Damodara, as per Raj Tarangani, was converted into a snake
because he offended some brahmin. He was succeeded by three tartar princes who
were Buddhists as confirmed by their coins. His successor was Abhimanyu, who
appears to be against the Buddhists. His successor Gonerda III, restored the
Naaga worship. Many more Naaga kings are mentioned. [Fergusson: 1971: 45]
When Huen
Tsang entered the valley in 632 A.D. during the reign of Baladitya, Buddhism
was flourishing, though the King was against Buddhism. He repeats the usual
story of valley being a lake in the past, but adds that fifty years after the
Nirvana of the Buddha, a disciple of Ananda, converted the Naaga Raja, who
quitted the tank, built 500 monasteries, and invited bhikkus to dwell in them.
[Fergusson: 1971: 46]
It is not
only in the valley of Kashmir, but from Kabul to Kashmir, Huen Tsang finds
Dragon Kings or Naaga Rajas playing important role in the history of land. All
this shows how north west India, in seventh century, was Naaga worshiper and
became Buddhist. [Fergusson:1971:46]
Huen Tsang
further mentions a legend of a king of Sakya kula, during his travels through
the land, fell in love with and married a Naaga princess, who was cured of
blindness by the Buddha Himself; and her son was among those who were present
during the distribution of relics of Buddha on His nirvana. [Fergusson: 1971:
46]
Another
legend is of a Bhikku becoming a serpent because he killed the tree Elaapatra
and resided in a beautiful lake or spring near Taxila. People could go there
along with a sramana, during Huen Tsang's times, and their wishes of good rain
or weather were fulfilled by prayer of the Naaga. General Cunningham visited
the spring in 1863, and found it still reverenced. [Fergusson: 1971: 46]
A story in
'Mahavamso', confirms the presence of Naaga Kings two centuries before Huen Tsang.
A bhikku, named Majjhantiko, was sent to Kashmir and Gandhara by Ashoka after
third Sangiti in 253 B.C.
Aravaalo, the
Naaga king ruling there, tried to terrify the bhikku, but was ultimately
converted to Buddhism. Similarly in Himavanta, 84,000 Naagas were converted,
and all his subjects were bowing down to the Thero. [Fergusson:1971:47]
Ambassadors
of Alexander, returning after a visit to Kashmir, mentioned that the King there
cherished two large serpents. The King of Taxilla also showed to Alexander a
huge serpent being worshipped, according to Strabo. [Fergusson:1971:47]
The Naaga and
Buddhist influence persisted till Moghul times as Abdul Fazal tells us in
"Ayeene Akbari", that during reign of Akbar (1556-1605), there were
temples in Kashmir, 45 of Shiva, 65 of Vishnu, 3 of Brahma, 22 of Durga, but
700 of the Naagas, in active worship. All this is confirmed by the architecture
of the valley. [Fergusson: 1971: 47]
Rise of
Buddhism:
A large
section of Indian population is of Turanian race, which fell prey to hordes
coming from west for centuries. The incoming Aryans intermixed with aboriginal
races, became weak and were subdued by next hordes coming in. Less pure
"Lunar race" came about 13th or 14th century B.C.
For next
thousand years, no other horde came here, due to powerful kingdoms in Assyria
and Persia. As the blood of Aryans had become impure, Veda had lost its rule of
faith. Under these circumstances, Sakyamuni tried to "revive the religion
of aboriginal Turanians" and his call was responded to by not only Turanians
in India, but by "all the Turanian families of mankind." [Fergusson:
1971: 62]
On Puranic
evidence, Fergusson, rather unjustifiably feels, the Buddha himself was Aryan.
Though Buddhist tradition takes his son Rahula as a bhikku, Vishnu Purana
records his succession to throne of his grand father. He says: "the
dissemination of Buddhist religion is wholly due to the accident of its having
been adopted by the low caste kings of Magadha, and to its having been elevated
by one of them to the rank of the religion of the state." [Fergusson: 1971:
62] As a matter of fact, the Buddha was a Naaga, and even by Brahmins, he is
described as Vratya Kshatriya. Fergusson feels that as the reforms introduced
by the Buddha, ancestral worship was abolished and worship of relics of saints
started, serpent worship was repressed and "its sister faith" the
tree worship, was elevated to first rank. [Fergusson: 1971: 63]
Ahimsa of
Buddha:
Ferguson
avers that the Buddha promoted asceticism, denounced the sensual enjoyment and
preached nonviolence, and observes:
"No war
was ever waged by Buddhists, ... No faith was ever so essentially propagated by
persuation as that of Buddha, and though the Buddhists were too frequently
persecuted even to destruction, there is no instance on record of any attempt
to spread their faith by force in any quarter of globe." [Fergusson: 1971:
63]
Serpent
worship during Mauryan Dynasty:
Ashokan
edicts do not show worship of Buddha, or tree or Serpent, but Mahinda takes branch
of Bo tree to Ceylon and in caves in Orissa we see both tree and serpent
worship prevalent during the period. [Fergusson: 1971: 64]
Time of
Naagaarjuna and Kanishka:
Naagaarjuna
was the ruling spirit behind the Buddhist Council held under Kanishaka. Roman
coins dated 73 to 33 B.C. are found in a stupa by Kanishka at Manikyaal. The
Name Naalandaa originates from a Naaga called Naalandaa, who resided in a pool
nearby. Naagaarjuna was monk at Naalandaa
monastery. According to him,
"the
words uttered by the Sakya Muni during his life time, had been heard and noted
down by the Naagas, and have kept them to themselves in their own abode, till
such time as mankind would become worthy to receive them. Naagaarjuna gave out
that he had received these documents from the Naagas and was commissioned to
proclaim them to the world. ..." [Fergusson: 1971: 65]
Buddhist
Sculptures:
The literary
evidence is only available from Lalita-vistara of Tibet onwards, and such later
books from Ceylon etc., it is hoped that original sutras would be available in
future. Our only means to reconstruct the history is from archeological finds
from Ashoka edicts, Sanchi, Amravati, Ajintha, Mahabalipuram,
and other caves in ghats. [Fergusson: 1971: 67]
Ashoka's
inscriptions present the picture of early Buddhism, entirely different and in a
wonderful contrast with Buddhism of Lalitvistara.[Fergusson: 1971: 67]
Gateways of
Sanchi are of times of Naagarjuna, in first half of first century. "Buddha
never appears in them as an object of worship. The Dagoba, the Chakra or wheel,
the tree and other such emblems are reverenced. Serpent does appear but
rarely." [Fergusson: 1971: 67]
At Amravati,
three centuries later, Buddha is worshipped, but Naaga is his coequal, more in
accordance with modern notions. Dagoba, Tree, Chakra are all worshipped. Thus
Sanchi gives picture of Hinayana and Amaravati that of Mahayana, before coming
of Fa Hian. [Fergusson: 1971: 67]
Ajanta
depicts picture just before its decline, three centuries later than Amravati.
There is no serpent worship in paintings, but Naaga representations are found
as sculptured decorations on the doorways or in detached bas-reliefs in the
caves. [Fergusson: 1971: 67]
At
Mahabalipuram, is the most important bas-relief described by Fergusson, which
today's brahmanic scholars like to describe as a scene of "Descent of
river Ganges". He mentions it as "great Naaga sculpture belonging to
the classical stage of Indian Art". He describes the sculpture in minute
details, and laments that the top portion is broken away, In 1827, only the
lower part of Naaga was remaining, but his wife below him was quite intact. It
has a form of Naaga different from those at Sanchi, Amravati and Ajanta, but
the grouping of the figures around Naaga is so similar to the oldest one in
Sanchi, as if so many centuries made no difference in style, and this is last
of Takshaka sculptures. [Fergusson: 1971: 68]
Ayrans
created writings, Turanians created structures :
Fergusson
believes, Turanians were builders, the stone architecture starting from Ashoka.
The point that Turanian, i.e. Dravidian culture had also created great
Buddhistic literature, and has been destroyed by Brahmanic / Aryan / Sanskritic
vandalism, has not been taken into account by him, it seems. He mentions:
"... It
(Buddhism) was not a reform of Vedic religion of Aryans, but simply that when
they had lost their purity, Sakya Muni called on the subject races to rise, and
moulded their feelings and their superstitions into that form of faith we now
know as Buddhism. It was when these Turanians first came into power that
permanent architecture was thought of in India, and as they grew in strength,
and their influence extended, so did their architecture acquire consistency,
and spread over the length and breadth over the land. They had no literature,
or next to none; at least we have not yet found one Buddhist book that was
reduced to its present shape till nearly 1000 years after the death of the
founder of the religion. ... Stated in its broadest terms, the distinction is
this, - all the literature of India is Aryan, all the architecture is Turanian;
and the latter did not come into existence till the former race had lost their
purity and power, or, in other words, till the Turanian religion, known as
Buddhism, rose to surface, and its followers usurped the place hereto occupied
by the Aryans and their Vedas." [Fergusson: 1971:78]
Tribal
Population in Sanchi and Amaravati Stupas:
By careful
study of human figures both of men and women, which Fergusson has described in
minute details, he identified two distinct races to be present there.
One is
described as civilized, and worshiping the Buddhist emblems like Chakra, Stupa
and tree. He is actually referring to Buddhist upasakas, i.e. house holders,
though he calls them as "Hindoos", not in modern sense as of
brahmanic faith, as word "hindoo" has no relevance for a period
before the arrival of Muslims. As against this there is another race, referred
by Fergusson as "Dasyus", for want of any suitable name, which is of
Aboriginal Tribal culture, mostly worshiping Naaga emblems. These were labeled
as "ascetics or priests" by General Cunningham and Colonel Massey,
because their costumes resembled Buddhist ascetics in Burma and other Buddhist
countries. But Fergusson believes them to be Aboriginal tribals. He says, as
there is no appropriate name, he would
"unhesitatingly"
suggest them to be called as "Takshaka", like Colonel Todd did. This
is because, they are essentially serpent worshipers and "Naaga and
Takshaka being synonymous appellations in Sanskrit for snake, and Takshaka is
the celebrated Naagavamsha of the early heroic history of India." He
believes, these people were converted to Buddhism, as he says:
"From
their appearing so frequently on Buddhist monuments, we may certainly assume
that they were converted eventually to Buddhism, and being a tribe dwelling in
woods, their priests may have become forest ascetics ..." [Fergusson:
1971: 94]
He further
avers that they were the real architects of India, their original home was near
Takshsila, the important seat of serpent worship, and from there they spread
all over India. [Fergusson: 1971: 95]
Antiquity of
Naaga worship:
Fergusson
believes that, Snake worship was an old and prevalent form of original faith
all over India before Aryans arrived, and Aryans adopted it gradually as they
intermarried with indigenous Naaga people. He remarks:
"It is
not mentioned in Vedas, hardly hinted at in Ramayana, occupies a considerable
space in Mahabharata, appears timidly at Sanchi in the first century of our
era, and is triumphant at Amaravati in the fourth, and might have become
dominant faith of India had it not been elbowed from its place of power by
Vishnuism and Shaivism, which took its place when it fell together with the
religion of Buddha, to which it had allied itself so closely."
[Fergusson:1971:114]
Amaravati and
Tree worship:
As is well
known, Buddha at Amaravati is now a days is worshipped as Shiva, the subject
being discussed more fully by us elsewhere. [Tirupati Balaji was a Buddhist
Shrine, p. 10]. The Tree worship and Naaga worship are well known methods of
Buddhist practices. After conversion to Brahmanism, even now they form
important part of ritual at Amareswara. Fergusson, while describing tree
worship at Amaravati, observes:
"The
following is a curious instance of irradicability of local forms, even long
after the religion to which they belonged may have perished. At the present
day, during the festival of Navaratri, in honour of Shiva at Amareswar, the
immortal lord, on the third night a brazen tree is carried round the town in
procession; on the fifth night a ten headed serpent in brass. At the close of
the festival the worshipers go in great pomp to a tree called Shemmu Veerchum,
where the god is made to exercise in shooting an arrow at the sacred tree,
followed by discharge of fire arms in the air,
which closes the ceremony. In the festival called Shiva Maharatri, the
procession to the same tree is the culminating point, to which all previous
arrangements are subordinate, and thus the festival closes." [Fergusson:
1971: 171]
Mihirkula and
Feet marks of Buddha:
The feet
marks of Buddha are seen in many places at Amaravati, and are also seen stamped
on cloths there. Mihirkula, a Shaivite king of Kashmir, is well known as the
enemy of Buddhists. He waged a war against Sri Lanka, because his wife happened
to wear a jacket of Simhala cloth, which was stamped with feet marks of Buddha.
The impression came off on her bosom, and the king became indignant and invaded
Ceylon, and forced him to stamp the cloth in future with a golden sun.
[Fergusson: 1971: 189]
Tribals are
Naagas:
Fergusson
describes mainly two types of persons worshiping Buddha and being disciples of
Buddhism. Turanians are the Dravidians, also termed the Naagas, whom we now
know as aboriginal tribal population. Who are the people, whom Fergusson
referred to as Hindoos. He himself has cleared the point. : "... the
sculpture meant to represent the inhabitants of the province now known as Upper
Bengal, more specially of the districts of Tirhoot and Behar, which were
assuredly the cradle of Buddhism. ..." [Fergusson: 1971: 225]
The people
who are associated with Buddha in both the stupas of Sanchi and Amarawati, are
the mixed race of Bengal, with some Aryan blood, but mostly which was mixed
with the aboriginal tribes of Bengal before Aryan invasion. That the Buddhism could
rise on its ruins, is the evidence of it.
Another
important question is, Are the people who wear the snake hoods are as same race
or not. Fergusson believes that the difference is only artistic, they are the
same people but of two different nations. He explains that these are the
aboriginal tribes.:
"The
people whose manners and customs appear to present the closest affinities with
what we found on the monuments, are those known as the Gonds and other closely
allied tribes inhabiting the country to the south of the Vindhya hills. From
their language we learn that they were allied to Dravidians, now occupying
nearly the whole of Madras Presidency, ..." [Fergusson: 1971:225]
After careful
study of figures, Fergusson comes to conclusion that people with snakes are the
Naaga people. [Fergusson: 1971: 192]
Adivasis in
South India:
Most ancients
were "Villavar", (bowmen) identified with Bhils and
"Minaver" (fishers) identified with Meenas. The other group is termed
by the Sangam poets as Naagas, whom Hindu books depict as semi divine beings,
half men and half snake, but Tamil poets describe them as warrior race with
bows and nooses and famous as free booters. Various tribes are mentioned like
Aruvalar in Arvunadu, and Aruva vadatalai, Eyinar, Maravar, Oliyar, and
Paradavar (fisher tribe), who are certainly belonged to Naaga stock. [Cambridge
hist. of India, vol. I, p. 539]
The main
dynasties ruling Tamil country were of land tilling class. Pandyas, claiming
descent from a tribe styled Maarar, Chola kings from tribe Tirayyirar, and
Chera from Vaanavar tribe. Even in first century A.D., the country was free
from Brahman caste system, thanks to the influence of strong Buddhist and Jain
churches. [Cambridge hist. of India, p. 540]
Satavahanas
were Buddhists and not of Brahmanic faith Because Goutamiputra Satkarni
performed the yajnyas, as mentioned in Nanaghat inscription of Naaganika, some
scholars tend to think that he belonged to Brahmanic faith. This is a wrong
interpretation. Shri Kosare feels the nature of these vedic yajnyas must be
considered as a political act of a Kshatriya to raise ones own political
prestige, status and glory as an Emperor. These yajnyas had absolutely no
Brahmanic effect on the republican style of their social culture in Satvahana times.
Similarly, there are no records to show that any other king of Satvahana
dynasty performed any vedic sacrifices. On the contrary, it appears that
Buddhism flourished and developed to a great extent during the Satvahana period
only. [Kosare:1989:167]
Brahmanic
traditions do not depict correct picture:
It is now
well recognised that Brahmanic books try to depict the superiority of Aryan /
Sanskritic / Brahmanic culture and ignore the vast population, which had always
been against this culture. Prof. Rhys Davids, aptly, points out this mentality:
"It is
the accepted belief that it is in the literature of the brahmins that we find
the evidence as to the religious beliefs of the peoples of India in the sixth
and seventh centuries B.C. This seems to me more than doubtful."
The priests
have preserved for us, not so much the opinions the people actually held, as
the opinions the priests wished them to hold. ... We see how unreasonable it
would be to expect that the brahmins, whose difficulties were so much greater,
should have been able to do more.
What they
have done they have done accurately and well. But the record they have saved
for us is a partial record. [Rhys Davids, "Buddhist India", p.210 ]
Language of
masses was Pali:
That similar
misinformation is spread by the Brahmanic claims that Sanskrit was lingua
franca of India is clear when he avers:
"What
had happened with respect to religious belief is on a par with what had
happened with respect to language. From Takkasila all the way down to Champa no
one spoke Sanskrit. The living language, everywhere, was a sort of Pali. ... in
the schools of the priests, and there only, a knowledge of the Vedic language
(which we often call Sanskrit) was kept up. But even this Sanskrit of the
schools had progressed, as some would say, or had degenerated, as others would
say, from the Vedic standard. And the Sanskrit in actual use in the schools was
as far removed the Vedic dialact as it is from the so-called classical Sanskrit
of the post Buddhistic poems and plays." [Rhys Davids, p. 211]
The religion
of masses was not Vedic:
The brahmanic
books, and their propaganda by the vested interests, try to give an impression
that the religious beliefs of Indian masses also were Vedic. This is far from
the truth. Rhys Davids remarks:
"So with
the religion, outside the schools of the priests the curious and interesting
beliefs recorded in the Rig Veda had practically little effect. The Vedic
thaumaturgy and theosophy had indeed never been a popular faith, that is, as we
know it. ... The gods more usually found in the older system - the dread Mother
Earth, the dryads and the dragons, the dogstar, even the moon the sun have been
cast into the shade by the new ideas (the new gods) of the fire, the exciting
drink, and the thunderstorm. And the charm of the mystery and the magic of the
ritual of the sacrifice had to contend, so far as the laity were concerned,
with the distaste induced by its complications and its expense. ... Those
beliefs (in Rig Veda) seem to us, and indeed are, so bizarre and absurd, that
it is hard to accept the proposition that they give expression to an advanced
stage to thought. And one is so accustomed to consider the priesthood as the great
obstacle, in India, an way of reform, that it is difficult to believe that the
brahmins could ever, as a class have championed the newer views.
"But a
comparison with the general course of the evolution of religious beliefs
elsewhere shows that the beliefs recorded in the Rig Veda are not primitive. A
consideration of the nature of those beliefs, so far as they are not found
elsewhere, shows that they must have been, in the view of the men who
formulated them, a kind of advance on, or reform of, the previous ideas, and at
least three lines of evidence all tend to show that certainly all the time we
are here considering, and almost certainly at the time when the Rig Veda was
finally closed there were many other beliefs, commonly held among the Aaryans
in India, but not represented in that Veda." [Rhys Davids, Buddhist India,
p. 212]
Atharva Veda
is more ancient:
It is well
known that there are in reality only two Vedas, Rig and Atharva, the other two
Sama and Yajus being the compilation of verses mostly from Rig, with a few more
ideas being added. Out of these two, Atharva has got beliefs more ancient, the
beliefs of ancient original residents, and therefore, the brahmins for a long
time did not recognise it as a Veda, neither did the Buddhists. Rhys Davids
explains:
"The
first of these three lines is the history of the Atharva Veda. This invaluable
old collection of charms to be used in sorcery had been actually put together
long before Buddhism arose. But it was only just before that time it had come
to be acknowledged by the sacrificial priests as Veda inferior to their own three
older ones, but still a Veda. This explains why it is that Atharva is never
mentioned as a Veda in the Buddhist canonical books. ... Yet it is quite
certain that the beliefs and practices to which the Atharva Veda is devoted are
as old, if not older, than those to which the three other Vedas refer; and that
they were commonly held and followed by the Aryans in India. ..." [Rhys
Davids, "Buddhist India", p.213 ]
Forest folks
were looked after by Ashoka:
An account of
his Kalinga conquest and its effects is given by Ashoka himself in Rock Edict
XIII. After the horrible disaster, he expressed profound sorrow and regret for
the war, and started spreading Buddhism. About the forest dwellers he said, in
the same edict:
"Even
upon the forest-folk in his dominion, His Sacred Majesty looks kindly and he
seeks to make them think aright, for, if he did not, repentance would come upon
His Sacred Majesty. They are bidden to turn from evil ways that they be not
chastised. For His Sacred Majesty desires that all animated beings should have
security, self control, peace of mind and joyousness." [Mahajan,
"Ancient India", p. 276]
Why Ashoka
was sympathetic towards Adivasis is explained by todays Adivasi scholars:
because "he was himself of the same blood", says Venkatesh Atram as
well as L. K. Madavi. [Venkatesh Atram, "Gondi sanskuti che
sandarbha", p. 51] Naagas flourished before Guptas. Among the important
monarchies flourishing before the rise of Guptas, the most important were the
Naaga dynasties, and also many Republics.
They were
scattered all over India, as proved by literary, epigraphic and numismatic
evidence. Vidisha, Kantipuri, Mathura and Padmavati were all Naaga powers,
according to Puranas. We know from inscriptions, that Bharshiv Naagas came into
power after fall of Kushanas. We have some coins of Bhava Naaga of Padmawati.
In Puranas nine Naagas are mentioned by name. Powerful King Virsen of Mathura
was also perhaps a Naaga. Guptas flourished by marriage of Chandragupta I, with
princes Kumar Devi of Licchavis, whom Manusmriti had condemned as "Vratya
Ksatriyas". Allahabad Pillar inscription mentions of marriage of
Chandragupta II with a Naaga princess Kuveranaga. Thus though the Guptas rose
to power with the help of Naagas, they terminated Naaga kings like Ganpati
Naaga and Naagsena, and most of the Naaga republics. [Mahajan, Ancient India,
p. 406 ff.]
Republics of
Tribals were destroyed by Samudragupta:
The
disappearance of the republics about 400 A.D. was due to the imperialism of the
Guptas, according to Jaiswal, who said,
"Samudragupta,
like Alexander, killed the free spirit of the country. He destroyed the Malavas
and the Yaudheyas who were the nursery of freedom and many others of their
class." As Dr. Altekar pointed out, even after Samudragupta, the republics
of the Malavas, the Yaudheyas, the Madras and
the Arjunayanas maintained their existence and autonomy, though now, under
suzerainty of Guptas. However, the leadership became hereditary, and under
those circumstances the republics disappeared and monarchy became the general
rule. [Mahajan, p. 201]
The Pala
Period:
Many people
are under a wrong impression, that after Harshavardhana in seventh century,
there were no Buddhist Kings. They conveniently forget that Palas ruled for
four centuries, and they ruled nearly whole of north India. They were staunch
Buddhists and no brahmins were left after their reign in Bengal, so the Senas,
who came after Palas, had to import the Brahmins, for yadnyas.
The area
under control of Palas is the area of Naagas and is now an Adivasi tract. It
was from Palas that the Buddhism finished, or mostly so. So they are the last
remnants of Buddhism. Therefore, their history deserves special study by the
Buddhists. That is why the tribal belt extends from North East Provinces, lower
Bihar, some parts of Bengal, some parts of Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Chatisgadh
and Bastar and adjoining part in Chandrapur Gadchiroli and the parts of Andhra?
The relationship of Pala kingdom with Adivasi tracts is not discussed by the scholars.
The Adivasi
scholars start the history of Adivasis from the Gonds kings in Sirpur in
Andhra, and in old Chandrapur district, which is now divided into two, and in
Bastar and Chattisgadh and Madhya Pradesh etc. Some people like to connect
themselves to the people of the neolithic age, as if nothing has happened in
the mean time. Then they are silent about the period in between. They not only
remain silent, but do not try to understand the reasons why their history is
ignored by the Brahmanic scholars. But even then, from scanty references, it is
possible to reconstruct the history of tribal population in the area.
A mention is
made about Tribal kings as Naaga kings in post Harsha period in Madhya Pradesh.
The Tunga kings, Jayasimha, ruled over the whole of Gondama (or Gondama) which
is sometimes specifically referred to as Eighteen Gondama. Gondama has been
taken to mean the Gond tribe, but it probably denotes a territory, which was
perhaps the entire hilly tract extending from Bonal and Barma in the north up
Jeypore in the Visakhapatnam District in the south. [Imperial Kanauj, p.77 ]
An account in
a book by the poet Padmagupta, of the court of a Paramara king, Navasahasanka
Sindhuraja, is considered historical and it narrates how a Naaga king ruling
south of the Narmada sought help from Sindhuraja against a neighboring
demon-king named Vajrankusa, and gave his daughter Shashiprabha to him after
their killing the demon king.
It is
suggested that the Naaga king was a chief of the Naaga dynasty ruling in old Bastar
State, and the demon-king was a chief of the Non- Aryan Mana tribe of Vajra,
modern Wairagarh, presently in Chandrpur District of Maharashtra. [Imperial
Kanauj, p.97]
Also mention
is made of Vijayaditya II, coming into conflict with a Naaga king probably of
the Bastar region. [Imperial Kanauj, p.134]
The Pala
Kingdom comprised tribal areas:
After the
death of Harshavardhana, the brahmins regained the lost prestige and started
converting people to brahmanism through the means of force by creating small
principalities. The empire was broken down and only small feudatories under the
newly created Rajput clans started appearing. R. C. Majumdar, explains how the
Palas stopped this political disintegration of Bengal resulting in anarchy and
confusion for more than a century after the death of Sasanka, the king of
Bengal and strong enemy of Buddhism and of Harshavardhana, and how in the
middle of the eighth century A.D., a heroic and laudable effort was made to
remedy the miserable state of affairs. Realizing at last, that all the troubles
of masses were due to the absence of a strong central authority, the numerous
chiefs exercising sovereignty in different parts of the country did set up such
a regime by voluntary surrender of powers to one popular leader.
This shows no
small credit upon the sagacity and sacrifice of the leaders of Bengal who rose
to the occasion and selected one among themselves to be the sole ruler of
Bengal to whom they all paid willing allegiance. Majumdar comments:
"... It
is not every age, it is not every nation that can show such a noble example of
subordinating private interests to public welfare. The nearest parallel is the
great political change that took place in Japan in A.D. 1870. The result was
almost equally glorious and the great bloodless revolution ushered in an era of
glory and prosperity such as Bengal has never
enjoyed
before or since." [Majumdar R. C., "The Age of Imperial Kanauj"
HCIP vol. IV, p 44]
The hero was
one Gopala (c. 750-770 A.D.), whose early accounts are uncertain, but he came
to be known as a Kshatriya and was a Buddhist. All his successors also were
Buddhists and the dynasty ruled over a vast area for about four hundred years.
The "bloodless revolution", was no doubt
religiously motivated. This was also the time when Tantrika Buddhism made its
appearance, and the religious leadership passed on to the lower castes in the
society, to such an extent that after the fall of Palas, their successors had
to import the brahmins for performance of yadnyas.
After Gopala,
his son Dharmapala (c.770-810 A.D.), came on throne. He was a hero of hundred
battles, and had assumed full imperial tiles. He held a most magnificent durbar
at Kanauj, to proclaim himself as the suzerain. Vassals attending durbar, among
others, were the rulers of Bhoja, Mastsya, Madra, Kuru, Yadu, Yavana, Avanti,
Gandhara and Kira, who uttered acclamations of approval "bowing down respectfully
with their diadems trembling." He is described as the "Lord of
Northern India""(Uttarapathasvamin)." [Majumdar, ibid., p.46]
He was ruling
over a vast territory. Bengal and Bihar, which formed its nucleus, were
directly ruled by him. Beyond this the kingdom of Kanauj, roughly corresponding
to modern U.P., was a close dependency, whose ruler was nominated by, and
directly subordinate to, him. Further to the west and south, in the Punjab,
Western Hill States, Rajputana, Malwa and Berar, were a number of vassal states
whose rulers acknowledged him as their overlord and paid him homage and
obedience. According to tradition preserved in the
"Svayambhu-Purana", Nepal was also a vassal state of Dharmapala.[Majumdar,
p.47]
His grateful
subjects fully realized his greatness and sung in his praise all over the
country. He was great patron of Buddhism and founder of Vikramshila University,
named after his another name, and a great vihara at Sompuri in Varendra. He
also built Odantpuri Vihara in Bihar as per Tibetian
sourses, though credit is given to his father or son by some scholars. Great
Buddhist author Haribhadra flourished during his reign. Majumdar laments that
his greatness, though sung by masses, "it is irony of fate that he should
have been forgotten in the land of his birth but his memory should be kept
green in Tibet." [Ibid., p.49] What is so strange about it? It had always
been the practice of brahmanic scholars to kill the memory of great
non-brahmanic dignitaries by non-mention, and if we may say so, it continues
even today. No non-brahmanic king is remembered by the priestly scholars of
this country. Chandragupta Maurya is remembered in a fiction "Mudrarakshasa"
written thousand years later; Ashoka is remembered by his edicts and credit of
identifying Ashoka of Cylonese chronicles with Piyadassi of edicts goes to
JamesPrinsep; Kanishika is remembered by his coins, Chinese sourses and Buddhist
MSS, and "Buddhacharita" of Ashvaghosha; King Milinda by foreign
accounts and Harshavardhana mainly by Huen Tsang's writings.
For the elite
of this country, even Alexander the great never existed. Dharmapala was
succeeded by his son Devapala who had a long reign of about forty years. He was
a great patron of Buddhism like his father, and his fame spread to many
Buddhist countries outside India. Devapala granted five villages on the request
of Balaputradeva, a king of a powerful Buddhist Dynasty, in the East Indies, in
order to endow a monastery at Nalanda. Another record informs us that a learned
Buddhist priest, hailing from Naagarahara (Jelalabad), received high honors
from Devapala and was appointed the head of Nalanda monastery. [Majumdar, p.
52]
After
Devapala, glory of Pala empire declined. Though to a large extent, Mahipala
tried to restore it. The Brahmanical dynasty of Senas overtook them. Senas, had
to import Brahmins to their kingdom from other Brahmanical areas and start the
infamous "Kulin" system, to reestablish Brahmin supremacy. The reason
why we like to stress the importance of the history of Pala Kings, is that they
were Buddhists and their subjects were Buddhists, and at the present time, the
area under the influence of Pala kings is the exact area which is occupied by
the present day Adivasis. This shows that they were reduced to their present
state, after the fall of Palas, due to neglect by and the atrocities of the
Brahmanical forces during post Pala period. Though the miseries of tribals had
started with the rise of Guptas, they had no protector left after the fall of
Palas.
Rise of Rajputs
was mostly from Tribals:
After the
fall of Harsha, the Rajputs were created by the Brahmins, with the intention of
fighting with the Buddhists by physical force. Through the Agnikula theory four
dynasties of foreigners like Hunas were hinduised in North India, and in south
India, through hiranyagarbha mahadana five dynasties were created out of tribal
Buddhists. The subject is discussed fully by me elsewhere in another post, suffice here to
mention that also some tribal chiefs were among those who became the Rajputs.
Giving example of House of Mewar which played important role in political and
military history of India for centuries to come, and gave heroes like Bapa
Raval, Rana Sanga, and Rana
Pratap, Stella Kramerish observes:
"Formerly
they (Bhils) ruled over their own country. This was prior to the arrival or
Rajputs. The Rajputs, the 'sons of king', invaded the country, subsequently
Rajasthan in about sixth century A. D. They became Kshatriyas, the nobility par
excellence of India. Some of these Rajput princes, including the most exalted
of them, the Rana of Mewar, at the inception of their rule, had their foreheads
marked with the blood of a Bhil. It was drawn from his thumb or big toe. This
was an acknowledgement of the precedence of Bhils as rulers of the country".
[Stella Kramerish, "Selected writings of Stella Kramerish",
Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1968, p. 90; fn:- Koppers, "Die Bhil",
p.14]
Rajputs came
from Tribals:
In North
India, Rajputs were made on the Mount Abu, by a purificatory yadna and four important
dynasties were created to physically oppose the Buddhists and accept the
supremacy of Brahmins. Some were remnants of Hunas and some were tribals. But
the Brahmins took special precaution to limit the admittance to Rajputs to only
a few important people, and the rest were remaining as ordinary castes, as
explained by Balkrishna Nair. In Southern India, the rite performed for
purification, conversion, and initiation into awarding Ksatriyahood was called
"Hiranya-garbhs mahadana" and the king was designated as Hiranya-
garbha-prasuta, i.e. "one who performed the sacred rite of hiranya-garbha
which consists in the performer passing through an egg of gold which was
afterwards distributed among the officiating priests". [D. C. Sircar, 'The
Classical Age', HCIP vol. III, p. 225]
The Hiranya
garbha prasuta kings of South India belong to the dynasties of: (1) Ananda
gotra connected with Chezarla. (2) Vishnukundin connected with Srisaila. (3)
Chalukyas. (4) Pandyas and (5) Rashtrakutas.
Most, if not
all, of them were Buddhist Tribals, but after accepting Brahmin supremacy they
fought with Palas as well as among themselves, thus instituting a tripartrite
struggle for centuries, till they all handed over the reigns of the country to
Muslims. The detailed discussion of them is beyond scope of this article.
With their
conversion, all their deities got converted into Brahmanic deitis, like
Jaganath Puri, Pandharpur, Ayyapa, Draksharama, Srisailam, Badrikeswara and
many more including Tirupati, "tirupati
Balaji was a Buddhist Shrine". Only one example is given below how tribal
Madiyas became devotees of Puri. Tribals worship Danteswari and are disciples
of Jagannatha of Puri The tribal population of Bastar, known as Madiyas, as is
well known, are Naagas, and they were referred as Naagas in inscriptions. What
is not well known is that they have a Rath Yatra, very much like that of Puri.
As explained by K.Jamanadas in "Tirupati Balaji was a Buddhist
Shrine", both Rath Yatra and Puri Temple are of Buddhist origin. Also the
name "Danteswari" of their deity is strongly suggestive of
"Dantpura", where Tooth Relic of the Buddha is being worshiped, which
now is Jagannatha of Puri. The following are the excerpts from the article by
Bhai Mahavir, who attended Dushera festival of Madiyas, and describes it as
"a Dussehra without any mention of the Ramayana". Even the date of
Dushera is significant, as prior to Dr. Ambedkar's conversion to Buddhism in
1956, the Hindu Panchangas used to depict Dushera as the date of birth of the Buddha,
though Buddhist tradition places it on Veshakh full moon day. He writes:
"While
for a large part of the country, Dussehra gets its name from the victory of Ram
over the 10 headed Ravana, ... in Bastar we have none of this. There is no Sita
abduction, no Hanuman search mission and no Ram-Ravana battle. You do not see
the spectacle of any effigies of Ravana, Kumbhakarna and Meghnath going up in
flames as its finals. In fact, when this idea was mooted once, tribal leaders
did not welcome it."
J.K Jamanadas explains how Baster's Dussehra is connected
with their own favourite deity, Danteshwari, unknown elsewhere. The festival,
lasting virtually for two and a half months, is not mere entertainment, but a
genuine religious practice and an essential part of their culture and philosophy.
Ratha Yatra
being the main part, its preparation starts early, and different villages
having well-designated duties of fetching wood meant for specified parts of the
Rath. It is pulled with long ropes by about 500 Madiya tribals of Kilpal, a
privilege they jealously guard.
The fourth
ruler of Bastar, Raja Purushottam Dev, who ascended the throne in 1408 AD,
performed Dandavat (prostration) pilgrimage from Baster to Jagannath Puri,
offered lots of precious gifts with one lakh gold mohurs to temple, and started
the Ratha Yatra. Like in several states, the practice continued till the tragic
death of Pravinchandra Bhanjdev. Now only the chhatra and the chief pujari of
Danteshwari temple of Jagdalpur ride it. All the tribes bring their favourite
deities with their chhatras to the courtyard of the royal palace. The whole
town is out jostling to watch the gigantic chariot being pulled by hundreds of
devotees.
The tribes of Bastar are no Vaishnavites
(vegetarians), they are devotes of Danteswari, though their Danteshwari Temple,
at Dantewada, in Bastar, has an idol of Nandi and an image of Shiva. The Rath
Yatra commences with a goat sacrifice, and no less than five goats are
sacrificed by the time the festivals conclude. [An article "Without Ram or
Ravana" by Bhai Mahavir in "Indian Express", Nagpur, 4.12.99]
No comments:
Post a Comment