 |
(10) A fallacy that relates to the period
of the Vedas, Upnishads and the Puranas.
It has already been explained that the Vedas, the
Upnishads and the Puranas are: (a) eternal and Divine, (b) firstly
produced by the creator Brahma, (c) they are not the writings of any human
being, and (d) all of them were again revealed and rewritten by Bhagwan
Ved Vyas long before he revealed the Bhagwatam, which was sometime before
3072 BC. Sanskrit language is also eternal which was firstly produced by
Brahma and then it was reproduced by Ved Vyas along with the Vedas and the
Upnishads.
But, the western writers and also the encyclopedias
wrongfully say that the Sanskrit language started around 1500 BC and the
Vedas came after that, whereas the Puranas came at a much later date
sometime between 400 and 800 AD. They call Ved Vyas as only a legendary
figure. Not only that, they derogate Bhartiya religion by all possible
means, mutilate the history and abuse the Vedas by saying they are the
poetic compositions of some foreign Aryan tribe who spoke Sanskrit and
came to India from a still-unknown land around 1500 BC; and a lot more
misleading statements like these.
For the last 200 years such a wrong image of Hinduism
is being injected into the innocent minds of the school-going children as
well as in the minds of the research scholars all over the world who study
Hindu religion. Someone has to take the lead to correct these wrong
statements about Bhartiya religion and history and feed the correct
information into the encyclopedias of the world and save millions of
innocent seekers of truth whose spiritual progress is being hampered and
paralyzed because of such negative informations that confuse their mind
and damage their faith.
Let us now come to the reality and see how it all
started. On the 2nd of
February, 1786, a British jurist and a great scholar of Latin
and Greek languages, Sir William Jones, who had also studied Sanskrit in
India, gave a stunning speech in the Asiatic Society of Calcutta (Bengal)
about the amazing similarity of some Sanskrit words with that of Latin and
Greek, and the audience was thrilled with his skilled oratory and the
style of the interpretation of his findings. But, in the end, he strongly
asserted that, not Sanskrit, but there must be some other unknown
common language from which all those languages must have originated.
Was he correct? No. Absolutely not. Because Sanskrit is
the first language of the earth planet. Its root system of forming a word
and its detailed grammar have no comparison with any of the languages of
the world, and because it is the original language, so it is very likely
that some of its daily spoken words could have been adopted by the other
languages which itself is the evidence that Sanskrit is the mother
language of the world.
But still his linguistic conjectures and skilled
speculations led the other European linguists to proceed on the same
lines. Thus, the term “Indo-European (or Proto-Indo European) language”
was created, which factually never existed.
(Article 23) In this way, the
attention of the whole world was withdrawn from looking into the greatness
of the Sanskrit language and was drawn towards the opposite side of the
truth, which was like searching for water in a mirage in a desert.
|
 |
 |
