Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Dr. Buhler's writings Inconsistent, absured and Self-contradictory

Bhumivarma, founder of the Solar dynasty, the fifth dynasty of kings of Nepal, secured the throne for himself and ruled over the country in Kali 1389 or B.C. 1713. The 27th King of Nepal of the Solar dynasty, Sivadevavarman, was crowned in Kali 2764 or B.C. 338 according to Nepala Rajavamsavali or chronology of the dynastic lists of the kings of Nepal.

Inscription no 12 and again Nos. 13, and 14, in all 3 inscriptions, have been discovered so far, indicating the date of his coronation. By the time of the coronation of Sivadevavarma, the Sri Harsha era of 457 B,C., was in vogue in Nepal and hence the dates of his coronation is given by Sivadevavarma in the same era in these inscriptions. In inscription numbered 12. the date of his coronation is given as Sri Harsha Samvat 119. Inscription numbered 13 is dated Sri Harsha Samvat 143 and the inscription numbered 14 is dated Sri Harsha Samvat 145.

Sri Harsha Samvat 119 is the same as (457-119 =) 338 B.C. The date given in the Nepala Raja Vamsavali Kali 2764, also works out to (3102 - 2764 =) 338 B. C. So the date is confirmed as Kali 2764 or Sri Harsha samvat 119 or B.C, 338 and cannot be disputed. In the face of such clear evidence, with a view to bring forward the time of Sivadevavarma and thereby to reduce the antiquity of, and shift forward, the entire history of Nepal, the Sri Harsha era mentioned in the inscriptions is identified as the Sri Harsha Siladitya era of 606 A. D. and the date in the inscription given as Sri Harsha Samvat 119 is deduced to be the same as 606 + 119 = 725 A.D., and the date of the coronation of Sivadevavarma is therefore located in 725 A.D. by Dr. Buhler, the European orientalist, in his history of Nepal. This finding is accepted as authoritative and a proved fact by the modern scholars of the history of ancient Bharat.

As a matter of fact. Sri Harsha Siladitya had never founded an era. There is no evidence of any kind to show that he did. Alberuni mentions Sri Harsha era and equates it to 457 B.C. But he has not mentioned any Sri Harsha Siladitya era. Hieun·tsang, the Chinese pilgrim, who stayed in his (Harsha Siladitya's) court for 5 or 6 years as an honored visitor, or his court poet, Banabhatta, the author of Sri Harsha Charitra, never reports that Sri Harsha Siladitya, established an era. There is no evidence of any Siladitya era of 606 A.D., in any historical composition or inscription discovered so far not even any reference to such an era. It is entirely a creation of Dr. Buhler, with his obvious intention to distort history.

There is another absurd inconsistancy on the part of Dr. Buhler which deserves careful attention. The 31st king, i,e. the 4th after Sivadeva Varma in the list of the kings of Nepal, is Amsuvarma, the founder of the sixth or Thakore dynasty. According to the history of Nepal as recorded in the Nepala Raja Vamsavali this Amsuvarma was crowned 237 years after Sivadeva Varma i.e., 338-237 = 101 B.C. Dr. Buhler has deduced, as a result of his study and interpretation and application of the writings of Hieun·tsang, that Amsuvarma (actually of 101 B.C.) was crowned in 637 A.D. and this not only reduced the antiquity but upset the order of the kings in the chronology of Nepal. In this zeal and anxiety to reduce the antiquity of the history of the country he has been blind to the inconsistency in his determinations. The 31st king in the list, Amsuvarma who reigned 237 years later, is placed 88 years earlier than the 27th king in the list, Sivadeva varma, placed in 725 A.D. This is a telling example of the standards of efficiency with which European orientalists have studied and used the inscriptions in their reconstruction of the history of ancient Bharat. We are obliged to pause and enquire how dangerous it is to rely on the findings and the writings of such historical scholars.

It is such historians that have discounted the reliability for historical research of the true and accurate history of Nepal and the history of Kashmir, available in the Rajavamsavali and Rajatarangini, and the history of Imperial Magadha available in the Puranas, sneered at them and rejected them as unworthy of the attention and respect of students of history, not for any thing really wrong with the splendid historical writings of the land but on account of their own bias and prejudice. Historical scholars of Bharat who swear by inscriptions should wake up to the truth and recognize how the inscriptions available have been grossly abused by European orientalists in their reconstruction of the ancient history of Bharat and realize that inscriptions can never constitute independent evidence for historical purposes, and that they can serve at best only, to corroborate the evidence of genuine, historical writings. In fact, it is the other way round. Such of the inscriptions as do not tally with and go contrary to the indigenous historical treatises of ancient times and the traditions of the country should be rejected as likely to have been tampered with or even forged. All the inscriptions discovered so far have to be subjected to a critical study and scrutiny afresh by the patriotic historical scholars of Bharat, with an open mind, free from blind respect for the western orientalists, in order to reconstruct the true history of our ancient country.

According to the history of Nepal, available in the Nepala raja Vamsavali, Amsuvarma was crowned in 101 B.C., and ruled for 68 years, up to 33 B.C. During his reign, Emperor Vikramaditya of the Panwar dynasty reached Nepal in the course of his march of conquest and induced Arnsuvarman, without war, to incorporate Nepal as a feudatory kingdom within his empire, thereby completing the extension of his over-lordship over the entire continent of Bharat. As a matterof fact the inauguration of Vikrama Era of 57 B.C. or 3044 Kali was celebrated in Nepal. (Vide Indian Antiquary, Vol XIII, D. 411 ff.)

In the history of Kashmir, available in Kalhana’s Rajatharangini, it is recorded that Vikramaditya of Ujjaini ruled as emperor or overlord over the whole of Bharat. Jyotirvidabharana of Kalidasa vouches that Emperor Vikramaditya founded an era of his own, in commemoration of his Emperorship. Puranas, cherished as genuine historical writings in the country, regular historical treatises like the history of Kashmir (Kalhana’s Rajatarangini), the history of Nepal (Nepalaraja vamsavali), have all described the conquests of Emperor Vikramaditya elaborately. Yet, these European orientalists and their Indian disciples whose faith in them is unshakable strangely deny the very existence of the Great Historical figure Vikrama. The author urges upon the readers, in this connection , the desirability of a careful pursual of the following publications by himself(Pandit Kota Venkata Chelam). 1. Chronology of Kashmir History reconstructed. 2. Chronology of Nepal History Reconstructed 3. Age of Buddha, Milinda, Amtiyoka and Yugapurana. 4. Chronology of ancient Hindu history 1 and 2 parts.

1 comment:

  1. It seems correct what you have justified. Here I have two more independent publications from Nepal which are favouring you.

    Dr. Shree Ram Prasad Upadhyaya from Tribhuvan Univesity, Nepal wrote on book review Nepal: Under Amsuvarma by S.L. Joshi "Two sets of dates viz, 516 to 526 S.S and 29 to 45 S.S were incribed in the inscription belonged to Amsuvarma. Both these dates have become most controversial issues for the scholars of Nepalese history. The author also remains in confusion and merely makes remark as 'this inscription needs careful and thorough study before any conclusion is arrived at".

    KP Malla a reknow modern historian of Nepal also got confused because of mistake done by earlier historias. He wrote "Kaiser Vamsavali gives the impossible 546 as the year of Rudramalla death".

    Nepalvamsavali: A complete version of the Kaiser Vamsavali, 1985, Contribution to Nepalese studies.