Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Indian religions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Indian religions. Show all posts

Friday, February 8, 2013

Shiva – The God of Harappans



Shiva – The God of Harappans
- SAI PAPINENI

Tripurantaka - Annihilator of Three Cities
Adherents of Aryan Invasion paradigm explain the religion of IVC as non-Vedic and that it belongs to the same set of aboriginal belief systems, latter assimilated into the mainstream. Today the imagery around Shiva is so complex it can be used to explain every, and any, word, picture or artifact, – not only of Indian origin but from anywhere in the world of any period – as in some way or other, connected to it. Therefore, it is convenient to label every pictogram or the script symbols as non-Aryan and somehow connect them to this godhead. Even the new age fiction writers with no understanding of mythology or history have not spared him, trying to portray him as an aboriginal character fighting invading barbarians is height of absurdity. 
Nevertheless, the progress of Rudra complex within Vedic literature gives us clues to the identity of the God of the Harappans. Rudra primarily is a minor beneficent god in its earliest books, especially the second mandala of Ṛgvéda. He is called fair-lipped, youthful, tawny, decked with golden ornaments, rides a chariot and a physician of physicians. But in the later sections of the same codices, the first and the last, his character begins to mutate – prayers are addressed to him, instead of asking for favor, they are aimed at seeking deliverance from his wrath. This wrathful imagery takes a definite shape in the latter books and is developed into a huge theistic complex towards the end of the Vedic age. The logical way to fix a chronology for the events in the Vedic tradition and the Gods of IVC is to find correspondences from historical sources and the evolution of sacred complexes in contemporary cultures.
We are reasonably sure that the earliest sacred complex of the human beings is built around a female entity – the Mother Goddess – and the Venus figurines found across the globe bear evidence. In the Paleolithic – Hunter-Gatherer – societies, the subsistence depended on whatever the Earth Mother provided. Woman was the main bread-winner. Human being, per say, is not a big game hunter. It had been the woman that gathered trapped and processed food and produced offspring. Man had been a subservient adjunct and probably contributed an insignificant morsel as a result of a communal sport called hunt. It was only with the coming of Neolithic subsistence system, an understanding of male component in the process of procreation dawned on the collective consciousness. Animal breeding and cultivation had made the ‘seed’ as important as the ‘womb’. When did this process begin in Indian context? 
Preparing the Seed - Mehrgarh

Megasthenes gave us the first clue. Dionysius came to India into its northwestern hills in circa 6363 BCE – based of course on existing native tradition then. The date coincides with the beginnings of Neolithic complexes in the region. Do we have any corresponding reference in Ṛgvéda to support this statement?  In the creation hymn of Ṛgvéda the first job of Rudra was to prepare the seed for ‘the father’. Who was this Rudra? He was an archer, poised to shoot the very same father when he wanted to waste it on his virgin daughter. It was this act of shooting – an attempt at parricide – that allows the earth to receive the spilled seed. He was called Vāstoşpati, Lord of Vāstu – The Site. Vasusthali was the name of the city at the foot of Méru. So-po-fa-so-to (Subha-Vāstu) was the name given by Hsuen Tsang to the Zhob Valley.

Doesn’t this give us a reason to assume that the Vedic tradition has the remembrance of this very early event? 
Tryambaka and Tri-Puras

This primordial understanding of sacred male began to grow with the progresses in subsistence technology. Even in the Early Neolithic milieu, the woman’s contribution to the community table continued to be predominant. It was only the child bearing and rearing compulsions that had taken some of the productive activities away from the female domain. 

See table.

The female became house-bound and the male a wanderer. When the early urbanization reached the Indus-Saraswati basin, three subsistence systems came together – Three peoples, Three Lokas and Three Mothers. The river system was an amalgam of male and female – they were called the Twins, Ila and Ilā – or Yama and Yami and their union Yamuna the Twin River. Tāntrik tradition still remembers them as two parallel streams – they called them nāḍi – between them rose Kunḍālini, the field of Siddhi. Ila and Ilā are the primordial twins whose incestuous union resulted in the rise of the civilization. In time, the male stream Ila came to be known as Indu, a single conspicuous dot in the night sky, moon, by dropping the semi vowel ‘V’ from Vindu/Bindu. But there was no threat yet to the primordial sacred feminine. She continued to be the queen in the collective consciousness even today – and addressed as such – a position reserved only to the goddess Saraswati. The Bālā Tripura Yantra, an esoteric representation of the primordial virgin mother begins with three equally-spaced dots – a symbol vocalized as the syllable ‘i’ in Brahmi. Brahmi is another name for Ilā/Saraswati. The syllable ‘i’ pronounced as English letter ‘E’, for Ilā became its first letter, with reason, at least until the male god asserted his dominance and the ‘Man’ sign for ‘A’ (ʞ) took precedence.
In the earliest strata – Ṛgvéda, Yajurveda and the Brahmana of Hundred Paths, he was called Tryambaka – he was associated with a lady or three ladies. Some called them his mothers, some consorts and still some his sister. In classical Sanskrit, Ambaka meant ‘Eye’. He added a third eye on his forehead – a vertical representation – a symbol for the female generative organ and a source of fire, Agni. Purānas called him Tripurāntaka, the annihilator of the Tripuras and built a myth around it. But the kernel of the memory was not lost. The archer shoots only when the three dots converged to become one – The Bindu. A confused account of Nāda and Bindu as the brother of the sacred feminine continues in our Tāntrik tradition even today. Nada with a short second letter means a male river as opposed to Nadi, the female. 
Iśāna and Sthānu

The conflict was real and the man relentless, he was not satisfied until he received his wont. As the civilization began to grow, he also began acquiring new cognomens. He cried and howled until they are granted. Śatapatha Brahmaṇa relates his ascent in a story …  
Add caption

When the Child cried, the Father said to him “Thou art Rudra”. And Agni took that form. Rudra and Agni became one. But the Child is not content. He cried for more. Then the Father said to the Archer, “Thou art Śarva”. And he became one with the Waters. Because from water comes everything*. But the child is not happy. Then the Father gave more names, called him Paśupati, Ugra, Aśani, Bhava, and Mahadeva. And the plants, wind, lightning, rain, and moon became one with him in that order. Yet he is unhappy. Finally, the child smiled, when the Father called him Iśāna, making him one with the Sun, Lord of all, that he surveyed.

(*Here is a blunder committed by the authors of SB … Sarva and Śarva are two different words. Śarva comes from the root Śaru, the arrow while Sarva (without the diacritical mark) means ‘All’. Where is the connection between arrow and waters? I shall address this later.)



Mukhalingam- Phallus with a Face
In the Mature Harappan context, most of the productive activities have already moved to the male domain.The preponderance of female figurines in Neolithic Mehrgarh is replaced by the male elements in Harappan iconography – symbols of phalluses and bulls outnumber. The god takes a new name, once again. 
Gudimallam 1st Century CE
He called himself Sthānu, a column a pillar a symbol of male productivity. The sacred feminine – the mother goddess becomes a consort of the male god. The father of the river – Lord of the People – Prajāpati will be forced to acknowledge his preeminence. This new consort is called Umā or simply ‘His Companion, Sati’. But their matrimony doesn’t last long. Unfortunately, she leaves him.
Where did she go?
Kushan Coin

There are many clues left scattered across different historical milieu. One of them is a quarter stater of the Kushān emperor, Hüvişka. It has on its obverse surface a pair of gods, male and female, and the legend ‘Oesho and Nana’. It is accepted as an early-historic material reference to the existence of the divine couple, Shiva and Pārvati. The engraver of another coin struck in gold by the very same emperor, now in British Museum, was a little more helpful. He called the lady ΩΜΜΩ – OMMO. This is not an unfamiliar name. In Babylon she is called Ummu or Ummi. The Akkadians also called her Ummi. Scythians, of course pronounced it as Ommo. In South India we call her Amma. And, in the north she’s called Mā. 
The clue is in the unity of Ummi and Nana.
Here let us travel laterally for a few hundred miles to the west, to another Twin River and a different civilization – Mesopotamia. En Merker legend states that goddess Inanna deserted the people of Araṭṭa during the reign of Al Suguir-anna and her disfavor led to a famine. The civilization tottered on the brink of collapse. If we identify this king of Araṭṭa with Sagara, we may get some clues to the economic and political state of the civilization. For details you may read my earlier post on a new paradigm of Pargiter’s genealogies called … http://saipapineni.blogspot.in/2012/12/history-of-indus-valley-civilization.html

For the discussion here it may suffice to say that Sagara, an Ikşvāku king of Ayodhya was instrumental in annihilating the Asura overlords and also during his reign, there occurred a riparian crisis due to the drying up of lower river basin in which 65000 households of his subjects suffered from a prolonged drought. An irrigation channel that he had planned to build to revive the old course failed and was only completed after a few generations. This period also foreshadows the rise of an indigenous movement of a sacrificial cult, led by Viswāmitras and their descendents called Bharatas. It was in the hands of these Bharatas, the religious and historical tradition of antiquity was codified.
And, our Rudra suffers the biggest crisis in his career. To understand the crisis, we must understand the power complex of Rudra that drew its nourishment as much from the popular Neolithic substructure as from the political and economic superstructure of the urban culture. What was this political superstructure? Ikşvākus ruled from their capital Ayodhya (Harappa) and they lived for generations in a constant dread of the alien overlords called Asuras. There is a natal connection between the Asuras and the various cultures of Mesopotamia. Trade flourished between the cultures, but there seems to be a coercive element that favored the aliens. Tradition is thick with evidence of Rudra favoring these Asuras. 
The sacred complex of Mesopotamia consisted of Anu the supreme male god and Ea the hermaphrodite Earth god – a clear parallel to Stha-Anu (Rudra) and his concert Umā/Nana. Inanna was the goddess of the river. With the annihilation of Asuras and the unprecedented famine, it is no wonder the general confidence in him dwindled. Figuratively, Rudra goes on a self-imposed exile and ceases to be the chief god of the civilization. In Mesopotamia, the preeminence of Anu also suffers. Marduk ascends the ziggurat as the chief. 
Rise of the Sun God

Like Ra of Egypt and Marduk of Sumer a warrior solar god arose in India also.
He is Indra with his coterie of Dévas. The Solar powered Ādityas took over and Rudra is relegated to the frontier lands. He becomes the god of thieves, wanderers, aborigines and the dead. He survives there for a millennium and rises like phoenix with the revival of early historical civilization. Probably, the crisis forced his followers to fan out wide and identify themselves with the lower social strata that are more numerous, while the brāhmaṇic Indra becomes an instrument in the hands a handful. 
By the first millennium BCE, in Kena-Upanishad, this primordial god takes a new name and a damsel from the mountains as his concert. For the first time in tradition, he’s called Shiva. 

Conclusion

Ṛgvéda… if one still considers it as the earliest book of IE tradition, its memories go back to the earliest context of post Holocene events in the subcontinent. A reasonable connection can be made based on the references to Rudra-Agni complex with the Pre-Harappan events. Secondly, significant presence of Sumerian-Akkadian element in the early Ṛgvédic hymns is visible, only if one sheds the conventional colored glasses.

Before I set my case to rest, I want to draw your attention to some recent headway made in this direction – here I am not referring to the extreme jingoist views but some objective research – Sullivan Code, for one. Though I am not fully convinced about her reading of all the script values, I see some of the individual signs do have promise. Here, I want to bounce off two of the most common terminal signs – the Arrow and the Pot – as I feel that they are relevant to this post.

232 Signs
Sullivan’s reading of the Arrow sign as ‘Ni’ is the most common terminal letter for the feminine names in Ṛgvéda. Indra-ani, Varuna-ani, Rudra-ani and the names of Shiva’s consorts – Bhava-ani, Śarva-ani, Shiva-ani – the list is exhaustive. If the seals actually proclaimed the names, there is a good reason to assume that a significant number of legends ending with the Arrow are female names. The next is the Pot sign. To me it always looked like a stylized frontal view of a bovine head with a pair of horns and ears. 

1696 Signs
Sullivan and IM read this as ‘An’. If one looks at the Shiva-ite Tāntrik sects, there is a strong tradition of suffixing the proper names with that of the Lord – Shiva, Śambhu, Bhairava etc. If Shiva in Harappan context had carried the same name as his counterpart in Sumer, it is eminently possible that a good number of masculine PNs ended with the letter An, Anu or even Anna as in Suguir-anna. 

Let me close this post with a caveat …
A-Sh-Sh-Ani----Ma-Anu - Aśani-Manu
We may not be able to find all the answers from the Vedic tradition since the tradition that is handed over to us is a result of codification that had taken place after the Mahabharata War – and the event or process could not have taken place earlier than IVC – and is clearly sectarian in character. We must draw data from other sources – Purānic, Tāntrik and contemporary records from the neighboring cultures – before making any inferences. With the current state of knowledge, the conclusions above will not pass muster – they can only be termed hasty speculations – but I am sure they point towards the need for some serious research in this direction. 

Hail Aśani the Original Man!


Sunday, April 17, 2011

Mound of the Dead

Mound of the Dead
What was its real name?
Mohenjo-Daro
We know, there existed, a city.
A conservative estimate from the excavated ruins tells us that it was a city spread over 240 Hectares, and probably had a population of around fifty thousand. A conservative estimate, mind you.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/138/video
It was only one mound, which was excavated.
Archaeologists have found six more within a radius of 5km. All of them are of similar size or a little bigger.
Now, let’s imagine that some aliens have excavated the ruins of Manhattan sometime far into future while the rest of the city lay underground and unexplored; and they have estimated the population of New York as one tenth of its urban agglomeration.

The table shows the names, sizes and the estimated populations* (Population estimates based on the area of habitation mounds) of the urban complex, which buzzed with life with people of many hues, trading with the far corners of the known world then, between 2800BCE to 1900BCE.
Let us make a small comparison:
The estimated human population of the entire world in 3rd Millennium BCE was slightly more than 100 million. That means 0.04% of the world population lived there. What is the percentage of population of New York to that of today’s world? 200 million out of 7 billions = 0.03%
The population salience of Mohenjo-Daro during its high noon was more than that of New York today and in area it was at the least five times larger than its contemporary cities in Iraq or Egypt.
Yes, it had disappeared, ruined beyond recognition and we call it by the name: Mound of the Dead.
Could that be its name when it was ‘alive’?

India claims a tradition which goes back eons in time. Yet we have no clue what those numerous cities which dotted the landscape of the Great Bronze Age Civilization were called.

Where do we search for clues? 
     
  •   Indian tradition
  •     Contemporary records from the Middle East
  •     Later reminiscences from Antiquity
  •     Historical records
    Indian Tradition 

    It is our understanding that the Harappan Civilization had declined and was in ruins by the time the country was invaded by the barbarian hordes called Aryans across the Hindu-Kush Mountains and they had in time, erased the earlier memories completely and replaced them by an imported tradition which belonged to the lives and lands foreign to the Sub-Continent. 

    There was complete discontinuity for a period of 1000 years before the Aryans built a second urban civilization on the banks of Ganges entirely independently.

    This is what every textbook of Indian Antiquity taught us for the last hundred or more years.Theoretical edifices, built during those nascent years of exploration and discovery have calcified into unyielding political and ideological positions which deter any attempts to set right the errors.

    But now, advances in the fields of Archaeology and Human Genetics have put forth strong evidence that the civilization had not disappeared overnight but had continued to exist even though at a less glorious state.

    And, there is no proof of any major shift in the genetic makeup of the population to indicate an invasion of new people immediately after the Harappan phase.

    And, if we have evidence of the motifs, skills and more importantly the generations of people which had continued into the historic period, why should there be a complete discontinuity of memories: of names, heroes and legends from that period?

    Linguistic and literary evidence points to a date of 1500BCE for the beginning of Indian Tradition as it survives to today. There is consensus that some parts of the tradition captured in the Vedas, Puranas and Epics belonged to periods of great antiquity even at the time of their initial rendition. We have lists of kings and saints which, when seen in retrospect, indicating an approximate time of 3100 BCE for the beginning of kingship in India, a date which agrees with similar developments in other Bronze Age Civilizations of the Middle East and Egypt. Archaeologically the rise of Harappan Civilization more or less coincides with this date.

    Therefore, it is eminently probable that some of the names of the cities associated with the legends captured in the Vedic, Puranic and the Epic traditions belonged to that period and the civilization. 

    Let us list down some of those names: 

    Sonita-pura: The capital of Tāraka, the demon killed by a son of Shiva; Udavraja: The principal city among the hundred ruled by Sambara, killed by Indra; Pātāla: The later exile of Bali and his brood of Rakshasas; Lanka: The city of Gandharvas, which was captured by Ravan of Ramayana; Ayōdhya: The capital of Ikshvāku line of Solar Kings; Mathura: Principal city of Yadavas; Māya: The city of Maya the Architect; Kānchi: The city of Bronze; Kāsi: Capital of a line of Solar Kings and also called the World Capital; Avantika: The city on Narmada, Probably associated with Bali in its early phase; Dwārāvati: A port built by Krishna, submerged at the beginning of the current era. (The list is not exhaustive but would serve our purpose)

    Out of the above, we strongly ‘believe’ in the present location of some. Let us examine the archaeological evidence from them: 

    Lanka is Ceylon or a city in the island republic of Sri Lanka. We have no archaeological evidence of any urban civilization before the historic period, ie. 300BCE. 
    Ayodhya is believed to be the controversial site at Faizabad in Eastern UP. There was a native structure, possibly a temple belonging to a time prior to Mughals. But the earliest levels in the neighborhood do not go below the early historic phase, the period of Buddha, 600BCE. 
    Mathura is a town on the banks of Yamuna slightly to the Northwest of Agra. It was a major historic city, yet the earliest levels of urbanization were of the first millennium BCE. 
    Kānchi is the temple town west of Chennai in Tamil Nadu, capital of Pallavas who ruled from the 2nd Century CE. The earliest dates of urbanization of South India are 3rd Century BCE. 
    Kāsi is the sacred city of Benares or Varanasi on the banks of Ganges in eastern UP, and due to its references in the Puranas and its association with the Vedic Legends, we consider this the most ancient extant city in the world. But the archaeological evidence shows that the city and the surrounding region were not urbanized until the beginning of the 1st Millennium BCE. 
    Avantika is usually identified with the city of Ujjain at the confluence of a small tributary of Narmada. The area has many sites of the Harappan and Late Harappan age which may fit the bill. 
    Dwārāvati or Dwāraka, thanks to Marine Archaeology and the efforts of Prof. S R Rao, is discovered under water - a burgeoning port belonging to the mature and late Harappan period, which came to an abrupt end around 1500BCE. 

    This date is seminal to our discussion. 

    All the cities mentioned above, as per our tradition, belonged to periods earlier than that of Dwāraka. If the archaeological data shows beyond reasonable doubt that the currently identified locations of the cities have not existed before the date of Dwāraka, then where were they? Is our identification based on ample research by the likes of Cunningham wrong? 

    No.
    We know that there was a gap of around 5 centuries between the late urban phase of Harappan towns and the early cities of the historic period. And we also know that some of the traits of the early period had persisted into the later. 
    We have ample evidence from the past that the people when they had migrated to new areas, named their new settlements after their native land and the cities. We have New England and New York in the American continent and similarly an Ayodhya in Thailand and a Madurai in South India and many more examples from the world over to prove this tendency.

So let us for once assume that the names of the Indian ‘Second’ Urbanization were derived from a past, from the names of those cities which had ceased to exist but were fondly remembered by their builders.
We have evidence of cities which existed in the past, which are now called by various names with meanings tantamount to ‘Mounds of Dead’ or ‘Fortresses of Demons’ etc..

‘Isn’t it possible that these ruined mounds were known by some of the names mentioned above?’
A dead end?
Let us examine the other source....

Contemporary records in the Middle East
We don’t get much help from the present state of our knowledge from the records of the Sumerian Cities, Assyria and Egypt. The names presumably associated with India were variously: Meluhha, Sidi and Ophir*. Any attempt to associate them with Indian tradition could only be convoluted. Let us hope that more finds will surface and better reading techniques prevail to give us new evidence from there.
(* Meluhha from Acadian cuneiforms, Sidi of Gilgamesh Legend and the Ophir of the Torah or Old Testament)

Later reminiscences from Antiquity
The early Zoroastrian book in Zend, a language belonging to a period almost contemporaneous or a little later than Rig-Veda, Vendidad has a description of all the lands of the known world, sixteen in all. The last few belonged to the lands to the east, east of the Iranian Plateau.

They are:

14. Varéna, “for which was born Thraêtaona, who smote Azis Dahâka, whereupon came Angra Mainyu, who is death, and he counter-created by his witchcraft abnormal issues in women and oppression of foreign rulers”. 
15. Hapta-hindus or Seven Rivers, “whereupon came Angra Mainyu, who is death, and he counter-created by his witchcraft abnormal issues in women and excessive heat”.
16. Rangha (Land by the floods of), “where people live without a head, whereupon came Angra Mainyu, who is death, and he counter-created by his witchcraft winter, a work of the Daêvas”.

The earliest portions of Rig Veda record a legend of the dragon Ahi-Dahaka or Vritra killed by Indra, who is thereby called Vritraghna, but they do not mention the location. But Zoroaster tells us that it had happened at Varéna.
By the progression of locales mentioned in Vendidad, the region/city of Varéna lies to the west of the country of Seven Rivers, Vedic Sapta-Sindhu: the country drained by Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Bias, Sutlej, Saraswati and Dṛshadvati.
Where, then do we place the region of Varéna?
Isn’t the region of Indus a good possibility?
Does the familiar identity of Lord Varuna with a large body of water tell us something?
Isn’t the most sacred of our ancient cities called Vāranāvat, which is same as Kāsi/Vāranāsi?
Now let us assume that there existed a city called Vāranā on the banks of Indus and look for confirmation in the other sources if there are any further clues to narrow down its location.

Historical Records
The earliest of the records belong to the Roman World, mostly in the form of references and quotations from the Alexandrian period.
Arrian’s Anabasis Alexandri: Book VIII (Indica) records some of the geographical references and legends associated with the expedition of the Macedonian king into the valley of Indus. Any conclusion based on these references is foolhardy. Yet, these fragmentary pieces of unconnected references were treated with more seriousness by the historians than any of the native source material. We shall also do the same while considering them.
One reference which comes to my mind is “the Story of the Rock of Aornos”, which was forced by Alexander in a singular effort, while the legend has it that even Heracles had failed and was repulsed thrice; about which even Arrian had said, “I am inclined to think is a Macedonian boast”. Why was this Rock of Aornos so important for Alexander to boast?
It belonged to past, a legend and probably an unprotected fortress: there was no reference to any fight. The local inhabitants, interestingly called Sibae or ‘Sivas’ had not given him a fight. They said it was founded by Dionysus, who as per Arrian’s reckoning reached India in 6363BCE, which Heracles, a local hero had tried to capture, in vain. Certainly they were referring to an important local legend, a battle or a war which was remembered by the natives.
What was this impregnable Aornos? And, where was it? The location is unclear from the descriptions in Strabo’s Geography: Book XV: “When Alexander, at one assault, took Aornus, a rock at the foot of which, the Indus River flows, his exalters said that Heracles thrice attacked this rock and thrice was repulsed; and that the Sibae were descendants of those who shared with Heracles in the expedition, and that they retained badges of their descent…”
But the clue here is Sibae; Or, Sivas or Sibis who lived in the region. The town of Sibi still exists within a stone’s throw from Mohenjo-Daro on the way to Quetta Valley.
The location more or less corresponds with the current location of Mohenjo-Daro.

Now let’s examine some Chinese sources:

Ta-T‘ang-Hsi-yü-chi, the title of a book found in many Buddhist monasteries of Far East when translated to English, “Records of Western Lands of the Great Tang Period” was more simply known to us as the record of the travels of a Chinese pilgrim called Yuan Chwang, who visited India in the first half of the 7th Century CE. While he was traveling through this country, characteristically he had narrated many legends associated with the places, especially of Buddhist interest.

India is variously called in Chinese records as Hsien-tou, Hsien-tu, Kan-tu, Yuan-tu, Tien-chu, Tien-tu and Yin-tu.  Brother Yuan preferred ‘Yin-tu’ which he said was derived from the Hindu word for ‘moon’ (Indu).
But the earliest name for the country as given by its neighbors of Bactria ( Ta-hsia in Chinese records) was Kan-­tsi or Kat- chi. An envoy Chang Ch‘ien in 120 BCE had recorded this name for India and it was more than 700 years before Chwang.  The most ancient name recorded by Chinese to the Indian territories neighboring Bactria, resembles something like Kānchi or Kāṇsi.

Now a little more specific reference from Brother Yuan:
On the north bank of Indus he had visited a town called ‘Ⱳu-to-ka-han-ťu’, restored variously as ‘Uda-khanda or Udaka-khanda. The neighborhood has a stupa and a Blue Rock of Mahadeva (Bhimala/Siva) at its foot. Let me quote from the Chapter VII, Chuan III of Si-Yu-Ki translated by Thomas Watters: “From Udakakhaṇda city a journey north over hills and across rivers (or valleys) for 600 li brought the traveler to the Wu-chang-na country. Now what is this ‘Udyāna’ country?  According to Cunningham, our pilgrim’s Udyana belonged to Swat Valley, drained by the river, ‘Su-p‘o-fa-su-tu’.
But the name of Swat had always been ‘Suvastu’ not Subhavastu (Su-p‘o-fa-su-tu) of Chwang. The identification is doubtful.
But another reference to a city called Pὁ-lo-mên-tu-lo in its neighborhood points to a location of Udaka-khanda to Sind instead of upper Punjab. Pὁ-lo-mên-tu-lo can be read as B-ra-men-stha-la or ‘Brahmanasthala’.  Doesn’t it indicate the city of Brahmanabad in Sind?

Now, why all the brouhaha about the town Udakhanda?
Our pilgrim associates the region with a well known legend: The legend of a king selling his wife and child to pay his dues to a Brahmin. Does it ring a bell?
Yes, it’s the story of Harischandra, king of Ayodhya, an ancestor of Rama who had sold his wife and son Rohita near the sacred city, Vāranāsi.
‘The Jataka of Rahul’s Mother’ (I am not talking about Ms Sonia Gandhi) associates the tale of a sage called Ekasringa with Vāranāsi. Yuan Chwang narrates that the local legend associates a place 5miles from Udakhanda with the story.

Rig-Veda associates Uda-Vraja as the capital of a kingdom with hundred cities of the greatest demon king, Sambara.  Udavraja means a fortress surrounded by waters. Vāranāsi of the legend was a city between two rivers: Vārana and Asi.

There were seven towns forming a complex spanning a period of a thousand years or more, one of which is called today: the Mound of the Dead.

Was it the same as the Zoroaster’s Varéna?
Was it the same as Huen Tsang’s Udaka-khaṇda?
Was it the same as Alexander’s Aornos?
Was it the same as Harischandra’s Vāranāsi?
Was it the same as Rig-Vedic Udavraja, chief amongst a hundred cities?
Was it the same as Ancient Chinese Kāṇsi?


Location references point to Mohenjo-Daro: 

  • Zend Avesta locates Varéna west of Saptasindhu. 
  • Huen Tsang locates it in Sind on the banks of Indus. 
  • Arrian and Strabo put Sibis on the route taken by Nearchus between the confluence of Sutlej and the mouths of Indus.

Ancient legends associated with the names and locations indicate the same: 

  • The legend of Sambara’s Udavraja and that of Ahi-Dahaka belonged to early Rig-Vedic period vastly predating the historic Benares on Ganges Valley. 
  • The legend of Harischandra predates Ramayana and unless we assume that the epic, if ever it had taken place, had taken place in the Second Urban Civilization milieu.
Therefore, the archaeological site on the banks of Indus in the Larnaka District of Sind amongst a complex of six unexplored mounds, fondly called by us as the Mound of the Dead had a significantly more familiar name, as the seat of the Lord of the Known World, the Capital of a Hundred Cities, A Fortress surrounded by Waters.

Vāranāvat or Vāranāsi.

Or, Kāṇśi, the City of ‘Bronze’ (Kāṇś in Hindi)

It was the most sacred of the ancient cities and the capital of India’s Bronze Age Civilization.

So my next pilgrimage must coincide with a cricket match at Karachi. Hope, I get a visa.

Aren’t you wondering where Ayodhya was?