It took the whole world by shock for the revelations it brought.
It happened to be a civilization (6.5+2.0) KY BP*
*Thousand years before present
3/n Here as stated by Dr Shinde, the Panchayat found on the site is around 5.5 KYBP.
We do not find any evidence of Monarchical Set-Up across any Indus Saraswati Civilization belt. tribuneindia.com/news/archive/f…
4/n Now, it becomes very interesting to observe that even though it was a notion that Greeks gave democracy to world.
Diodorus who is said to have visited India, around 2 centuries after Alexander talks that high level democracy of Indians was peculiar to Greeks (Diodorus 2.39)
5/n It was peculiar as Diodorous noted "No Slavery."
Slavery was very much predominant in West. In fact, Plato defines Mathematics with notion of "Slave's Soul." @dhume aware of it?
So how can a society with Slaves be considered "DEMOCRATIC"?
6/n Ok @dhume , now what did democracy meant to Greeks, rather Athens?
Is it not the common notion that it originated in Athens around 2.5 KYBP?
Of course, we have no clue that how exactly the discovered "Panchayat" of Rakhigarhi was operating 5.5 KYBP, but we know of Athens.
7/n In the Athenian democracy around 70% of adult population (foreign origin, slaves and women) didn't had right to participate in Legislation & Executive Bills.
Look at this source: Athenian Democracy by John Thorle, I have put pg 74
8/n In case if one is getting confused with status of women as mentioned by Plato in Republic, one need to know that Plato's ideal state wasn't a democracy.
And in Athenian Democracy, men believed women's intelligence to be same as that of animals & barbarians.
9/n Well @dhume ji, there are various reasons why with current researches, India certainly needs to be seen as place to have seen "Democracy" much earlier than West.
I showed you above how discriminatory was Athenian Democracy for Slavery unlike India.
10/n Now let me let you know a bit about proto-democracies which have in place in records.
We have evidences of "Governing by assembly" in ancient Phoenicians. One such evidence is the story an Egyptian trader who traveled north to the Phoenician around 3.1 kybp.
Source below
11/n Now we also hear about "Primitive Democracy" pre-Babylonian Mesopotamia. One person to strongly vouch for it was Thorkild Jacobsen.
So what was primitive democracy?
According to Jacobsen, it was as below:
12/n "A government wherein ultimate power rests with the mass of non-slave male citizens. Although the various functions of government are as yet little specialized & the power structure is loose."
Jacobsen explains in his book, "Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia" that
13/n The kings like Gilgamesh were devoid of autocratic power like how Mesopotamian rulers wielded in later period. Major city-states functioned with councils of non-slave men bearing arm. They were consulted on all major issues such as war.
14/n But is Mesopotamia really fit enough to be considered as “democracy” ~4kybp?
Many scholars are against calling it"democracy".
According to Bailkey this Gilgamesh & other situations, reflect a power struggle between primitive monarchy and Noblemen.
15/n Scholars see case of Mesopotamia as a struggle where common men appear more like pawn than sovereign authority.
& the Jacobsen too accepts that the peculiar evidence let us see Mesopotamian democracy = primitive oligarchy.
16/n It all has began after @narendramodi ji, spoke of India being "Mother of Democracy," let me focus completely on "Bharat" exclusively from here.
In the quoted tweet, I proved of Panchayat in India 5.5kybp & in above tweets spoke of Proto Democracies.
Hence we know that an office bearer used to see the number of ganas and their koram in the Rajasabha.
Pali-pitaka’, Majjhamnikaya, mahabagga, Avadana shataka talk about ganas and sanghas extensively.
21/n We must be informed that Gaṇas during Buddha's period were assemblies of the Sanghas.
The democratic republics Gaṇa-rājyas=rule of the assembly.
It is identical to demo-kratia .
Bhārata Gaṇarājya = The Republic of India
22/n As per the Kalchakra tradition Buddha would have lived around 2.9 kybp.
And even the most conservative, Marxist Historians place him 2.6 kybp, and that is when demo-kratia to came.
23/n So yes, these terms exists in our texts from ages.
But we will do a great disservice the stream of research if we don't look for empirical evidences too for the existence of Democracy in Ancient India a lot before the Western World.
24/n Now, let me summarize, what I have established so far:
a)Athenian Democracy(2.6 kybp)is considered the origin by conservative thought just based on Textual Evidences,even though Slavery existed & Slaves+Female were not part of System.Term too comes from here.
25/n b)Mesopotamia gives very crude idea which people call as "Democracy" (around 4 kybp)
c)India has ideas about Democracy in texts in lot earlier ages than both Greece & Mesopotamia (refer Rig Veda, Gana & Sangha).
26/n d)The existence of Panchayat in Rakhigarhi (5.5Kybp) is an empirical evidence that Democracy existed in Indus Saraswati Civilization.
Now from 27/n onward I'll deal with Janapads & Mahajanpads with empirical evidences too.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"The Arya Samaj was the first Hindu movement to take up a bold stand in this context. Maharshi Dayanand himself had showed up Muhammad for the sort of man he was."
in his book, "Freedom of expression: Secular theocracy versus liberal democracy."
SR Goel writes, "He (Dayanand) made a positive contribution when he pointed out that India had inherited a spirituality and a culture which were not only indigenous but also intrinsically superior to the imported creeds and cultures...
...He encouraged and enabled his people to reawaken to their own inner sources of strength, and hold their heads high in the face of foreign invaders. He was the first to use the terms Swadeshi and Swarajya.
There was a period, when every Hindu Organisations including Ramkrishna Mission, Hindu Mahasabha, Arya Samaj spoke of Shuddhi (re-converting to Hindu Fold) & wanted Hindus to give away shackles of caste for same.
Instead of blaming them as reformist & Christian stooges+
One need to understand Politics, situation of that period.
Why all were on same page?
Recently we came across a case where a BJP’s MLA’s mother converted to Christianity.+
A thing was observed that a child deemed to be Shudra by birth ran into the Mandir & heavy fine was imposed (₹25,000).
3)Post Crusades (after 7 centuries), Church brought logic in play & declared that metaphysical Mathematics began with Euclid, although they couldn't notice that it was actually dealing with empirical proofs.
4)It became an error for metaphysics of church
but went on being unnoticed till 19th century.
5) It was admitted that other empirical proofs (such as the proof of Proposition 4 or the side-angle-side theorem) are essential to the proof of the “Pythagorean” theorem in the Elements.
Reformation isn’t needed in process that has “evolution.”
Sanatana Dharma, is the address to Nature, which evolves everyday.
The more beings are born, more she evolves. Every extra breathing has a new carbon-footprint.
Reformation comes in play where things are actually “distorted.”
Our Shastras don’t have contradictions, but evidence of “evolution” which was always accepted by our Acharyas.
While Christians after reformation, got to be known as Protestant, our Shastras despite evolutions kept being accepted by Hindus. There contradictions didn’t being new sect each time.
Well @TheDeshBhakt ,"Hindutva"isn't only "Hindu Nationalism"as claimed by @devduttmyth, I must tell u that when Savarkar took it up in that form decades after it being coined (1892),it saved nation from the backlash of political Islam which could have resulted in Pakistan ++++