The Mysterious Origin of Mauryas
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 авг 2023
- In this video, we discuss the debate regarding the origin of the Maurya dynasty. We dissect and analyze various sources in order to have a clear picture of the ancestry of the Mauryas.
Disclaimer: The image used in the Thumbnail is just for representation, It doesn't necessarily depict the subject of the video.
Reference:-
1. Chandragupta Maurya and his Times by Radhakumud Mookerji
2. Age of Nandas and Mauryas by KA Nilkantha Sastri
3. History and culture of Indian people, Volume 2, Age of Imperial Unity by RC Majumdar
4. Chandragupta Maurya a Gem in Indian History by Purushottam Lal Bhargava
5. The past before us; Historical traditions of Early North India by Romila Thapar
6. Vishnu purana translated by Horace Hayman Wilson
7. Bhagvata Purana by Gitapress Gorakhpur
8. The life and legend of Gautama, The Buddha of the Burmese, Volume 2 by Right reverend P Bigandent
9. Markandeya Purana translated by Frederick Eden Pargiter
10. Textual and Historical analysis of the Puranic Chronology relating to the Maurya dynasty by SN Roy.
11. Ashoka and the decline of Mauryas by Romila Thapar
12. The Purana text of the dynasties of the Kali age by FE Pargiter
13. Mahapariniban sutta, Last days of The Buddha, translated from Pali by Sister Vajira and Francis Story.
14. Mudrarakshasa (Literary study) by Antara Chakravarty
15. Epigraphica Indica Volume 2
Credits:-
Research and Script by Pushkar Chaudhary
Inputs on the script from Jay Vardhan Singh
Spotify
open.spotify.com/show/6NJcBvG...
Follow me on Twitter
/ jayvtweets
Follow me on Goodreads
/ jay-vardhan
Maps Images used in the video are made by me and are subject to copyright.
Images are sourced from :-
commons.wikimedia.org/
Jay is top notch student of History! Great scholar in making.
pls continue in english. there's tons of videos on indian history in hindi...
your maps are especially appreciated...
Nice Content.
loved this video about debate on maurya
BTW, I have some doubts about one of your old video I recently watched about was gupta capital-pataliputra.
I went to present few points regarding the topic. Hope you read and will consider replying.
1. Modern historian after evidence of another dynasty ruling prayaga has been found, its almost certain now that prayaga was not the early capital and was conquered later by samudragupta from magha dynasty whose coins and inscription are found less than 15km away from allahabad inscription.
It is outdated and new detail point out that it was ruled by different dynasty together in 270 AD
2. A reference to the city in Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudra Gupta which states that:
"A King of Kota ( kota-kula) was 'captured' by Samudra Gupta's army, while he was 'playing' ( kridata) at his capital city of Pātaliputra" presenting his capital as pataliputra.
3. We do know by archaeological evidence that Pataliputra was heavily damaged during floods and much of the city was destroyed which is why there was not much left. You can see this in records of how Fa-Hien and Xuanzang described the city.
4. You mentioned Faxian details but Faxian never mentioned Ayodhya or Prayagraj much in his record if they were really capital of the empire ruling all of gangetic plain.
Only city talked greatly about was Pataliputra.
5. Pushpapura ( Pataliputra ), was the capital of Guptas as mentioned in the Allahabad Pillar inscription of Samudra Gupta too.
Kusumpura is another name associated for Pataliputra and Aryabhatta which was from similar Era as Guptas called himself from Kusumpura ( Pataliputra ) and Kulpati of Kusumpura Institution in Nalanda.
6. Also, much of Pataliputa lies below modern day-Patna today which has also halted finding of more Gupta era artefacts and inscription from the city as not much excavation has been done.
Also, much of city was washed way too due to floods as previously mentioned.
7. Skanda Gupta likely may have later transferred capital from Pataliputra to Ayodhya because of floods and to be closer to any further Hun Invasion of India for a while in later period.
I wish you will reply to my query with a response regarding the fact.
SR goel did good job on gupta history but there are many points which I think he really misinterpreted.
Just because most inscription are found from different place shouldn’t be taken as face value because even mauryan empire ones are found mostly outside of their core kingdom
Bruh are you Sabutai from Twitter? Firstly Gupta's being from East UP is the most possible case not Prayag necessarily. They could have been early feudatory of the Magha dynasty or a result of a later conquest. Furthermore I highly doubt that Samudragupta attested Patliputra as Gupta capital...cause there wouldn't have been a debate to begin with..neither do I recall reading it...
Oh master , I'm blessed with your knowledge all these years I was seeking truth nobody showed up the day I met you your objectivity touched my heart. All these nationalist commies soycialist twist facts according to their narative nobody speaks truth you are " the true noble Arya" have my respect .
But he shud provide references from puranas too because puranas are not trustable scriptures and mostly interpolated and go against the vedas
@@vedicarya7he did provide suitable references from puranas.
@@ranveersr8080 he didn't, he just named em
@@vedicarya7 Puranas are a major source for Hindu History after Vedic Age, Vedas told us about its time
Puranas vere still vritten around Mauryan time, so Mauryan info vas added, but Veda are much older than Maurya, so they vont talk about them.
@@anirudh177 vedas told about whose time? Vedas don't talk of puranas.
What's even ur point? I didn't even ask all that sh*t
I found your page few days ago. As an History enthusiast, im really happy that i found it but regretting at the same time why didn't i find it before. You're contemt is amazing Jay!!
Really well researched video man.
This is the JNU products we need in real life
True.
Yesterday we got yet another typical JNU Palestinians c-suckers along with JMI, AMU marching for Palestinian terrorists
He is not the only one.
Sir S Jaishankar was also a graduate from JNU.
But he was a right-winger nationalist, which can't be seen in the other Jnu peeps
@@vinz8081-2What makes left winger more reasonable either?
@@sivaratnamasabaratnam8946He never said the left is reasonable
@@vinz8081-2 whats wrong in being nationalist, it is better than anti national
very informative video ,thanks for this
Great Research & Analysis 🙏🏼
Marvelous analysis,pl. Search links with Kunida,Yodheyas etc
Your thumbnails are top notch
nice content asusual jay bhai, but m intrigued that 19.4 k to 19.5k its taking you a bit time, hire a team with with some more animations and vintage clips in btwn your videos if you can....ciao.!
Really like your vdos so much
Excellent video
Jai Vardhan Singh best history knowledge ever seen I am not that educated person iam just HSC passed but a meditator best knowledge i know my past life in maurya empire..
The logo on bottom-right corner is looking nice.
Can someone tell any painting related or mural surviving of the era of pratihara or rashtrakuta dynasty.
Pls make video on pratihar palas and rashtrakutas
Already a lot of information is available about them
Kshtriya king
all sources whether budhist or hindus confirm chanakya was the real person.
Chanakya is the OG
Chanakya written in Sanskrit language.
In mauryan period the court or written language is pali.
Nobody no Chanakya before 100 years and have no proofs.
@@user-hr8ef6tw9u 😂😂😂😂10th century budhist sources confirm chanakya
2nd - 4th century mudrakshas confirmed chanakya
Jain sources confirmed vishnugupt.
Gadhe k bache pdle thoda .
😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@user-hr8ef6tw9u chanakya treatise was in existence till 12th century
Then it got burnt or gone somewhere and later discovered in 20th century.
I know which caste you belong and you claim yourself as a budhist but still enjoying sc st benefits
@@ishaanrohmetra3447 SC ST benefits are given to Muslim and Christian's also. Story of chanalya is very new and popularised by TV serials. No western records mentioned about Chanakya. These are only Indian records which mentioned him which are influenced of Gupta sanskrit dramas.
Please make a video on recently discovered Rakhigarhi civilization. Which is believed to be older then Harappan!?
@5:19 Provide Sources/Citations as my memory of Matsya Puran Chapter 272/3 based on version says Chanakya along with the Mauryas will establish Dharma by killing evil Nandas.Also for Yuga Puran as I don't remember reading anything about Mauryas in Critical Edition which I read few months back:)
Buddhist claim of Maurya being a Shakya kshtriye is because Ashoka's patronge to the Buddhism. Also we know how Buddhist text describe Ashoka before his conversion to Buddhism like a violent ugly man, but after conversion to the Buddhism. He all of sudden becomes Devanampriye, priyadarshni Ashoka. Also, Buddhist text conflict itself one end says that Shakya clan was wiped out by the Khoshala king Vidhuba, the son of presenjit because of Sahkayas betrayal to his father and humiliation which he and his mother faced because of being a Dasa and Dasi putra. When Presenjit killed Buddhas Shakya clan in Kapilavastu and when King Ajatshatru gets to know that Vidhuba has massacred the Sahkya clan and destroyed the kapilavastu. He invades and conqueres the Khosala kingdom and kills the Vidhuba. So Buddhist sources says that Shakya clan disappered with the Destruction of kapilavastu
What nonsense.... Vidudaka was son of King Prasenjit from slave girl dhammakhattiya. When peasenjit knew her slave origin, he expelled her. Buddha told the king to restore her status as chief queen and vidudaka as his successor.
Vidudaka did not kill all shakyans but only the princes who humiliated him. Most of shakya farmers were saved when they apologized him. After Parinibbana of Buddha, some of shakya farmers built stupa in kapilvastu.
Moriya was one of branch of shakyans. Who built stupa in piphrah.
@@SirisenaDhammarakhita Lol, fake history, Buddhist scriptures itself says Shakya were destroyed by the vidhurva and those who survived left out the places and settled in different states. They even switched their Varna.And morya has nothing to do with the Sakhya. This guy has already cleared it. Today there is no Sakhya left in Nepal, but Brahmin with Sakhya gotra exist in Nepal and we Buddha and his Sakhya caln were Kshtriye by their Varna.
@@Kalki3710 😂😂 Read properly. Most of shakyans were saved and resettled. Moriya is sub group of shakyans coexisted long period.
Switched varna??😂😂 There are lakhs of shakyans in Nepal, Uttar Pradesh and Madya Pradesh. They came under OBC and dalit SC in madhya pradesh.
Ji inke vanshaj mori rajput more maratha hai
Plz provide this information that when was Vishnu puran written and which lipi
Nice 👍
Historical lineage of Mauryas-
Kshatriyas - for Rajputs.
Shudras - for SC, ST, OBC.
Vaisyas - for Agrawals and Sindhis and other business communities of India.
Obc's aren't shudras.
Many High caste like Yadav, Saini are considered as OBCs.
And ST aren't shudras.
They are tribal people. Sc's are the real shudras.
@@hunar354 but that doesn't matter in case of Mauryas. Mauryas were those, what a perticular cast or tribe want believe who they were.
This is the reality of indian people
@@hunar354 these people are not knowledgeable and wise enough to know beyond their prejudices.
There were Moris during 5th to 7th century present in Malwa region who claimed Suryavanshis, however, they dont link themselves with Mauryas of Pataliputra. They may belonged to Malava tribe.
Chandragupta never mention himself maurya in his inscription foreign writer linked it is maurya but not any evidence and gupta dynasty also use chandragupt.
Aur uss time tribe rha hoga. Aur koi bhi tribe akele khud ke tribe se shadi kr hi nhi skta. Usko koi subordinate tribe bhi chahiye jaise isliye aaj koi bhi jaat ho usme 50 variety ka gotra hota hai.
I think bhavishya Puran also mentions about mauryas as the descendants of nandas indirectly
Someone seen as Kshatriya in one region cannot be necessarily Kshatriya in another - it's all region and context specific.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem that these things were understood in ancient times.
Region can be substituted with religion as we know kshatriya was just a term to depict who fights for dharma , so for Buddhists they might be kshatriyas and for Hindus they were shudras , as simple as that
@@SahilSura-yq4dsLol in Buddhism Varn Vyavastha is based on birth read tripitak you will know it.
@@SahilSura-yq4ds Kshtriya Only 36 Kula 🚩
@@greatkaafir7478Konse 36 kul?
Was vishakdatta court poet of any gupta king?
Hope we got the history right as there r lot of versions, else we need to look at the past through a Chronovisor device ;)
Mauryans being an offshoot of Licchavis or Shakyas is the best story.
Yeah it's the best story only . A good fictional one.
It’s a common theme in history, of dynasties rising from humble origins fabricating a greater lineage. Same thing with the Aeneid - the Romans creating the mythology that they are Trojans.
@@CatastrophicDisease that is the point here, there is no evidence of Mauryas directly claiming to be of higher origin or attempting to portray themselves of higher origin like Shivaji did in 17th century, it is mostly the later Buddhist texts and later inscriptions which calls them kshatriyas of Solar Race, so mauryas cannot be blamed for this.
@@aryanjaiswal8935 Its true, Mauryas were aryans who came from outside India
@@venchingfu Lmao Indian is Arya land..and nothing "Aryan" can come from outside...what you are saying is Indo-European. Again even that is dmb. Romans were Indo-European who came from Russia to Rome. Hence Roman Empire is Russian? That's your sh*tty logic.
when are the first maps of ancient india made.
Puranas which are hindu texts calling mauryas as Shudras could be a result of Mauryas being patrons of Buddhists and not them, I mean some kind of enmity against Mauryas from the Hindu Scholars.
This is ll nonsense. If this be the case then why do the Buddhist say the palas as shudra?
No even foreign Greek and Jain book says Maurya vere shudra, hov can most s
@@sudipkumarroy3790true Palas were great patrons of Buddhism
The same can be said for the Buddhists texts ,since Ashoka converted to Buddhism and spread it every, therefore Buddhists texts call Mauryas as Kshatriyas as the Mauryas were great patrons of Buddhism
@@anirudh177Shudra is more ritual moral outlook than race,same goes to kafir islam
Pl date the Purana u mention.
when and where where the first gns in india.
It appears that the ancient chandra Gupta Maurya dynasty had some relation with the ancient Mitanni dynasty of Anatolia .more probable that some of them had settled in the Saar Mountain or Mavrov region of Macedonia after decline of mittani dynasty. Because one name of their rulers was Dasaratha and the word Saar is also found in the name of some rulers. Chandragupta's queen was Greek and one of his courtiers was also Greek. The Maurya Empire emerged only after Alexander's arrival in india.despite of this fact it also seems that chandra Gupta was also related with Nanda dynasty of Maha padam Ugrasen maharaj.l
Do you think we had less peoples in india to create empires. Mitanni Dynasty died 1200 years before mauryans. That's some next level argument you are making..
Andar is used my name too.
Lmao
according to Kota Venkatachalam (later Shankaracharya) Guptas were there when Alexandra arrived Mauryas are older.
Through agnikula legend, rajputs derive legitimacy as rightful rulers by associating themselves with the Kshatriyas, facilitated by Brahmins. In the case of Mauryas it was done by Buddhists. The "divine" right.
What about the theory that Maurayas were descended from Greeks and Kshatriyas?
So the overview of is , as follows:
1.Puranas - Strongly tells us that Mauryans were of a low orgin and basically were shudras .
2.Buddhist Texts - Emphasizes on the point that they were Kshatriyas and some texts even relate them to Shakya clan of buddha and consider them as a sub-branch of shakya clan .
3.Jain Texts - Don't give us a very clear point of view , but according to the jain story of Parshishtparvana , chaandragupta's mother was the daughter of a peacock tamer , so it could be possible that they linked to a vaishya or shudra origin .
Ashoka wife mahadevi also was of merchant clan .
@8:01 again provide sources as Matsya Puran chapter 272/3does indeed mention that Nandas (Mahapadma) was son of previous Shishunaag though through a Shudra women so that explains coming from aristocratic information and being Shudra at same time :)
I'm an English speaker. I was wondering why you broadcast in English. Is it to appeal a wider Indian or even broader global audience? Also, I I noticed when a Indian history video is in an Indian language, the slides and visuals seem to be in English. I was wondering why that is. Wonderful stuff. I've been discovering Indian history and it's absolutely fascinating. Thank You.
Yes, these English videos can be viewed even by those who don't know Hindi (my native language). Also, I've a dedicated channel for Hindi videos where the slides and visuals are also Hindi. I don't know why other creators don't do this.
Thanks for watching the videos.
@@JayVardhanSingh is maurya =magyar/hungary?
@@JayVardhanSingh i like your channel
saka=szőke in magyar= blond
bolond=mad, crazy, blonde girl in magyar
the pale skin folks like so called aryans are a result of albinism made by inner breeding, what is a shame, what made them sudra, this is why albino/white folks of old lines ( albino dravidians) are resistant of milk consume and alcohol tolerance plus resistent of pathogenes
reds ate roth, rotten, dead stuff like dead body/meat (agains hinduism) stole milk and butter from holy cow and eat rotten fruits together= colika, e-coli poisoning, kali yuga...
an inner breeding, drunk, meat and dead eating milkwhite family what lives on the garbeage and waste of real men with kinship system to mate/against innerbreeding
.
this blond, mad, red, full with rat, rotten and rude family started to ride =rite of slave keep and man eating
üt in magyar= hit in english = swat in hindukush, swat valley
swat=kushans last hide from where they made hit on the cities= mad genocides and destroy (self defence to hit first, albinos are sacraficed even today in tanzania..)
szutyok= white trash
swatok= swat ones
Szvitek= family name in my village in hungary
szittyák=scíthians=gitannes= gypsies (gipsum white folks)
cigány=gitan, gypsie
szégyen= shame
rossz=bad
eretnek=against religion/natiure= redneck
rőt nyak= red neck
rút= ugly
szegény= poor, in shame
szőkén= with blond hair..xican
szaka=szőke=blond
zakkant=mad
erő=force
erőszak= force, rape
erős=strong
vörös=red
óriás=giant
veres=red, bloody
verős= hitter, agressive, who hit/swat
big, red, alcoloic, inner breeding rapist meat eater killers= rednecks = heftalite huns = my family Kiss family, caisers, kiss úr/sir kiss
@@JayVardhanSinghcan you make a video of arcitecture and infrastructure of ancient india, fid we have them like in scale of rome? What materials were used to make them???
some people think Chandra Gupta was from Punjab where he obviously grow up and got education.His tribe was Khokhar they lived in the area which is known for big population of peacocks in Hindi moor🎉
so from due to that area they called Murya
There's no mystery. All Buddhist mediaeval records tell moriyas to be of ikshvaaku suryavanshi Kshatriya origin. Mauryans and shakyas and koliyas were all branches of suryavanshi Kshatriyas...who went on to found their own mini kingdoms later on and after that the pan subcontinent empire..
How historical is Chankya?
Please make a video on the origin of brahmins, rajputs and kayastha
Kshtriya rajanya rajputra
How much old are purana how we taking as evidence
Exactly, all these puranas are of post Mughal Empire.
@@theknightsky3834 Post Mughal empire or post Mauryan ? And it could be possible that these puranas of post Mauryan period were the copies based on the contemporary puranic texts which surely existed at the time of Mauryan empire .
Plz make videos in hindi also
We have a Hindi channel too. Do Checkout www.youtube.com/@ThestoryofIndia
@@JayVardhanSinghmourya Kshtriya the unke vanshaj mori rajput more maratha kshtriya chambiyal rajput hai
It is quite possible that the caste lines were not firmly established
All these guys may be right in their view. Mauryas may have lower origin but since they became kings they were given kshatriya status. Possibility of them being vaishya is more tho.
If Mauryans were lower origin , Why did you place their Buddhist Darmachakra on your national flag.Remove it and replce it with your Hindu symbol.
@@shashediri544 low origin hindu. I mean. Im also vaishya.
It's about origin, not about their later status.
@@Bhatti_Saab_7773 it all starts somewhere. First kshatriyas were also some random person.
@@gravewalker34 Their is nothing like first kshatriyas... Their were only one Kshatriyas who continued from then to now
तो मौर्या भी क्षत्रिय थे 😂
अब भीम - मीम वाले क्या करेंगे
पुरानो की मानेंगे या बुधिष्ट् की मानेंगे
मुझे लगता है पुराणो मे गलत है उसमे मिलावट हुई होगी |
Mori rajput k pado.
Im from this clan , azadi se phile ye general category me ate thee, mauryan royal family ne bhuddism ko iss liye follow kiya thaa kyu ki gautam budda shakya suryavansi thee.
Bahut duvidha hone wale Wali hai unhen, Buddhist ki manenge to Mauryas hath se jayenge aur Hindus ki manenge to unka dharm sankat me par jayega 😂😂😂
Moris of pippalvahan clearly say they are khattias(kshatriya in prakarat),Arya samajis have started distributing our clans surname to other communities like the koyris adopted maurya surname under sanskratisation missionaries,mori rajputs are found in up,mp and gujrat in good numbers
@@amitthakur6281koiri-kushwaha hain awadh men Maurya(murao/murai) hain South vhi more maratha ho gye hum hi se to nikle ho tum log bhai😊😊
I think chandragupta maurya was descendant of moriyas of pipplivahana
Warnaashrama dharma basically represents psycho-physical attributes of a person which aren't denoted permanently by birth of a person whatsoever.
W
Plz make a video on chanakya is chanakya really exists or it is a fictional character with archeological evidence 🧾
Archaeological evidence of chanakya?
Na jane
Perhaps they are described as khatriyas because of their ruling and fighting status ,,,i mean what would you call someone in the army back days ? khatriya right!
by the way , can we have a reasonable time for the existence of Lord Buddha ? is it 800 BC or 1200 BC ?
600 or 500 bc
1800BC
Chanakya might be later vishnugupta and not from mauryan period which could explain shudra sitting on throne.
Why did you removed this fact.
Wtf 😂😂😂😂 king becomes kahtriya , shudra remains a shudra
Shudra means who works for livelihood like agriculture, making temples, architecture etc these all are shudra works bro.
Even vaishyas are considered as low caste by brahmins s till they are general category
Budha was kshtriya 😂😂😂😂😂
@@ishaanrohmetra3447 nope Shudras are those who used to only services not professions like farmers cause" shudras didn't have any right to claim any land.
@@pranav_chalotra who made temples and all of the architecte then?
puranas mention a person Brahmin called Kautilya established Mauryan dyanasty
@@pranav_chalotra Nope as that view or interpretation of DharmaShastras is not supported by the Commentors like Medhatithi .
According to Manusmriti switch of varna is possible based on your karma. That could be the reason why different places address Mauryas differently .By the time Buddha died may be Mauryas had established themselves as Kshatriya .. may be prior to that they were shudras
Where, its based on birth! Give reference!
@@tattvamashi for varna related info get manusmriti. The rest is my deduction
@@abir95571 varna says its based on birth!
Varna system is based on Karma of past life. It can not be changed in living life. Though ancient times there were many kings from humble backgrounds, they had tendency to call themselves Kshatriyas. Same with Shivaji who was a kunibi or peasant but he had to take Kshatriya status later.
@@SirisenaDhammarakhita nope I've gone through it. if that was case then Manusmriti wouldn't have made it clear that you can change your varna in this life based on karma. You have confused yourself with the logic of previous life. It says whatever karma you do in this life not only changes your varna in this life but also becomes the basis of varna in which you'll be born in next life.
I am a Jain and let me clear, we jains believe that Chandragupta maurya was a Shatriya
My view - no one knew.
Do you think Most ancient / early medieval kings were from shudra varna or other so called backward castes, other clans [that time caste system wasn't rigidified yet] but during and after medieval ages the brahmins who gained social hegemony made those kings 'Savarnas' by distorting their origin stories using the texts written by them? What is your opinion?
No, Those that managed to gain enough social, economic and political pover became Kings, and they fell vhen others grev stronger than them. Also, these rulers themselves claimed Kshatriya ancestry even if they vere not originally kshatriya because it gave them prestige and legitimacy.
Lol only Nandas were Shudras no other dynasty all the dynasties call themselves Kshatriyas if Shudras were kings then why do Shudras want reservation😂😂😂😂😂
@@tishantchhabra6856 I'm not from reserved castes. Reservation is not just reserving.it's a form of representation or positive assertion for communities which are historically excluded from government, power/ privileges.
@@Archi.x002 yóu are extremely naīve, regurgitating what yóu were indoctrinated with on dallit pages, I'll try to explain the reasons why i said that,
1. Reservation is a form of affirmative action that only leads to dímwit individuals being entrusted with responsible positions of the society placing the progress of the nation in jeopardy. No wonder India's behind Xàina or any other 3rd world country like Brazil, Mexico Indonesia or Saudi Arabia when the phenomenon of segregated sections within a society has existed throughout the known world.
2. There is no parameter or codified criteria that laid down what castes were shudra or not, shudra is an umbrella term and changes definitions throughout the course of history, Dalllit is a modern term, A political movement that soley seeked political gains and was largely motivated by baseless Hindu Hatred, and neither were there ways to be sure those castes were really discriminated against
3. Even the Kshatriya lineages who are doubted by modern scholarship to have had Shudra origins are clear the word meant Hunnic or Scythian NOT modern day Sc/St.
To be honest its all assumed, in nut shell we all r indian origin.
It sounds defensive!
Chanakya was not contemporary of Chandragupta Moriya.
Recasting of history
Is there is any evidence of castism in history
I thought nanda empire was the pan India empire
So You preassumed already that Chanakya was a conservative brahmin who believes in Varna Hierarchy just quoting by one shloka from Arthshastra.
This is incorrect…what Roman scholar mentioned was Chandrakuttos and Samudrakuttos of Gupta empire
We don't have firm origins if shivaji from 17th century. How can we get exact origin of mauryas
@@hathgola100yes 100%
@@hathgola100 yup , i still respect him tho
@@hathgola100 Nope her mother was a hoysala her father too from noble lineage..Kunbi was a occupational caste them fwik.
@@hathgola100 Exactly hence you should stop lying.
Useless to link maurya with caste and varna because at Mauryan period no caste and varna was present,there was 7 classes as farmer, artisans,clerck, animal herder
Love ur videos jay.....keep it up.....keep busting the leftist agendas of communists distorians😊
The son of Prasenajit, the king of Kosala, named Virudhaka, attacked the Sakyas, forcing some of them to take refuge in Pippalivan, a place where peacocks or peacocks were found in abundance. That is why he later came to be known as Morris or Maurya. Chandragupta Maurya descended into the lineage of Suryavanshi Kshatriyas. He was the son of a village chief of the Mauryas who was killed fighting the army of King Dhanananda of Magadha. Later, with the help of the famous Brahmin Vishnugupta or Chanakya, he (Chandragupta) became the ruler of Magadha by duly defeating the forces of Dhanananda.
Sir I would like you read and understand the reality and history..and some by logic ..
i would like if you spread reality not misinformation....
By :- Avneet Maurya
He has mentioned about kosala and sakyas story in short at 11:26.
But the Puranic version of legend indeed says that mauryas were descent of Nanda and was born via Shudra lady . See maybe there is something fishy going on as Nandas are bad in puranas while Mauryas are praised.
bro, you should also provide this information in Hindi. Please consider. I'm waiting.
Perhaps that first inscription can be explained through a mixed origin. A vaishya would lay between a kshatriya and a shudra.
Is there any archeological evidence of chanakya
Mauryas were low born from a caste whose profession revolves around the peacock. This is what the ncert tells us.
Mauryas not win over tamil countries chera pandia and cholas Tamil proms Agananuru and purananuru
K.N.Neelakanda shastri also mentioned in his book Nandas
and mouryas
but the issue of separate from Bharatvarsha is not supported from Puranas, Sangam Literature , Tipitika along with commentry, Indica also includes Tamil Lands much like Al Beruni .
Whatever the topic tamil is only talking about me me me. Bro lose some ego. Thats not even topic of video.
Ashoka made them his vessels. This is mentioned in his rock edicts.
Chandragupta is GREAT SHEPHERD
I think you're putting too much emphasis on the origin of Chandragupta "on the basis of birth" the term Kshatriya has root word as Kshtra which means 'Region' in Sanskrit, so being a provider for a region/people can be named as Kshatriya: A chieftain of peacock people, or a head of a tribal group. Similarly if a person can attain the social status of Kshatriya, than his birth varna becomes irrelevant - for example: Nishadraj Guha (The king of tribals) in the Ramayana, Karna (King of Ang) in the Mahabharata, etc. Further, the royal marriages (related to Hindu Families who formerly ruled these princley states) in India were/are mostly conducted on the basis of their former princely state status not necessarily by the cast of the royal family. In a nutshell: Chandragupta could be born as a Shudra but later he attained the status of a Kshatriya- making the contemporary and subsequent literary evidence pointing a mixed origin.
Kshtriya the
It is quite possible he was from kshatriya mother and shudra father( nanda dynasty). This should suppprt all the theories.
But if his father was shudra then he would also be called shudra
@@Bhatti_Saab_7773 Not really as by that logic Nanda as per Puranic Sources should be called Kshtriya but truth he is called Shudra even then :)
@@linguistme6870 Lol Not True Couse He Was Nai ( Shudra ) ✌️
No wo kshtriya the nashik shilalekha pad lo
@Bhatti_Saab_7773he was kshtriya mori rajput more maratha kshtriya
jati was the group one was born in and varna was the profession per aptitude. The caste was imposed by the british. when we discuss indian history, we have to provide preference to the profession. rishi valmiki, matang, shabari were what we call today SC/STs shudra and by profession were highest rishis with own ashrams and were performers of yadnya. ravan, vibhishan, kumbhkarn, meghnaad were brahmin birth, kshatriya varna and still were rakshas. hanuman was ST, vanar and learned in vedas, languages and diplomacy. shri krishna, pandav, kaurav were ahir by jati and kshatriya by profession. pushyamitra shunga, peshwa bajirao, parshuram were brahmin by birth and kshatriya by varna. andhra nayak emblem mentions themselves as proud shudra kings who protect cows and brahmin. there are too many instances like these.
i never get this he grows up in Punjab got education at Texila and then suddenly all the Punjabi kings get behind him to attack Nanadas.
why they will fight for a foreign student 😂
If the puranas tells mauryas demons and immoral, they definitely were from lower caste.
Koi sak nahi mourya Kshtriya the
Did mourya fight with porus in punjab ?
Well it's clear he was neither kshtriya nor shudra bcz at that time varn vyavstha was not even existed in India. Buddha himself was a khattiya mean agricultural person. Mauran were a sub branch of shakya, why you ignore the inscription of asoka himself?
Exactly, all these guys tells us the wrong history about the buddhism, also in the excavation if kanganhalli two sculptures of early buddhas were found.
Also there is an excavation site where pre buddist era layer has been found at site which had no inscriptions written in it. But also found Mauryan and other time period stuff meaning the Mauryans knew their history and followed their ancestors history.
The amount of false narrative thats there in the puranas against mauryans and Buddhism in general itself shows that vedas puranas have been written after 10th 12th century
Kshtriya the mori
Shakya clan= Saka, A-Saka=Ashoka Bactria Babar Mughal
dude you are in confusion
puranas called them wicked because most patronised buddhism
sometimes even for jains
and btw humble origion
here origin in Indian mindset refer to caste
but it is not caste
Not true both chandragupta was literally a follower of Vedic religion who regularly performed Brahmanical rituals and sacrifices.
Bindusar in srilankan text is also called a brahmin bhatto.
It was really because of Ashoka, mauryan are demonised because of his decision, Brahmin lost their power which they have from almost a millennium
@@rowlattgamer3355 dude I have not mentioned changragupta name only
I used most*
@@rowlattgamer3355 chandragupta died while practicing a jain religion.
@@Pantheon-nu5klNo, that claims come from a 12th century book written almost thousands years after his death. (Not considered reliable among Historians now as that source has written a quite a lot of fanciful shit)
Also there is a possibility the person hemachandra has talked in that book was actually samprati not chandragupta) . So yeah nothing suggest he ever adopted Jainism after his abdication from throne. He likely died as a Vedic religion follower itself
@@rowlattgamer3355 No records about religious life of Chadragupta maurya and bindusara. Both may have patronized all religions.
As per Buddhist sources, parents of Chandragupta Mauryan were chieftain of piphrah who built Buddhist stupa there. His brother Vishnugupta was a Buddhist monk.
Mudrarakshash is completely farji book
They say he was brahmin but
How some brahmin would say rakshasa in his name
@@TheMidnightClub10 rakshasa word used for the amatya(prime minister )of Chandra Gupt maurya
Hindu puranas give importance to Nandas dynasty because Nandas are the lenage of Chandra vamsa and the Continuation of Sri Krishna lenage, last nanda king Mahapadma nanda had the sudra queen they lost the purity of Chandra vamsa, Dhananda is the son of that Sudra queen who was very arrogant and against Brahman s and there scriptures .
Open chapter 272-4 on Matsya Puran Nandas were DEMONS incarnation of Kali Purush
Mahapadma was starter of Nanda
As per Puranas Nandas were linked to Shishunaagas
The buddist sources are srilankan sources not indian... come on give my people some credit for writing these down... lol
Why dont we discuss the possibility that within Varnas classes could have emerged. Mauryas might be Shudras, but of higher origin than Nandas.
And that the Chanakya's link with Chandragupta might be fabricated.
मौर्य मूलतः भगवान बुद्ध के शाक्य कुल के थे। जो पिप्लिवन मे जाकर बसे थे। यही वजह है की अशोक ने भगवान बुद्ध का इतना प्रचार प्रसार किया था।
What type of research is this, there are ample evidence that all kshatria are from Naga solar race,,Ben's,vens,vans ,bais,baiza etc,are descendants of Banas clan
Buddhists text are trying to show mauryas were Kshatriyas..And Hindu text and purana are not trying to outclass him?....He was a buddhist and whole India was Buddhist that's the major problem for u all..And for further details it was Khatiye not kshatriya..
Hindu texts also say that before Nanda Empire there was a satriya kingdom
Buddhists also can manipulate to classify their history higher but buddist jatakas tells different stories about their kings
Its only in Hinduism
That even if you become the Strongest king in Indian History
You are still a 'Shudra'.
While a beggar surving on food given by people a high class brahman.
Beggar brhamin leave begging then he is also low birth mallecha
No Kshtriya the
Though Brahmins firmly believe in Varnashrama dharma,Smart Brahmins like Chanakya was ready to use any body for their political mileage.
Just loke Draupadi Murmu have become d President of India.
The story of Chankya in d court of Nanda is a basic behaviour of Brahminic.
If they r not provided first meal during feast get angry.
The feuds between Brahminism & Kshatria probably strated during Nandas & continued till 4th Century AD.
Ultimately Brahmins won d politics.That led to d imagimaging story of Parashurama.
Feuds between brahmins and kshatriyas = typical western bakwas.
It's baseless arguments. Specially how you reached the final conclusion about parashurama. He is mentioned in ramayan.
@-rate6326 this guies never understand history through the lens od socio political cultural economic landscape od that time
Carbon dating of purana
Puranas aren't physical books.