4000 Years – Hittites & Gandhiji
Separated by 4000 years, what could possibly be common between Gandhiji (2000 years after Christ) and Hittites (2000 years before Christ) – the pre-Greek Indians in the Middle East? Both, the Hittites and Gandhiji, rejected Hammurabi’s “eye-for-an-eye” legal thinking and system – 4000 years apart.
Who Was Hammurabi
Western historians glorified Hammurabi as the world’s first law giver – and Occidental-Levantine (including the Shariat) laws are based on Hammurabi’s legal code of “an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth”. Hammurabi’s laws and edicts were retributive, vengeful and punishment oriented. The focus of Hammurabi’s legal system is to give a ‘fitting’ counter punishment for a defined offense. Roman law calls this lex talionis and the Old Testament advocates an eye for an eye“, (Hebrew: עין תחת עין) is a quotation from Exodus 21:23–27.
Results & Consequences
These laws created a system of revenge, fueds and vendettas. The result – a fractured Europe, a rampant history of genocide, a fueding Middle East.
The largest prison population in the world is USA, currently at 2 million. The US has more people in prison than the totalitarian regimes of Russia or China. It also has one of the highest crime rates in the world is also USA. Is there a causal link between the Hammurabic legal systems and the crime it seems to engender.
Massacre & Slavery
This is also the same system that has created, supported, protected the premier slave systems of the world. It is also the same system with a singular record for blood baths and massacres in the history of mankind. This is region and system that gave rise to the three slave religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
The three ‘desert religions’, gained their first converts from slaves, but continued with slavery till the 20th century. The 3 ‘desert religions’ instead of reforming slave societies, just enabled the transfer of slave titles. Freedom meant old slaves became the new slave masters.
Gandhiji’s famous position was “an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind” when asked about the Hammurabi’s “eye for an eye” kind of justice.
The Hittite Legal System
The alternate system in that era, 4000 years ago, was the Hittite legal system. We get an insight into the Hittite legal system from (more than) 10,000 clay seals and tablets at Boghaz-koi, unearthed in 1907-08 by Makridi Bey and Hugo Winckler and deciphered by Bedrich Hrozny during 1910-1921. These tablets and seals reveal the legal minds of the Hittites. Hittite law, different from Hammurabi laws, was based on amelioration of the effect of crime and driven less by fear of death and punishment.
The Hittites, Mittanis and Elamites (using Indo-Dravidian languages) were Indo Aryans that dominated Asia from Indian borders to European borders till 500 BC. Kassite, the other major ruling clan in Levant’s geography (apart from the Egyptians) heavily adopted Indo Aryan cultural motifs.
Hammurabi’s main rival in the Middle East arena was Rama-Sin of Larsa (ruler of Larsa) who ruled for 60 years. Raim Sin (1753?-1693? BC) of Larsa, in Sumer (modern Iraq), ruled over Sumer, Elam – present-day Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. Sin is the Assyrian moon goddess (in modern Indian languages, Ram-Sin will be translated to Ramachandra). Ram-Sin assumed the title of ‘king of all lands’, blessed by Goddess ‘Nin Makh’ at ‘Opis’, his second capital in Babylonia. Ram-Sin fought for a long time an inconclusive war with Hammurabi (speculatively identified as ‘Ravana’ of the Indus seals). Ram-Sin, king of Babylonia possibly, was finally able to defeat Hammurabi in the joint action with the chief of Subartu, Hurrian and Mitanni kings. Hammurabi was killed in the fight, speculatively suggested by one of the Indus seals.
Gandhiji – And Hittites?
4000 years later, Gandhiji, described the western civilisation as a “good idea“. Gandhiji’s knowledge of Hittite legal thought would have been (probably close to) zero as the decipherment of Boghazkoi and other Hittite texts was ongoing and incomplete. Elaborate analysis and the commentary on Hittites and Boghazkoi came after Gandhiji’s death.
The Hittite legal revolution 4000 years ago plays out even today.
Go West, young man?
But, modern Indian law makers and jurists look to the West for getting legal ideas. Under the garb of modernisation, Indian law is becoming negative. Apart from not taking up the challenge of repealing colonial laws, the Indian Government has accepted the colonial legal system (nearly) in toto.
The Odious Section 498
Possibly the best example of post-colonial, western-patterned law is the Section 498. A retributive, revengeful law (patterned on western legal models) is now undermining the very structure of Indian society – marriage. Section 498 has has taken away marriages from the social domain into the legal sphere. From being contributory, accommodative, religious and life long, Indian marriage system is becoming extractive, adversarial, contractual, legal and short term. Some in the West do see the value in the Indian system – but India seems to think that West is a way out!
On September 5th, 2008, eight months after this post, the Times Of India reported that the Indian Government may review the section 498 law. The report talked about how
“For long, voices raised against the anti-dowry act were dismissed as those belonging to men desperately trying to retain their dominance over women. But now, an increasing number of women complaining against misuse of the act has forced the women and child development (WCD) ministry to initiate a review of the controversial legislation.
The government’s turnaround comes after an increasing number of complaints came from women themselves — mothers-in-law and sisters-in-law who ironically have fallen victim to the misuse of the two laws.
The statistics are telling. Raksha, an NGO working on marital harmony and child welfare, has analysed figures by the National Crime Records Bureau to deduce that 1.2 lakh women have been falsely implicated under 498A.
‘‘Every 21 minutes, an innocent woman is being arrested. While the number of arrests under 498A are increasing every year, what is not being considered is that the conviction rate in these cases is barely 2%,’’ Anupama Singh, Raksha spokesperson said.
The Indian Legal Alternative
Indian law can take inspiration from the Hittites of 4000 years and offer an alternate model to the world. A Gandhian model. The rejection of Hammurabi’s legal system by the Hittites and Gandhiji, separated by 4000 years, is not a co-incidence. Gandhiji’s response, separated by 4000 years from the Hittites, demonstrate the Indian continuity in thought and action.
The Khilafat Movement
Interestingly, also 4000 years later, when rulers of (the modern day Hittite kingdom in) Turkey, the Ottoman Turks, were being unseated from their thrones, by the British after WW1, it was Gandhiji who objected to the end of the Caliphate- and started the Khilafat Movement. India, itself a colony, took lead on an international issue and made its presence felt.
This break up of the Ottoman rule after WW1, and the installation of puppet regimes, regressed Islamic societies by centuries – at a great cost of millions of lives.
PS – If all else fails, there is the path of political assassination. A few days ago, from Washington, USA, someone Googled to ask “why britishers didn’t kill gandhi“. Perhaps, that was one moment in history, when the political leaders of the Anglo Saxon Bloc were momentarily humanised.
© with respective copyright holders. Copyright details embedded in the links.
My StumbleUpon Page
Seed Newsvine
[...] Lipit Ishtar-Hittite-Chanakya-Indic systems (LHCI) legal systems based on compensation and avoidance have lost following. Nelson [...]
[...] How can India have such a low prison population, with a poor police-to-population ratio and a crime rate which is not above the average. The answer goes back to Lipit Ishtar, Hittite laws, Hammurabi et al – 4000 years back in history. [...]
[...] the crime rate in India is in the low-to-average range. How come? 4000 years back in history is the answer … Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)On a Single Day, Five Banks [...]
This break up of the Ottoman rule after WW1, and the installation of puppet regimes, regressed Islamic societies by centuries – at a great cost of millions of lives.
->> There are some gems in this blog but also a lot of hogwash! Khilafat movement was what according to M Mujeeb made Indian Muslims feel part of one large Islamic brotherhood through the Ali brothers. The ottoman empire was responsible for an armenian genocide. They were so backward, that they couldnt even exploit the printing press lest it defiled Allah’s sacred scripture. Today, Turkey is a rare majority Muslim state with a secular constitution, thanks to the great Kemal Ataruk. Gandhi’s political opportunism was in the words of R C Majumdar nothing short of “anti-national”
The myth of the Islamic Brotherhood by now should have been well and truly laid to rest. After the 1857 backlash, the British Raj decided that interference in religion was an explosive idea – and changed their policy. Divide et impera became the official policy.
Christianity was replaced by a ‘benign’, ‘enlightened’ Raj – which was ‘progressive’, ‘liberal’, bringing ‘modernism’ to the ‘backward’ ‘natives’. To counter the Deoband School, they gave birth to Wahabbism – which is now the scourge of the world.
The Indian Muslim, has been, like the Rest of Indians, a broad minded, free-minded person. It is the 2nd /3rd largest Muslim population in the world – and has at least 7 major sects – Shias, Sunnis, Bohris, Ismailis, Aga Khanis, Ahmaddiyas, Dawoodi Bohras. One of them celebrates Diwali – and starts their new year by invoking Islamic conventions instead of Lakshmi.
The fear of Islamic Brotherhood is Western paranoia – based on their own past of genocides.
Sure thing. After all, they are part of the Desert Bloc. Is it surprising?
Kemal Ataturk’s perception of his country and people was so poor – that it was important for Turkey, to change even their dress – as per Ataturk. How much more bankrupt can a leader be? This is what the Shiv Sena, Raj Thackeray and Rame Sene are suggesting.
I cannot see how a State where a ‘good idea’ is thrust down peoples throat can be called a success.
Are you suggesting that we pay attention to a brown colonial hack to guage Gandhiji’s relevance?
Anuraag – Ataturk’s comparison to Shiv Sena et al is flawed… Ataturk was supposedly a “progressive” influence on Islam… as Nehru was considered to be a “progressive” influence on Hinduism. Nehru’s job was to subvert Indic polity by embedding western polity as a goal for “decadent” societies such as India. Shiv Sena and Raj Thackeray are demagogues – nothing more really, but pretend to defend Indic values – when in reality they don’t.
Let’s not confuse the two.
Saurav – Majumdar is a brown sahib who remained loyal to the English narrative until his death. Regardless of Gandhi’s real relevance – Majumdar is called the “greatest indian historian” … yet in the legacy of the English narratives he perpetually resorted to name calling… regards to 1857 – he referred to Indian leaders with the same venom… Nana Saheb was the son of a “worthless wicked ex-peshwa”… bahadur shah was a “dotard”… Indian civilians who “troubled” the English were the “riff raff”…
…let’s not quote Majumdar who participated in manufacturing this venom until he died … once can describe Majumdar using his own “scholarly” words as a “worthless and wicked dotard” slinging poison at Indian history masquerading as a historian…
The only and a major difference difference between Ataturk and Nehru, was the means.
Nehru used tax payers money and persuasion to influence Indians to become more ‘progressive’. Ataturk dragged Turkey, kicking and screaming to the Western altar.
After Nehru, India still had a chance to reclaim its Indic character. After Ataturk, Turkey was lost – forever.
That is all.
Agree – but Ataturk was no less. His demagogy was that of the ‘defeated’ Turkey.
I cannot let you get Nehru off the hook so easily… remember 1857 proved that the leaders were able to get popular support despite the genocide unleashed because the English overtly were attacking personal freedom… after 1857 – it was all be surreptitious ways to attack the Indic identity…
…Nehru did what he did – simply because if he had even attempted to do what Ataturk did – he would’ve been long gone…
…let’s not explicitly or implicitly credit Nehru for what he could not do…
Remember that in 1977 – Congress won ZERO seats when Sanjay Gandhi unleashed his population control campaign…
I can assure you that if Nehru had attempted Ataturk’s methods his political demise would have preceded his real one…
Let’s not euphemize Nehru’s deviousness to attack the Indic identity as using “tax payers money and PERSUASION”…
errata on previous post – ZERO seats in UP
Valid point … though speculative. There is much that Nehru did,for which can be faulted. But I think the context of Post WW2 world, will make us a little more balanced – and sympathetic.
[...] the paradox is 4000 years in history [...]
[...] answer goes back 4000 years back in history – to Lipit Ishtar, Hittite laws, Hammurabi et al. More than 2000 years ago, Megasthenes a Greek [...]
[...] other is the Indic model which traces its lineage to Lipit Ishtar, the Hitties till the advent of the Desert Bloc in India – with the brief Islamic rule from 1200-1400 (the Slave Dynasty, the Khiljis and Tuglaks) to [...]
You seem to harbor some hatred towards the 3 desert religions because you sound excessively like those hindu-fundamentalists .
Is Christianity a slave religion ?
It is common knowledge (even here in India) that Gandhi’s ahimsa was inspired from the bible .
This verse in particular
Bible quote
Matthew chapter 5: verses 38 to 45-
“ You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,’ but I say to you, do not resist him who is evil but whoever slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also, and if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. And whoever shall force you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, ‘ You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy,’ but I say to you , love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you in order that you may be sons of your Father who is in Heaven, for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and unrighteous.” [ This teaching , a portion of Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount, would have strongly influenced Martin Luther King’s approach to bringing change through nonviolent means.]
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Gandhi,+Mohandas+Karamchand
Hittite law was far more humane than Hammurabi code of justice , but to say that its more non-violent than preachings of Christ is a joke .
———————————————————————–
Hittite rule number 197 (The Code of the Nesilim)
If a man rape a woman in the mountain, it is the man’s wrong, he shall die. But if he rape her in the house, it is the woman’s fault, the woman shall die. If the husband find them and then kill them, there is no punishing the husband.
————————————————————————-
And no hammurabi’s code is not the basis for Koran ,bible and the talmud .You have obviously read none of them .
And before you jump to conclusions again i am an Indian and Christian . As there is freedom of language and culture in india i dont see why there should’nt be the freedom to follow your own choice of religion .
To start with, of course, you are getting defeatist. Any one can get away from any meaningful debate by alleging ‘Hindu Fundamentalism’. If it is religion that you want to discuss, I, at least, am NOT discussing religion at all.
Even if you are NOT a Christian Fundamentalist!
Are you suggesting that the Vatican did not support slavery? Are you ignoring the many Councils (of Gangra, for instance) where the Church explicitly supported slavery!
Very interesting! Another person commented the other day that Gandhiji took his inpiration from Prophet Muhammed!
I am quite happy (for you and MK Gandhi) if he found a pasasage in the Bible to take inpiration from! What exactly is your point!
If it is common knowledge, as you suggest and claim, the 2ndlook blog has no place for it. 2ndlook blog is for things that people do not generally know about!
Have I said anything about the teachings of Christ in anyone place! Have I invoked Jesus anywhere in the post? Have I talked about non-violence at all? I have not used the word violence or non-violence even once in my post!
Why are you inserting your own beliefs, conclusions – and imputing them to be mine?
Where have I said anything about Hittites being non-violent? They were fierce and skillful warriors – especially against the Slave Kingdoms of that time. You can check this out with the Egyptian Pharoahs.
- Your ideas and theory springs from a peculiar school of Western propaganda which is called comparative theology. The basic mechanism of this ‘academic discipline’ is to pick up a sentence (from the Bible, Koran, Old Testament, Gita, Vedas, et al) and prove anything. This is nothing but religious propaganda.
- As for your bit about Hittite Law, you should look at more data (some are linked in the post) before you tilt at these windmills. One sentence out of the nearly 100,000 clay tablets, gives no credibility or value to your statement.
- Even in ‘modern’ legal systems there are laws which exist in statute books but never implemented – a distinguishing feature of the Desert Bloc. So, if you take one sentence, to discredit the Hittites, you are using blunt and over-used weapons.
- With regards to “obviously read none of them” – Have I stated or even implied anywhere that I have studied any or all the religious texts in the world? So, why are you jumping to conclusions?
Why are you assuming that I will conclude anything else – except what you say about yourself. I dont see the relevance of this at all. Maybe you can enlighten my dark mind on this statement.
Where am I implying any curbs on culture, linguistic and /or religious freedom?
You are right, in India, dominated by ‘Hindus’, there is freedom to follow any religion, culture or language! Which unfortunately is not true in most countries governed by the Desert Bloc! Look at the curbs on Muslim faith in the West – or the curbs on Hindus in Islamic countries!
As for your bit about being Indian (meaning a passport holder) apparently has taught you nothing about Indic values. If it is history, that you want to discuss, then you have only have to look at the annihilation of peoples, faiths and belief systems in the areas governed by the Desert Bloc to debunk your ideas. The only areas which have been resist this annihilation were the Africans and Indians.
1. The quote was ‘for your information’ . There are many (mainstream) sources in the internet which are proof to what i have said about Gandhi being inspired (link in previous comment) by the bible . You can always check the internet (google) , it being a recent event is well documented by both Indian and non-Indian historians . I have nothing to prove .
2. [quote]If it is history, that you want to discuss, then you have only have to look at the annihilation of peoples, faiths and belief systems in the areas governed by the Desert Bloc to debunk your ideas. The only areas which have been resist this annihilation were the Africans and Indians.[/quote]
Very wrong …… Egyptian dynasty owning slaves is well documented . you yourself have stated so in other posts .
Hebrews who principally followed the Jewish religion never owned slaves or a significant kingdom for that matter and for the most part were slaves themselves . modern Israel is the fruit of American politics and their atrocities in gaza is no worse than the Gujarat,Orissa pogroms in India .
It is also well known that Hittites owned slaves
A book about Hittite rules for slaves
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=-4OHxYNRdhAC&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=did+Hittite+own+slaves&source=bl&ots=EJOEYJrZvY&sig=NoAVhXCwJw_WZAPUHXw8QggR880&hl=en&ei=5re8SvOOLIvU6gPGnrWdCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=did%20Hittite%20own%20slaves&f=false
Archimedian Persian empire the descendants of Elamites and Medes et al(culturally) used slaves .Islam was yet to be born at that time .
slave societies of Aztecs,Incas etc
Caste system proof of slave system in ancient India (Shudras/Dalits in particular) . A very popular social practice .
6. Quick to judge eh? You know what they say ,” When you point at somebody ,your own 3 fingers point back at you ”
7. I did … your concept of “Greater India” is funny . Maybe a separate discussion on that later .
I am grateful for this information, which you say is well known, a part of the mainstream media and I can get easily on Google!
What is wrong? Is it my English or your comprehension?
I am talking about “annihilation of peoples, faiths and belief systems in the areas governed by the Desert Bloc” and your response is Egyptians were slave owners!
I dont believe you at all! But, maybe if you can tell this to the African Americans who were traded by Jewish slave traders!
They might believe you!!
Maybe you have lived through a pogrom to know what it is.
Which is why both Islaimic and Christain believers in India are increasing, whereas ‘non-believers’ in Desert Bloc have decreased to extinction!
Are you not contradicting yourselves? On one hand you talking of religious freedom in India – and the other hand you are talking of pogroms!
Have I said anywhere that the Hittite kingdoms were free of slavery? That distinction belongs to India alone! Why are you making up statements that I am not making?
Yes. So? What about them? What are you saying?
Did you find any historical or archaeological proof of humans being captured, recaptured, sold and resold, in organized slave markets in India – with State sanction and protection? Can I have a reference to that? That my dear sir is slavery!
By the way, if you check with some Keralite nuns in Vatican, they will tell you about Casteism in the Vatican!
I am so glad that you found it funny – but of course, you have nothing to say why you found it funny!
If you point what is it that you found funny, maybe I will use more of that and improve it!
——————————————————————–
Typo its Achaemenid Persian empire
The fact that Elamite could be Dravidian is only a hypothesis put forward by some historians. You have come to a decided conclusion based simply on speculative reasoning and you have stated every other Iranian tribe whose ‘origins are unknown’ to be Indian ! .
I am with you brother David. When you abrogate the ideas of the evil pagan faiths you are serving our Master – the Lord Jesus Christ.
But don’t be so gentle with these heathens – the lord did say “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” Matthew 10.34
Spread the word of God in the land of the Hindus, who will burn in the fires of hell… and brother David, despite your Indian ethnicity, the Lord will save some space for you in Heaven for spreading His word. All are welcome in His Kingdom – even the brown skinned.
Aha!
The penny drops! I was wondering why this took so long!
QED!