Discovery of Kangleipak - 8

Your HISTORY and your IDENTITY

This article is written in response to this massage.

Racial history, or Puwari as we call it in Kangleipak, draws you  and other men and women of your race in a particular form/way distinguishing you and other people, men and women from other race of the world communities. It may show you and your people in almost identical Physical features, dresses, language, easily perceptible characters, natural aptitudes etc.
This  is your identity.
Your history forms/draws your identity, a particular identity as a man or a woman of a particular race.
From this perception of Racial history and identity, the Meetei Race is first a Race of the Asiatic continent excluding Indian sub-continent's, having similar physical features etc. with other Asian peoples, like the peoples of Myanmar, Mizoram, Thailand, Malayasia, Philippine, China, Tibet etc. etc. the peoples so called Mangoloid peoples of Asia. So, your name should be written as Yumnam Chaoba, not Chaoba Yumnam, as in vogue among the Asian peoples.
Secondly, you are a Meetei Kangleicha, particularly a fine Ancient race of the Earth. You should not accept a name of other races of the earth. You have to show your self as a real Meetei of Kangleipak.
The Meetei race in Kangleipak  before 18^th century A.D. had a particular Excellent identity among the human communities of the world. But since the 18^th century A.D. large scale insinuations, fabrications of legends, traditions etc. books specially history books etc. make the identity of the Meetei Race disturbed, destabilized, fractured, unbelievable etc to the point of identity madness.
One particular insinuation, fabrication to destroy the excellent identity of the Meetei race of Kangleipak is the snake Pakhangba tradition believed upto this day by many uncritical Kangleichas  (please refer to DISCOVERY OF KANGLEIPAK (5) AND (6) in the www.paochelkangleipak.net). Frankly speaking, you will understand the problem after reading these two articles.
From the discoveries of the insinuations, fabrications etc. in the Ancient history of Kangleipak, we know now that ‘tili koktok' (tangja leela pakhangba), some times ‘tilli kokton', ‘tilli koktom ahanba', ‘tangja leelha pakhangba', Meitingu nongda  Lairel Pakhangba', Ibudhou Pakgangba Linjao' etc. are all fabrications after the 18^th century A.D. ‘Kangba is a name found in the Kanglei Puya (scripture), ‘Maliyapham Palcha' is found in the scripture, not as ‘Maliya Phambalcha' (please see the difference of spelling of the two words), Nongpok Ningthou is not a historical personality found in the Puya, what is found in the Puya is ‘Nongpok Chingkhei Apanpa'; ‘Shang  dynasty', hou-lai', ‘Sibi leima', are not found in the Puya (scripture). The Kanglei legendary Monarch, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa, generally written and spoken as ‘Pakhangba' married Lailup Talet (in the scripture) or Lai Nura Taret (seven Lai ladies). These seven Lai ladies names are recorded in the scripture clearly. These things are designed to destroy the clear identity of the Meetei Race since the 18^th century A.D.
Now, a brief history of the Meetei Race.
The Meetei Race of Kangleipak is one of the most ancient races of the earth. The present Meetei race is a part of the Lai peoples who were created, nurtured and inhabited after first the whole of Koubru mountain ranges of Kangleipak and dispersed and spread through out the Asiatic continent.  The Lai peoples came down for the first time to the present Imphal Kangla in about 20,000 years B.P. or 180 centuries B.C., when the present Imphal valley began to be dry, as a civilized people who knew using weapons etc. Probably, the Lai peoples spread and dispersed  through out the vast land mass of the Asiatic continent before their coming to present Imphal Kangla and also before the Indian sub-continent  converged and conjoined the Eurasian land mass because of the continental drift. The Lai peoples became the present Meetei race of Kangleipak  later in history. The present Meetei race is a part of the Lai peoples from the Koubru mountain tops.
When a part of the Lai People from the tops of the Koubru mountain ranges of Kangleipak came down to the present Imphal Valley, some times in 20,000 year B.P. or 180 centuries B.C. the only area dried and suitable for human habitation was present Imphal Kangla. After some times the whole Imphal valley became dried and suitable for human habitations. Then the whole Imphal valley was occupied by the Lai peoples. Then a superman, our legendary historical personality, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa was born among the Lai peoples. He became the first political Monarch of Kangleipak. He married Lailup Talet (scripture), Lai nura taret (seven Lai ladies). The names of the 7 Lai ladies (queens of the Monarch) :

1. Laikok Huimulei Puksi Khompi
2. Huimu Leima
3. Loikhompi Mawai Thongngai Lelpi
4. Laiyek Pithet Leima
5. Leima Ulum Khotchao Tonpi
6. Leitham Tali Leima
7. Nonghainu Lilee Leima

These 7 queens gave birth to 7 sons what we call to day as seven Salais, namely, Mangang, Luwang , Khuman, Angom, Moilang, Khapa-nganpa and Salai Leisangthem, the present seven Salais of the Meetei race as we find to day. Our salai names or the seven clans names are after the names of the 7 sons of the first Legendary Monarch of  Kangleipak. The part of the Lai peoples who came down to the Imphal valley first treading the present Imphal Kangla became the Meetei Race since the time of our legendary Monarch, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa (Ibudhou Pakhangpa at present). These are all recorded history of the Meetei race of Kangleipak upto now.The development of writing scripts (Aphabets) was during the time of our first Monarch, Konchin Tukthapa. Since then we had two kinds of histories namely history of Kangleipak (history of the kingdom) and Yumtapa Puya (Genealogy of the different seven Salais or seven clans.)
We thought, on the literary basis, that the time of establishment of our first Monarchy and development of the Kanglei writing alphabets were some times in 4000 years B.P. or 2000 B.C. Most probably it is not true now in the light of the scientific finding that the first human habitation on present Imphal Kangla was in 20,000 years B.P. or 180 centuries B.C. The establishment of the first Monarchy in Kangleipak, or reigning time of the first Monarch, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa might be many many centuries B.C. earlier than the present estamation of 2000 years B.C.
One of the worst unlucky historical events happened in the 18^th century A.D. when Pamheiba Garivaniwaz, the first Hindu king became king of Kangleipak was ‘Puya Meithaba' (burning of the scriptures). Renown Bengoli intellectual and writer Suniti Kumar Chaterji in his book, KIRATA-JANA-KRTI  at page 160 says, ‘The older literary tradition suffered from a setback, owing to the ill-conceived and mischievous action of the Ramandi Missionary Santadas Babaji,  whose Vandalism in getting together and burning a number of old Manipuri MSS. appears to have received  the support of Gharib-nawaz himself and this continued during the 18^th century."
In a parallel event in the Asian history, during the reign of the Chinese Emperor Shih-Wang-Ti (249-210 B.C.), " The Tai who had  been a cultured people being of the princely rank in early times, were in possession of rich heritage of art and literature at the time of Shih-Wang-Ti, but the men of letters among the Tai and their literary works were so completely destroyed in the wild act of persecution that from that time the Tai in the Empire became almost an illiterate race through lack of books and teachers" page 37 of the  THE TAI AND THE TAI KINGDOMS by Padmeswar Gogoi.
The Emperor killed 460 Tai  intellectuals also  by burying alive for their objections to this Vandalism.
For Kangleipak after the Vandalism of king Pamheiba Garivaniwaz and his dharma guru Santadas Babaji, whom  we in Kangleipak know by the name Shanti Das Gossai, of burning of all written records of the kingdom including centuries old Puyas (Scriptures) of the Meetei Race, the burning not only made the Meetei Race a bundle of stupid peoples without any background of intellectual developments, insinuations and fabrications etc. of  legends, traditions, history   etc. etc. made the Meetei Race almost a half insane  people without knowing what they are, and the present identity madness is the product of the Hindu Rule of about 250 years since the 18^th century A.D.
Now you note for your identity
Lai peoples created and nurtured, after inhabited the whole of Koubru Mountain ranges.

A group of Lai peoples coming down to the present Imphal valley from the Koubru mountain range, treading first their feet on the present Imphal Kangla at 20,000 years BP or 180 centuries BC. They became the Meetei Race in the later history of Kangleipak separating from the Lai peoples since the time of our legendary Morarch, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa.

The first legendary Monarch  married seven Lai ladies giving birth to 7 sons or seven salais composing the seven groups of salai peoples of the Meetei race.
So, the identity of the men and women kangleichas are so clear that your identity  as man or woman of the Meetei Race is a salai man or woman under different surnames descended from the Lai peoples of the Koubru mountain ranges in the deep pre-history period and directly descended from Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa, the legendary Monarch  in the history times of Kangleipak.
So, you are first a man or a woman descended in the deep pre-history times of  Kangleipak from the Lai peoples of the Koubru mountain ranges who may be the first Homo Sapiens of the Earth. Then you are a man or a woman directly descended from the legendary Monarch of Kangleipak, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa who was the starting point of Genealogy of the Meetei Race. You are a proud man or woman of the world born in the one of the most ancient races of the world.
Present research in the history of the Meetei Race and Kangleipak have led to the Fantastic Discoveries. The Lai peoples of the Koubru mountain ranges may be the first Homo Sapiens of the Earth.

Discovery of Kangleipak 7

The contents and extents of the Geographical areas of ancient Kangleipak.

(An anti-thesis against the Misinformation and Disinformation of the fact)

Now-a-days there is a systematic campaign against certain Historical and cultural facts of ancient Kangleipak from some small fraction of the Manipur population. On single fact, to mention only one, misinformed and disinformed  the Kanglei people is the contents and extents of the geographical areas of ancient Kangleipak against clear historical records of the land.

The humble writer offers the following historical facts in this regard to the global audience as an item of thought provocation.

Because of the availability of some Puyas (scriptures) – Wakoklon Heelen Thilel Sali Ama-Ilon Pukok, Wakoklon Thilel Salai Amailon, Kham-oi Yang-oi Sekning, Wachetlon Pathup to the patriotic Kangleichas as gifts from the graves of the enlightened buried ancestors, we know now in the 21^st century very well that there were 7 (seven) Kanglas as administrative centers of the seven sons of the Kanglei Monarch, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa spread over through out the length and breath of Kangleipak. We have the Mangang Kangla at Imphal Kangla for the 1^st son; present Langkol Ningthou Laipham was the Luwang Kangla for the 2^nd son;  the Khuman Salai people inhabited Yailipok (Yairipok), then Umukhong, then Laikoipung and lastly and permanently at present Pumlel area, Pumlel was Khuman Kangla; Angom Kangla was at the area of Kongba river; Moirang Kangla is even new located at Moirang  to the west of Loktak Lake; Kha-nganba Kangla was at Taknakha area; and lastly the Salai Leisangthem Kangla was in the present Imphal Kangla area, later Leisang Hithen area for the seventh son.

These areas of Kangleipak covered by 7 Kanglas, administrative centers of the seven sons of Kochin Tukthapa are naturally and effectively the geographical areas, and geographical contents and extents of ancient Kangleipak.

We have 7 (seven) Laipungthous as physical parts of the Ipung Loinapa Apakpa, the ultimate Universal Lord, the God Father Creator and places of worship of these seven Laipungthous. We have the place of worship of Nongpok Chingkhei Apanpa at Langmaiching (Nongmaiching) in the East of Imphal valley; we have the Awangpa Koupalu on the top of the Koubru mountain; we have the place of worship of the Thangching Koilel Lai Sitapa on the top of the Thangching mountain in the south west of Kangleipak; we have the place of worship of Wangpulel Khana Chaopa Lai Sitapa  (at present Wangbrel) in Chandel district in the south east mountain area of Kangleipak; we have the place of worship of the Eelai Pulel Puling Lai Sitapa at Loktak area; we have the Lainingthou Pangkalpa ( the writer cannot pinpoint the place of worship); we have the Salailel Sitapa (Space) covering these areas of the Laipungthous. These  are seven Laipungthous and 7 places of worship for these Laipungthous. We, the Kangleicha Meetei Race worship Kangleipak as Ipung Loinapa Apakpa , Universal God Father Creator composed of these 7 Laipungthous. We worship Kangleipak as Father Land.

The names of 7 Laipungthous are pure and pure Kanglei Meetei words/concepts. This means the Kanglei Meetei Race effectively possessed the hills and plain areas of Kangleipak before the advent of Hinduism since time immemorial. Please remember before Hinduism, the Hills and plain people are of the same Race. All places of worship except Eelai Pulel Puling Lai Sitapa are in the mountains and hills of Kangleipak indicating areas coverage of Kangleipak.

These are the geographical areas content and extents of Kangleipak as known in the Puwari (History) of Kangleipak.

Let us see another historical  record of Kangleipak embedded in an age long tradition in respect of the geographical extent of Kangleipak.

“Then the incoming  Chahitaba thus addresses the Raja  ‘O son of heaven, ruler of the kings, great and ancient Lord, Incarnation of God, the great Lord Pakhangba, Master of the bright sun, Lord of the plain and despot of the hills whose kingdom is from the hills on the east to the mountains on the west…..’ …….”.

The above quotation is from page 105 of the THE MEITHEIS by T.C. Hodson. Mr. Hodson not only shows the tradition of Cheithaba of the Meetei Race (Hodson writes as Chahitaba) in which Divine origin of state of the Meetei Race is clearly seen, shows the geographical extent of the hilly country Kangleipak embedded in the traditional annual ceremony Cheithaba performed in the Royal Palace since times immemorial. The traditional hymn of the Cheithaba Ceremony included the geographical extents of the  country because all men and women in the whole country had unconditional Loyalty to the country and to the King in the times of yore of Kangleipak. Please see the underlined sentence “Lord of the plain and despot of the hills whose kingdom is from the hills on the east to the mountains of the west’ as part of the ceremonial tradition of Cheithaba.

All these things shown above, tell very loudly and unambiguously to all men and women concerned  the contents and extents of the geographical areas of the ancient country Kangleipak since  times immemorial. No body can entertain any doubt in this matter.

There is another point to be remembered very well and to be counted without any dissent.

When the Lai people came down first to the Imphal valley from the Koubru mountain ranges touching first the present Imphal Kangla some times 20,000 years B.P., the whole land of the hills and plain of Kangleipak were inhabited by the Lai People. The indigenous peoples of the whole Kanglei Lands from the hills in the east to the mountains of the west were homogenous peoples, only the Lai People. When a man like Konchin Tukthapa became Monarch of Kangleipak, acceptedly a brave soldier and undisputedly an accepted leader of  the people, and also by disposition a God fearing leader, there is no point to argue disloyalty among the Homogenous countrymen of Kangleipak to the king.

From to day, because of the facts and reasons stated above, all unnecessarily suggested ideas that Kangleipak covers only the present Imphal Kangla areas may be kept to rest for all times to come.

Discovery of Kangleipak 6

The snake culture of the WORLD vis-a-vis KANGLEIPAK.

In the article of the writer in the matter, Pakhangba, a Snake as the Progenitor of the Kangleicha Meetei Race (It is an improper concept, created and born during Hindu rule in Kangleipak), the writer had showed the unacceptability of the concept that Pakhangba, a snake as the Progenitor of the Kangleicha Meetei Race, scientifically and historically.

Now the writer will show the snake culture of the world vis-a-vis Kangleipak in order to strengthen and confirm the blunder and unacceptability of the concept of Pakhangba as a snake as a Progenitor of the Meetei Race.

The Celtic symbols of serpent (Xerox from the originals)

                                                        

‘Every ancient mythology has some form of world serpent.’

‘The serpent represent the cyclic nature of life.’

‘Thus, many ancient people believed snakes are immortal.’

‘The serpent also is a phallic symbol, but ironically, serpents also are one of the older symbols of female power in the celtic religion.’

‘The coiled snake with its tail in its mouth is some times known as Ouroboros, and is thought to represent the circle of the continuity of life.’

From an article, the serpent (An Nathair) by Michealin Daugherty. (Source: irelandsown.net/serpent.html)

Ouroboros (Xerox from the originals)

(From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

                                             

                                 

‘The Ouroboros often represents self reflexivity or cyclicality, specially in the sense of something constantly recreating itself, the eternal return, and other things perceived as cycles that begin anew as soon as they end (see Phoenix). It can also represent the idea of Primordial unity ......”

Historical representations.

Antiquity

‘Plato described a self eating, circular being as the first living thing in the universe - an immortal, perfectly constructed animal.’

‘The notion of the serpent or dragon eating its own tail can be traced back to ancient Egypt, circa 1600 B.C. From ancient Egypt it passed to phoenicia and then to the Greek philosophers, who gave it the name Ouroboros (tail devourer).’

Non-western traditions

‘It is also present in some Hindu folk-myths, as a snake (Adisesha) circling the tortoise Maha Kurma that supports  eight elephants which support the world on their back.’

‘Snakes are sacred animals in many west African religions.’

Modern

‘The flag of the short lived Italian Regency of Carnaro featured the Ouroboros on it. The Ouroboros has been incorporated into the crests of the Hungarians and Roman  unitarian churches.’

From what the writer has quoted above from the article, the serpent (An Nathair) by Michealin Daugherty and from the article, Ouroboros from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, the esteemed readers might have understood that the snake culture was associated with the western and middle east countries (peoples) since B.C. Not only the western and middle east countries the snake culture was associated with the African and Indian peoples also since early times.

The present Indian people came to

the Indian Sub-continent with snake culture

On page 11 of the ‘KIRATA-JANA-KRTI’ by Sunity Kumar Chatterji, under the heading ‘13. THE ARYAN NORDICS : THEIR ADVENT INTO INDIA’ Mr. Chatterji writes ‘They spread west and south and east, and a branch of them, the Aryans, crossed the Caucasus Mountains into Northern Mesopotamia by 2200 B.C.,   whence some of their tribes after wanderings spread over several countries in Iraq, Iran and North western Frontier of India, finally came into India at a period not earlier than 1500 B.C. - probably nearer to 1200 B.C. than 1500. They brought with them their own culture and religion, .........................’

‘So, when the Indus Valley Civilisation was discovered all scholars were puzzled. They could not term the civilisation as Aryan since they already established the theory that Aryans entered India not earlier than 1500 B.C..’

‘A peace treaty of about 1400 B.C. between the Hittites and the Mattani Rulers of the Mattani, reveals the names of the Vedic Gods Indra, Varuna and Nasatya.  Ghosh thus concluded that about the middle of the second millennium B.C. the forefathers of the Indo Aryans still in the western Asia on their way to India from a European home.’

These two quotations above are from ‘The Aryan Hoax by Paramesh Choudhury (1995)’ pages 20, 375.

V.D. Mahajan in his history book, Ancient India on page 850 says that Aryan kings were still in the west Asia in their way to India in 1435 B.C.

An advanced History of India by R.C. Majumdar etc. on page 25 says ‘In the Chaotic State of early Aryan Chronology, it is a welcome relief to turn to Asia Minor or other countries in west Asia and find in certain tablets of the 14 century B.C., discovered at Boghaz Keui and other places, references to kings who bore Aryan names and invoke the Gods Indra, Mitra, Varuna ......’

From the above quotations from some of the reputed writers and historians of present India, the esteemed readers might have understood that the present Hindu people were part and parcel of Europe and west Asia people, sharing their culture, including that of snake culture and way of life upto most probably 1200 B.C.

After about 3000 years on the Indian soil, some Hindu Indians came to Kangleipak and a Hindu decent Pamheiba Garivaniwaz became king of Kangleipak in 18th century A.D., but actual ruler was one Santi Das Gosai, a Hindu  religious preacher, the Dharma Guru of king Pamheiba.

Before the advent of Hinduism, the people of Kangleipak and Kangleichas Meetei Race had nothing to do with snake culture and snake in their religion. Even to day some of the Kangleichas eat big snakes called Pythons. Every thing connected with the snake culture and snakes was brought and imposed by the Hindu kings upon the indigenous Kangleichas during their rules since 18th century A.D.

Tradition of rebirth and cyclic nature  of life of the Kangleicha Meetei Race.

The Kangleicha Meetei Race is a Race having extreme belief in the rebirth of human soul. During the time of Kanglei Monarchs, when a person is convicted of a serious crime, like treason, he was killed by the state executioner. The highest court, the king with seven Maichous, will say to the executioner ‘Angang Olhanlo’ = ‘Change him to child’ meaning ‘the man will be born as child’ after his death by gallows.

Everybody upto this day a man or a woman born as a Meetei knows very well that when a person is about to die, he/she is put over a Changpi  banana tree leave using a part of the Changpi banana tree as pillow inside a Khangpokshang in the Sumang (like courtyard) of the Meetei home. Khangpokshang is a compound word. Khangpokshang = Khang + pok + shang = Khang means Khangpa (Khangba), further means to endure the pains and suffering prior to death + Pok means Pokpa, further means to be born + Shang means hut. Therefore, Khangpokshang, for the Meetei Race, is a hut in which a dying person waiting his/her rebirth self controlling his/her sufferings and pains just before death. Every body must know that a Meetei person lies inside the Khangpokshang just before death facing up the sky. An example of extreme belief in the rebirth process of life.

‘Khamchinkon’ is a word/concept very frequently used in the scripture called ‘Kham-oi Yang-oi Sekning’, a Puya in which the life, birth-death-birth, is discussed in details.

‘Khamchinkon’ = Kham + chin + kon = Kham means khampa = khamba means end ( end of life) + chin means machin further means beginning + kon means konnachak further means coiled position of a child before birth in the mother’s womb. Therefore khamchinkon means the process of life (soul), death > birth > death ..... unending circle of life (soul).

There are two words/concepts, chakpalon and chakoi, which are discussed in details in two Puyas called Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Ama-Ilon Pukok and Polpilang. Polpilang = Polpi + lang = Polpi means life (soul) + lang means body. Therefore Polpilang means soul and body (soul body).

There are four chaks in the Meetei mythology - Hei chak, Ha chak, Kona - chak, Langpa chak. Hei chak means (time) of the father in which the soul (thouwai) of human beings  resides in the father, in Ha chak and Kona chak the soul resides in the mother, and Langba chak means human life time as man and woman. After human beings lived for a time as man and woman, they die and the souls return to the human father, and repeat the 4 chak process of human life.

The mythology of the Meetei Race, chakpalon and chakoi, is studied in the above mentioned two Puyas. Chakpalon = Chakpa + lon = chakpa means chak further means 4 stages (times) of life cycle + Lon means study and results thereof. Chakoi = chak + koi = chak means chak (time) + koi means round (circle).

Therefore, chakpalon and chakoi means life and death and their cyclic nature in the universal process ordained by the universal father, the God creator.

Inspite of the extreme belief of the Meetei Race in the cyclic process of life and soul, there is not a single instance of symbolic representation like Ouroboros in traditions, Mythologies and Puyas or otherwise in ancient times of Kangleipak.

When the Hindu comes

In 1834 A.D. when king Gambhir Singh was ill, he started worshipping Pakhangba  in a Kufa for his long life at Langthabal hill. During the worship the king had an earnest desire to see ancestor Pakhangba in the shape of swallowing its tail in the mouth (like Ouroboros) once he saw in a worship in ‘Nungjeng Pukhri.’  “ Mana ukhiba Mabudhou Pakhangbagi  murti adu ningsinglaktuna makhudombina leipakta yekle. Leimaida yekliba Mabudhougi murti aduda mapukning changna mityeng tabada khanghoudana Mabudhougi murti adu thangeisengba Pakhangba ollaktuna  mameibu mayana chiklambadu thadoklaga chongkhatlaktuna  maharajgi maraibakta chiklamlaga leimaida murti oina amuk  hanjinkhi.” (page 35 of Meitei Ningthourol by Sarangthem Bormani Singh). King Gambhir Singh died in this way.

“Gambhir Singh Maharajabu chikpa Pakhangba adu Pebra panditna mingkhei sonduna lupagi komfuda haplaga waithou mathak tangjeng patta thadokkhi, mapham aduda tangjeng pakhangba oina leikhi.” (page 38 of Meitei Ningthourol by Sarangthem Bormani Singh).

There is a confusion to the readers of page 35, 38 of the Meitei Ningthourol by Sarangthem Bormani that the snake Pakhangba that was set free by Pebra Pandit at Tangjeng Pat was a live snake Pakhangba or the drawn Pakhangba murti on the ground.

Regarding the death of king Gambhir Singh, the ‘Manipur and the Naga hills’ by Major General Sir James Johnstone says on page 87 ‘The Kubo Valley was handed over to the Burmese on the 9th of January, 1834, and on that day Ghumbeer Singh died in Manipur of Cholera.”

                              

The above two xerox copies are from two books, Luwang Nonghum Sanglen and Pakhangba Naoyom by Shri Hijam Ibobi and  his  relative, Hijam Phajabi of Singjamei Waikhom Leikai. Shri Hijam Ibobi was head Pandit  Achouba of Royal Palace before the merger of Manipur to India in 1949.

This Ouroboros type symbols of Pakhangba is said ‘Paphan’ or ‘Pakhangba Paphan’ in Manipur now.

The names of the above symbols as ‘Paphan’ or ‘Pakhangba Paphan’ are wrong and conceptually very misleading.

“Talang Eepung Loinapa Apakpa Masana Oipa Mihun, Sam, Tu, Khuchinnachingpa Singli Paphan 108, Mihun 84, Tangsamli 27, Thapung 10 ki Eepha Eemenpham, Thonglon 9, Pankhei 8, Eelam 7, ............”

The above quotation is from the scripture, Puya Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Ama-Ilon Pukok. Please see the underlined words. The words/concepts in the quotation cannot be deciphered fully by the writer till now. Mihun = Pulse, Sam = Hair, Tu = Hair all over the body, Khuchin = Nail, Singli = Nerve, Vein, Paphan = Pa + Phan = Pa means Paba further means very finely, Phan means Phandokpa further means spread over wide areas.

We know very crudely that the Singli (Probably nerves and veins) spreads very finely through out the body as Cobweb or spider net. We call this generally  ‘Singli Paphan’.

This ‘Singli paphan’ is/was never connected with the present snake Pakhangba or ancient  Lailel Pakhangba in any way or in any sense.

The above quotation from the Puya seems to express Physiological scientific findings in the ancient Kangleipak, but is never expressed any where or any time in the Past Kangleipak in symbols like Ouroboros or otherwise.

Therefore, from the reasons given above by the writer in this article, please know for certain that the symbolic representations of snake Pakhangba or ancient Lailel Pakhangpa or Paphan or Pakhangba Paphan as Ouroboros or a snake swallowing its tail or any other snake symbols are since the advent of Hinduism, not of ancient Kangleipak.

---------

Discovery of Kangleipak - 5

Pakhangba , a Snake as the progenitor of Kangleicha Meetei Race.

(It is an improper concept, created and born during Hindu Rule in Kangleipak).

Though most of the Meetei people, who are educated and cultured, do not agree with the idea and concept that the present Meetei Race are the descendants of a Lairel in the meaning of a big Snake, Python; but many uncultured, uneducated, uncritical and unsubtle minded people, even to day, are thinking that the Meetei Race are the sons and daughters of a Lairel in the meaning of a big snake or Python. Yes, the ancient Meetei Race are the descendants of a Lairel, in the original meaning of Lairel = Lailel = Lai + lel = Lai means God + Lel means the best, the highest, the ultimate as in the meaning of Phirel (best cloth), Ngarel (the best fish), Sharel (the best beast), Chaklen (the best meal) etc. This  wrong and improper idea and concept prevails in some hill communities also in Kangleipak.

This injurious, wrong and improper idea or concept was created and born  during the Hindu Rule since the advent of Hinduism in the 18th century A.D.

Before tracing the birth of the idea or concept historically on the soil of Kangleipak, let us look at the problem scientifically.

The geological age of the earth is estimated to be 4500 million years. On this Earth, about 3500 million years B.P. one cell-organism, unidentifiable plant or animal came into being, fish developed 400 million year B.P., from fish, amphibians developed 280 million years B.P., from amphibians, reptiles (snakes, pythons etc.) developed 250 million years B.P., from reptiles, mammals (monkeys, apes etc.) were developed 150 million years B.P. But Homo Sapien (man) developed from mammal 2 million years B.P.

In this evolutionary hierarchy, the time distance between man and snakes (reptiles) is 250,000,000 – 2,000,000 = 248,000,000 years. In the evolutionary ladder, Snakes, Pythons etc. are below the Homo Sapien (man) by 248,000,000 years in evolution.

The indigenous Kangleicha knew that there is a mythology that when Sanamahi Lainingthou created man, the last living being created by Lainingthou Sanamahi was a ‘yong’ = a monkey. Lainingthou Sanamahi brought the ‘yong’ before His God Father, Salailel Sitapa and claimed to His Father that He was created a man. Salailel Sitapa disagreed and  told His son, Sanamahi Lainingthou to create man in the likeness of His (Salailel Sitapa) image. Thus man was created as an image of God, highest in the evolutionary Hierarchy nearest to God. Upto this day indigenous Kangleichas think that ‘yong’ is their ancestor.

In such facts of evolutionary process of living beings, scientific facts, on this planet earth, can there be any ancestral relationship of the indigenous Meetie Race with Snake-Python-Reptiles in their genealogy. Senseless ! The indigenous Kangleichas Meetei are not ‘Nag Bungsees’ of India.

Now let us trace the word or concept ‘Lairel’, some times ‘Lairen’ historically in the Kanglei society - what it was and what it is now to some people in the Kanglei Society? The word ‘Lairel’ is a word very frequently used by the indigenous people. In the Meetei traditional dance  ‘Thabal Chongba’, the dancers use it ‘Ngasida Lairel Nongjada’; in the Cheithaba hymn ‘Nayu tubi yoinongda, Nongda lairel Pakhangba’; in the Cheitharol Kumbaba ‘Nongda Lairen Pakhangba’; ‘Tubi Lairel Chagok’; Pakhangba gave birth to  Seven Lairels’; ‘There is a black Lairel in the Iroisemba zoo’; etc.

The use of ‘Lairel’ or ‘Lailel’, in different backgrounds as in the above, may puzzle even  the most inquisitive etymologist at present. No clearcut meaning or concept may be discerned from the words ‘Lairel’ or ‘Lairen’ at present circumstances to the general people. In the ‘Ngasida Lairel Nongjada’, the word ‘Lairel’ cannot be equated to a snake or python in its meaning and concept. In the hymn of Cheithaba ‘Nayu Tubi yoinongda, Nongda Lairel Pakhangba’, reading the two sentences together the word ‘Lairel’ meant a snake or python. In the hymn the meaning  and concept is ‘snakes or python Pakhangba’ is certain; in the Cheitharol Kumbaba, ‘Nongda Lairel Pakhangba’, the two words ‘Lairel Pakhangba, we do not know whether they meant ‘Snake Pakhnagba’ or otherwise. But in the sentences ‘Tubi Lairel chagok’ and ‘there is a black Lairel in the Iroisemba Zoo’. , the meaning or concept of ‘Lairel’ is definitely a snake or Python. In the sentence ‘Pakhangba gave birth to seven Lairels’, to us who know the cultural past of the Meetei Race, it is a Lairel = Highest God,  but  to  common people, it is a horrible meaning of ‘Snake or Python’.

These murky, vague concepts or meanings of ‘Lairel’ and ‘Pakhangba’ originated during the Hindu times since 18th century A.D. Machinations and indoctrinations with threat of physical injury to lead the indigenous Kangleichas to think in the way of ‘Nag Bungsees’ of India made these social maladies during the Hindu Rule of the last about 300 years.

The Meetei Race in Kangleipak had very sacred and solemn concepts of ‘Lairel’ and ‘Pakhangba’ before the advent of Hinduism in 18th century A.D.

The Meetei Race has the tradition and mythology that they are sons and daughters of the Universal Lord Creator.

In the scripture called Puya by the Meetei Race , it is written about the birth of Sanamahi and Pakhangba as under :

“ Asum Oipa Laipauki matung-inna Sitapaki eesaiphu eelon-nungta, numit humni supaki nouwaki mawong oina sanaki machu manpa nouwa ama leilamle; nouwa atupu yenglaka sanaki masak manpa angangpa machuna leitengpa mahi atupu upata Sanamhi haipa mingthonpu peetuna machaki matamkumna loukhatle. Asum touna loukhatlapaka Lailelpi Sitapi Lailem mata Peesille.”

Before the birth of Sanamahi Lainingthou, a voice from the primordial space said that Ipung Loinapa Apakpa, the Universal Lord will come down on the Earth to create living beings. This was heard by Salailel  Sitapa (Ipa Salailel, Ipa Sorarel) and Leimalel Sitapi (the Earth personified as deathless woman mother). The above quotation says in English roughly “ According to the Laipau (voice from the space), a child (nouwa) of three day was found in the eesaiphu eelon-nung of Salailel Sitapa (body of Salailel Sitapa). After seeing the child (Nouwa) decorated with red Sanaki machu manpa (having procreative power), Salailel Sitapa took up the nouwa and handed over to Leimalel Sitapi.” (The statement in the scripture cannot be translated in normal way, it should be explained. The writer has not done it).

This Laipau is the beginning of creation of the living beings according to the tradition and mythology of the Meetei Race and of the genealogy of the Meetei Race. Please examine the quotation from Puya and try to understand the words underlined. The “Laibou chongba’ tradition of the Meetei Lai Haraoba came from this ‘Laipau’ in the Puya. From the words and concepts of ‘Sitapaki eesaiphu eelon-nung’, the present tradition of having an ‘eesaiphu’ in every worship of God came’. The words and concept of ‘ Sanaki masak manpa’ meant ‘having procreative power’. The word ‘sanaki’ is not related with ‘Gold’ or Gold liquid’ in anyway.  From the words and concepts of ‘Mahi’ and ‘Sanamahi’ in the Puya categorically prove that the Meetei Race is not idolatry in their religion.

The Kangleichas Meetei Race know very well that Sanamahi Lainingthou is the elder son and Pakhangba is the younger son of Lainingthou Salailel Sitapa (Ipa Salailel, Ipa Sorarel) and Leimalel Sitapi (Malem Earth as deathless woman-mother) according to the tradition and mythology of the Meetei Race. According to this tradition and mythology, the genealogy of the Meetei Race is as under :

According to this tradition, and mythology of the Meetei race in Kangleipak, as shown in the diagram above, the first Monarch of Kangleipak, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa is the direct son of Lainingthou Salailel Sitapa (Ipa Salailel, Ipa Sorarel at present) and Leimalel Lailelma Sitapi (Malem Leima, the Earth). Konchin Tukthapa is the real name of the Kanglei first Monarch; Ipu Athoupa means brave grandfather; Pakhangpa = Pa + Khangpa = pa means Ipa further means Father + khangpa means to Know. So Pakhangpa = Pakhangba means a man who knows Father, that is, the Universal Lord Creator. The present household word Ibudhou is a derivative of ‘Ipu Athoupa’ of the Puya. The Meetei Race called Panthou to the husband of the mother-woman, not as Ipa. Ipa (Father) is solemn name of the Universal Lord Creator (Universal Father) given by the Meetei Race in Kangleipak.

As the Seven- Salai Meetei Race is the direct descendents of the first Monarch, brave grandfather Konchin Pakhangpa, the Meetei Race gave the first  Monarch of Kangleipak a very  respectful name ‘Lailel Pakhangba’. Lailel = at present Lairel = Lai + Lel = Lai means God + Lel means the best, the highest, ultimate God. So, Lailel Pakhangpa means highest God who knows the Universal Lord Creator on the Earth. The first Monarch of Kangleipak was idealised as God on the Earth and worshipped him as Lailel Pakhangpa by the Meetei race.

From this brief statement of the genealogy of the present Meetei Race and of their first monarch, Konchin Tukthapa Ipu Athoupa Pakhangpa, every man and woman may be very sure that Lailel = Lairel, Pakhangba are never related with any meaning or  concept of Snake, Python etc.

The prosperous and disciplined society of Kangleipak became destablised in all respects and was in the process of destruction of all Kanglei Social fabrics since the advent of Hinduism. To destroy the backbone of the Kanglei racial genealogy  originating the Meetei Race from the Universal Lord  in the deep rooted tradition and mythology, the murky and derogatory concept of Reptile-Snake-Python was imposed upon the originally clear and solemn concepts of Lailel Pakhangpa with Royal authority since the days of Pamheiba Garivaniwaz and Santi Das Gosai in the 18th century A.D.

Now please see how the murky, unholy, derogatory concepts of Lairel Pakhangba were pushed in since the beginning of Hindu Rules in Kangleipak historically.

“Tarukni yumsakeisada Pakhangba Nongthoudagi Khaorou oina fifou mangda tarakye” page 99 Cheitharol Kumbaba (1967) English translation : “On 6th Wednesday, Pakhangba came down from heaven as a Cobra before the fifou.” This was in 1745 A.D. during the reign of Pamheiba Garivaniwaz. “Tarani Ningthoukabada Sna Yan  Lokchaoda Lairel Thokye” page 129, Cheitharol Kumbaba (1967). It was during reign of king Bhagyachandra in 1784 A.D. English translation : ‘On Monday at Sna Yan Lokchao Leirel  Came out.”

The unholy campaign to impose  the unholy concept of Reptile-Snake-Python upon the solemn concepts of Lailel Pakhangba will be more clear from the records of the ‘Diary of Manipur”, 1904, the so called Chronicle of the Royal Family (of Manipur):

“Pakhangba the ancestral God of the Manipuries came down from heaven in the shape of a small serpant and appeared in the front of the Raja’s house”.  Page 70, Diary of Manipur, 1904. It was during the reign of Pamheiba Garivaniwaz. Can any body imagine, Pakhangba, the ancestral God of the ‘Manipuris’ came down as a small snake from heaven, scientifically or otherwise ?

‘A peculiar kind of serpent was found at Lokchao, the serpent was called, by the name of Lairel (God of serpents)” page 96, Diary of Manipur, 1904.

These are all recorded facts of history. Along with these, the facts of building of temples of Pakhangba are recorded at page 99 of Cheitharol Kumbaba (1967) and at page 70 of the Diary of Manipur, 1904.

The modus operandi of the campaign, to impose concepts and traditions of Reptile-Snake-Python upon the solemn concepts and traditions of Lailel Pakhangba, was tricky and cruel.

At the sight of a cobra, a snake or a python, or some times, the Palace people will keep a cobra or a Python at some particular place and the mass people will be ordered to assemble there, and the Royal dignitaries will identify the Cobra, or snake or the python as the Kanglei ancestral God Pakhangba, it is called Lailel = Lairel, they will say. The indigenous Kangleicha will be forced to worship as such. Pakhangba temples were constructed and idol of Pakhangba in the shape and form of a cobra, or a snake or a python will be kept in the temple. The indigenous Kangleichas will  be forced to bow down before the cobra, or the snake, or the python idols regularly with some indoctrinations every time. Any people who shows some dissents will be punished severely.

Such machinations and indoctrinations with threat of physical injuries during the last about 300 years, about 6/7 generations, of Hindu rule imprinted the concepts of a cobra, or a snake, or a python in place of the solemn concepts of Lailel Pakhangba to the minds of indigenous Kanglei masses.

These machinations and indoctrinations with threat of physical injuries were at zenith during the reign of Pamheiba Garivaniwaz and Bhagyachandra.

Discovery of Kangleipak 4

Kangleipak : The name of this land, up to 2nd half of the 18th century A.D.

The name of this land, now called Manipur, was Kangleipak up to 2nd half of the 18th century A.D., up to the time of king Bhagyachandra Jai Singh. This requires no much introductions.

Now the question before the people of this land is that : who named this land  Kangleipak? At what time?

Regarding the answer of the first part question is very clear and certain. Regarding  the time of naming of this land Kangleipak  may have some + years, but may be not doubtful.

The present indigenous people called the Meetei are the descendants of a group of people called the Lai People. This Lai People were the first inhabitants of the Koubru mountain ranges. There are certain evidences in the scriptures called the Puya by the Meetei  Race.

       In a traditional unwritten song:

        Awang Koubru Asuppa,
        Leima-Lai Khunda Ahanba,
        Nongthrei Ma-u Lingliba,
        Irik Mapan Thariba,
        ………….. Lainingthou !

In this  traditional song, the second line ‘Leima – Lai Khunda Ahanba’ is certainly a historical part of this seemingly an invocational song to the God-creator, the Father of all creations on the Earth.

At page 45 of the Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Ama-Ilon Pukok, it is  written: “Ipung Loiki Yathangna Oikhipa Malemna Laiyamsingna Halaole; Yaphapaki Matikpu Laiyamsingna Penchale; Asum touna loipi chingki chingtonta mapham mapham yengtuna tuka waka patuna; Nungai thoina Pankhale, Wakon pungpu sakhale.”

This clear statement of the Puya, along with our present traditional song given above is clear indication that a group of peoples called the Lai inhabited the Koubru (Koupalu in the Puya) mountain ranges many many thousand years ago.

As corroborative evidences of these scriptural  and traditional evidences, we have upto this day, one Lai Pukhri Achouba, Seven Lai Pukhri Macha, Imoinu Pukhri etc. (Pukhri is a word came with Hinduism in 18th century, up to 18th century Lai Ikom or Ikon, Imoinu Ikom etc. were called). In the Koubru mountain ranges, we have still Lai Khun, a village peopled by the Lai, Lailouching (Lairouching), a hill cultivated by the Lai people.

A further corrobotative evidence is  that present Meetei  indigenous people every year in March, April came in groups to the top of Koubru mountains to offer prayers and their gratitude to their God-creator, Lainingthou and to see their first habitation areas on the Earth. The indigenous Meetei Race do not forget their first habitation on the Koubru mountains up to this day.

The group of people called the Lai settled many many thousand years on the Koubru mountain ranges. The Lai People, on the Koubru mountain ranges, developed a settled civil society  in the status of a civil  society  as we  know to day in the 21st century A.D. The present world famed Lai Haraoba Dance of the Meetei Race was first started on the Koubru mountain ranges and secondly, performed the Lai Haraoba on the Nongmaiching Hill (please see page 3, Silver Jubilee Souvenir , J.N. Dance Academy, 1999).

After several  thousand years’ settlement on the Koubru mountain ranges, a small group of the Lai people came down to the valley of Kangleipak, now called the Imphal valley. Please examine the following Xerox copy of the Puya page 53 of the Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai  Ama-Ilon Pukok for your complete understanding of the fact :


Please  see the actual words of the Puya in the English alphabets : “Lainingthouti Pangkalpana Huttang-nga Saion Toutuna chingpu huttoktuna Chingnunghut Haina Koukhipa mapham Atuta Laicha  Isingpu chithok-khipana, Kangpa Halle Haituna Kangla  Thenpung Haina Koukhale; Kangla Thenpung Maphamta Laiyamsingna lepnapa maphamta kayatlon yengtuna Im sale,  Mapham Atupu Kangla Impham Koukhale; Kangla Impham Maphamta Leilon Nonglon Kayat 14 ki Laipham Semkhale; Semkhalapa Maphamta Laiyamsingna Panpa Maphamne Haituna Laipham Haina koukhale; Laipham Koupa Maphamna Leipa Leipakpu KANGLEIPAK haina koukhale.” Translation is  from the 3rd line of the Xerox, the word ‘koukhale’, the last word of the transcription is in the page 54 (not in the Xerox).

Free English translation of the above Puya page, transcribed, is the following :
“Lainingthou Pangkalpa incarnating as Huttang-nga made a hole through the mountains, and  drained (the valley) at Chingnunghut, the place that dried up first has been called Kangla Thenpung. As decided by the Laiyam, at Kangla Thenpung, selecting proper situation, dwelling places had been constructed. The  place had been named Kangla Impham (Kangla residential area). Divine places, examining 14 Leilon Nonglon, had been made at Kangla Impham. The places so made, being the dwelling places of the Laiyam with their temples, had been called Laipham. The land (country), where Laipham situated, had been called Kangleipak.”

From this very clear and unambiguous statement of the Puya, we may straight infer that the first inhabitants of Kangla, the present Kangla, are the Lai People coming down from the Koubru Mountain ranges. After some thousand years, most probably, after occupation of the Imphal valley by the Lai People, Ipu Athoupa Konchin Tukthapa Pakhangpa established the Monarchy, capital at present Kangla. Konchin Tukthapa Pakhangpa married 7 Lai Nura (7 Lai ladies) and gave birth to 7 Salais and the descendants of the 7 Salais are the present Meetei Race. The Meetei genealogy is started only since Ipu Athoupa Konchin Tukthapa Pakhangpa. This is a common home tradition and history. We require no much introduction.

The name ‘Meetei’  is only some thousand years old, given to a small group of the Lai People. Before becoming the Meetei,  the forefathers and foremothers of the Meetei are the Lai People, inhabiting the Koubru mountain ranges for thousands and thousands years and then a small group to the Imphal valley. The name Kangleipak was named by the Lai People, before the name ‘Meetei’  was born. At page 54 of the Puya mentioned above “Kangleipak koupa maphamta Lainingthou Sitapa Salailel ki huksang kayatki nungpung wakhanna tatuna thok-khipa Lailup 7 mapu Pakhangpana Pannatuna …… Mangang mingthon   phangcheiye, ……..” From this we know Kangleipak was named by the Lai People before Konchin Tukthapa become Monarch of Kangleipak and gave birth to 7 salais.

The Kabui people claim their first habitation area on the Earth is Koubru. They claim ‘Koubru’ is their word. The ‘Kanglei’ is their word, having almost the same meaning with the Meetei word ‘Kangla’. The writer never dispute such assertions. Rather their claims prove the Ethnic Homogeneity with the Meetei People.

Please see some corroborative evidences that the Lai people inhabited the Imphal valley starting from Kangla. There is a Lai Pukhri at Kangla not connected with Hinduism. This is the Lai Ikom, dug by the Lai people when they first came down from the Koubru mountain ranges. In the Puya on the bank of the ‘Nungseng’ (Not written as Nungseng Ikon or Ikom,  only Nungseng is written in the Puya), the Salai Leisangthem, the 7th son of Ipu Athoupa Konchin Tukthapa Pakhangpa once settled, is written.

Of course, all hill communities of Kangleipak might not have any tradition that they are descendants of a people  called the Lai people. But the writer is very certain that both the hill and plain peoples have many oral unwritten traditions that they are brothers and sisters of the same family, ancestors. As a corrobative  evidence of this common tradition of the unity of origin of the hill and plain peoples, we have now very scientific evidence that all Naga group populations of Kangleipak have ethnic homogeneity with the Meetei of the valley. To show some scientific  findings, please see the following :

“The Kabui follow the valley populations while Tangkhul present  A>O>B. This pattern is however not observed with any other Naga groups from Nagaland. All Naga groups follow the pattern of the Meetei” page 43, the Meetei and the Bishnupriya.

“The close similarity in ABO blood  group between the Tangkhul Nagas and the Meeteis is again confirmed indicating the ethnic homogeneity between these two groups. This was observed in other various general markers.” Page 43, the Meetei  and the Bishnupriya.

In such circumstances of the relation of the hill and plain peoples, traditionally and scientifically, the writer cannot imagine any otherwise relations between the hill and plain peoples of Kangleipak. The name Kangleipak is not a name given to the land by the plain dweller Meetei, but by the Lai people certainly to be the ancestors of the hill and plain peoples. The writer earnestly feel the name Kangleipak was a name of the undivided hill and plain peoples upto only yesterday, the 2nd half of the 18th century A.D., up to the time of king Bhagyachandra Jai Singh.

One very important point to be remembered is that the Meetei language became a literary language since 2000 B.C. as known upto this day.

Question before the indigenous peoples of Kangleipak now : At what time, the name Kangleipak  was given to this beloved Land of the hill and plain peoples by the Lai People ?

So far up to only yesterday, we were groping in the dark, as no scientific excavation of any historical place of Kangleipak and dating of any find therefrom were done by the Government of Manipur, though we have seen a costly excavation of “Murari/Morari Lampak or Lawn/ground of dead, the graveyard” of Khangabok and the finds were dated by C-14 dating method. Hip Hip Hooray for the Government of Manipur from the writer for the scientific excavation of a known place of Mayang habitation in recent history.

Now thank to God, we have a report on the “Proceedings of National Conference on Luminescence and its Application (NCLA-2009), (February 19-21, 2009)” held in Calcutta organized by 1. Luminescence Society of India  2. Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science  3. Central Glass and Ceramic Research Institute, on the  excavation of the Imphal Kangla by Mr. Nanjest and his group of scientists. 

Please see the Xerox of  the report on the Imphal Kangla excavation :


In the Xerox above, please find K-11-15 under col. Layer; 9.8-11 under col. Depth in (feet); silty clay/sand under col. Lithology; wood xylem, potshard under col. Archaeo-sediments; pluvial with mass wasting under col. Climatic inference; and 19.3+2.1 under col. OSL/TL date (in ka). This table of the report is a complete scientific data on Imphal Kangla with reference to rocks, Archaeo-sediments of cultural  significance, climatic inferences from rocks found and age of human habitation inferred from the finds from the excavation. The excavation site was near the crossing of roads from Kangla west gate and south to north AOC gates, to the west of the road, south to north  AOC gate. When the digging reaches 11-15 layer at 9.8-11 feet, potshard, that is, broken pieces of pottery used by human beings as plates,  cooking utensils etc. were found. When further digging  at 11-16.5 feet, no potshard etc. that can infer human habitation was found.  The cultural finds from the Imphal Kangla excavation are dated by OSL/TL (Optically stimulated Luminescence/Thermo luminescence) method of scientific dating of rocks etc. as 19.3+2.1 years in thousand BP, that is Imphal Kangla had been inhabited by human beings in 19300+2100 years before present, inferred from the scientific dating of the cultural finds from the Imphal Kangla excavation.

The findings on the Imphal Kangla by the NCLA of the rocks etc. from the Imphal Kangla excavation is very significant and its impact on the cultural level of the indigenous people of Kangleipak will be immense.

Some important inferences may be seen. Our scripture, the Puya is very categorical that the first human beings inhabited present Imphal Kangla was the Lai People, who were the ancestors of the Meetei Race. From this OSL/TL dating of Imphal Kangla rocks, etc. it is scientifically proved now that the Lai People, coming down from the Koubru mountain ranges, inhabited Imphal Kangla, Kangla Impham in the Puya, around 20,000 years before present or 200 centuries before present, at around 18,000 years BC or 180 centuries B.C. It may further be inferred  that Imphal valley might be dried up, after the water had been drained through Chingnunghut at about 17,000 years BP making it suitable for human habitation. This further may mean, naming of this land Kangleipak by the Lai People, the ancestors of the present hill and plain peoples may be some times around 150 century B.C.

The scientific dating of human habitation at Kangla Impham (Imphal Kangla) at around 20,000 years before present, or 18,000 years B.C. or 180 centuries B.C. may further indicate that our present calculation that our first Monarchy was established around 2000 years B.C. may become wrong and it may be much earlier in the light of this scientific  finding. Kangleipak may become one of the earliest Monarchies on the Earth.

Discovery of Kangleipak 3

The concept of SPACE-TIME ENTITY of the Meetei Race in Kangleipak

In the first article under the heading ‘DISCOVERY OF KANGLEIPAK’, the writer wrote “The Religion of the Indigenous Meetei Race including the Hill communities is the Sanamahi Religion. The abstract concept of the SPACE-TIME ENTITY is the ultimate God-creator of the universe.” Now the writer will show the concept of the entity as found in the Kanglei Scriptures.

The indigenous Meetei Researchers have a copy of a Puya named ‘Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Ama-Ilon Pukok’ the original copy of which was burnt down by king Pamheiba Garivaniwaz and his Dharma Guru Santi Das Gossai in the first half of the 18^th century A.D. Just before the burning of the scriptures and written documents of the Meetei Race, one Angom Chaopa, a dignitary of the Royal Palace in whose custody the Puya was kept, copied the Puya secretly just before collection of all Puyas for burning and was smuggled out to a Hill community village for safe keeping for the future. The Meetei researchers discovered the Puya in 1971 A.D. The following is the Xerox copy of the 44^th Latam (Page) of the above mentioned Puya copy :

The 3^rd and 4^th lines of the Xerox copy says “Malem Leimana Lumpala ? Palem-Imana Malum-ee. Koilou Nongmatonna Wangpala ? Panthou-Ipana Mawang-ee.” The rough English translation is this : “ Whether the Earth is heavier? (No) Palem-Ima (Mother roughly) is Heavier. Whether Koilou Nongmaton (Top of the limitless space) is taller? (No) Panthou-Ipa (Father roughly) is taller.”

In the concept of Palem-Ima, the child stays in the womb of the mother-woman about ten months eating the blood of the mother-woman before birth; and in the concept of Panthou-Ipa the ultimate God-creator concealed Himself in the Father-man for further Endless-creations of mankind;  are signified. So, here in these Puya sentences, Palem-Ima and Panthou-Ipa have special significance. Panthou-Ipa actually mean here, universal God-creator-Father. The Meetei Race call Universal God-Creator as Ipa (Father roughly). This Universal God-Creator is also called by the Meetei Race as ONE, because He is the only ONE being or spirit or reality before anything else existed in the Universe. This only one being ….. is called Ipung Loinapa Apakpa Technically, by the Meetei Race in the time of Yore.

Please see another  Latam (Page) of the Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Ama-Ilon Pukok. The following is the Xerox of the page 22 of the Puya:

In the above Xerox, from the 3^rd line to 5^th line of the Puya says: “Talang Ipung Loinapa Apakpana Iyek Talanipan Amati Singthalon Cheising Iyek Amata Saiontuna Ating-aa Sitapa Ahangpa Haina Koukhale.”

The rough English translation of the above Puya sentences is this : “ The indeterminate Primordial Ipung Loinapa Apakpa Incarnating as 18 (writing) alphabets and counting number ONE stood permanently being called as the Deathless Open Space.”

From these scriptural dicta  and from our Living Tradition of calling the Permanent Open Space  what we call Koilou Ating-aa also as Ipa Sorarel, Ipa Salailel, Universal Father, it is known that the Meetei Race thought the Open Space was the ultimate God-creator or ultimate origin of the universe, ultimate reality of the changing phenomena of the universe.

From our experience upto this stage of the Dicta of the scriptures called Puya, there is an Essential difference between our philosophical experience of God, the Foundation of every religion, from the Philosophical experience  of the God of the west including of India.

We do not start from ‘Jagat Mithya’, ‘Sunyata is the otherside of Purnata’. But in Kangleipak, we start from Ipung Loinapa Apakpa (a being or a reality in whom everything included. Ipung means whole of blood, whole of every living being). He creates everything . Everything is His manifestation. He incarnates as Open Space. He creates everything including the earth, the moon, the sun, the stars etc. We in the East, start from the ultimate reality to the changing phenomena of the universe.

Then what is the relation of SPACE with time what we call MATAM in Kangleipak?

In Kangleipak, the definition of Time as a measure of duration or measure of unlimited duration is not the foundation of time, and rather we feel this is only a late Idea in the long March of the Human Civilization, and this kind of Definition does not explain the origin of the abstract  Time-concept. This kind of definition describes the Time-concept as they find the Time-concept  in late ADs.

In Kangleipak, we have the Indigenous Time-Concept called MATAM, generally translated into English as Time, though we do not know actually the Appropriateness of the translation.

The concept of Matam in the Indigenous Vocabulary in Kangleipak we have : MATAM = MA + TAM, MA means  Mana, further means by Him (by the Good-creator) TAM means Tampa = Tamba further means provided for, or make it available to the living beings etc. So, Matam, therefore, means all objects created by the God-creator as objects of the changing  phenomena. So, the concept of Matam does not mean any abstract concept as time, as we find to day. The original Idea or concept of Matam means and includes all  definite concrete creations like the earth, the moon, the sun, the stars etc, the mountains, the rivers, the trees etc….. the events like famine, war etc. A concept very near and almost synonymous to is the concept of MAHOUSA in the Kanglei vocabulary, generally  translated as NATURE.  Mahousa = Ma+hou+sa = Ma means Masana further means by self, Hou means Houkatlakpa = Hougatlakpa, Sa means Sakatlakpa = Sagatlakpa further means growing up, spring up by themselves. So, the Matam with the Synonymous concept to it Mahousa, in Analysing them, does not means Any Abstract concept in Kangleipak.

The western concept of time also means the same thing originally, the writer feels. A young man sitting in a garden looks at his watch very frequently. He does not mean the abstract concept of time when keeps his eyes on the watch. He means a concrete Human Body in his mind, that is, his beloved lady’s arrival as scheduled. A farmer asked his  friend ‘What is this month?’ He does not mean an abstract concept of time, but he means a concrete events of sowing, or harvesting of crops, or arrival of Monsoon for cultivation  in his mind. A concrete thing stands behind every or any mention of time, most probably consciously or unconsciously.

Then how modern concept of Time as ‘Indefinite, unlimited duration in which things are considered as happening in the past, present or future’ etc. comes about ?

As mankind advances in Human civilization, Man begins to study natural history, science history, racial history, social history, calamity history, astronomical history, history of inventions, geological history, history of the origin of the mankind etc. etc. for men’s own needs. All these things are co-related, parts of the same thing, manifestations of the same Reality, the necessity of doing studies of all these things in the same time frame of unlimited duration is felt, is forced, consciously or unconsciously, upon mankind. To connect yesterdays with todays and todays with tomorrows, man requires a time-watch  or time clock in a time-frame of unlimited duration. To study social relevance of Women’s problems in Manipur to day with those faced by the women in 1939 (Women’s war), we require an uninterrupted social time duration with yesterday and beyond backward, and also, with today and beyond Forward. To tell the mankind of today a Message of ‘Dooms-day’, we require an unlimited Time-duration-Frame beyond to day. The necessity of these things may be more acute in Physics, Astronomical investigations etc. In this way, the abstract concept of  Time with Space, ‘ a four dimensional continuum  with four coordinates, the three dimensions  of space, and that of time, in which any event can be located’ and also anything can be located, might have been born.

Further, if you go from Imphal to New Delhi on foot you may require some months. If you go on train, some days. If you go by Air, few hours. So, to understand  the difference of duration of action for reaching from one concrete point of the Earth’s surface to another point of surface of the Earth, man requires this abstract concept of time, or a Time-machine telling you the abstract Time-concept. In this way, the abstract Time-concept  was born as of necessity as the Human kind has unlimited  vast Faculty for adapting to changing necessity. Abstract concept are born only when man has developed advanced faculties.

In Kangleipak, the unity of Space with Time, that is, the abstract concept of Space-time Entity is apparent and a simple concept even to an unsubtle mind. We have Ipung Loinapa Apakpa (Talang Ipung Loinapa Apakpa in the Puya), who is Taller than the Top of the limitless space, incarnates as the open space and  creates everything inside the open space. And we have the Matam concept in which we conceive  all concrete creations in the open space. So, the totality of the   Ipung Loinapa Apakpa with the space-time entity, with all His creations in the universe is the ultimate Reality of the Meetei Race in Kangleipak. But the Meetei Race worship Him in the name of Lainingthou Sanamahi (Lainingthou = Lai + Ningthou = King of Gods) who concretely comes to the Earth for Endless creations  of the Mankind and other Living beings and to care for them and sustenance.

Discovery of Kangleipak - 2

From the experience of the writer as member of THE COMMITTEE AGAINST THE CLAIMS OF THE BISHNUPRIYAS (CONSPIRACY angle detected)

The writer Wangkhemcha Chingtamlen of the book, "From the pages of history : THE MEETEI AND THE BISHNUPRIYA" published in 1999 A.D. now producing IInd edition of the book, was selected as a member of THE COMMITTEE AGAINST THE CLAIMS OF THE BISHNUPRIYAS by the Government of Manipur. The following Xerox of the order may please be seen :


The writer was selected along with important persons from Manipur, Tripura and Assam. Among the members of the Committee in number and importance, the Manipuri Sahitya Parishad dominate the Committee. The name of the writer is seen at Sl. No. 4 of the non-official members from Manipur in the above Xerox.

The terms of reference of the Committee are seen at Sl. No. 2 of the order below the non- official members from Assam.

One expert Committee meeting was held on 27-5-2003. The agenda of the meeting was the following

1. To discuss the judgment of the Honorable Gauhati High Court under Civil Rule Nos. 1439/96, 4499/96 & 3146/96.

2. To discuss the matters pertaining to the following :

(a) SLP(C) No. 8864 of 1999

(b) SLP(C) No. 9280 of 1999

(c) SLP(C) No. 9282 of 1999

(d) SLP(C) No. 8862 of 1999

(e) SLP(C) No. 9046 of 1999

The writer as member of the Expert Committee received the following documents amongst the records mentioned in the agenda: :

(1) Civil Rule No. 1439/96 (two copies of judgment and order)

(2) Civil Rule No. 3146/96 (two copies of judgment and order)

These are High Court Cases.

(1) SLP(C) No. 8862 of 1999 (paper book)

(2) SLP(C) No. 9046 of 1999 (paper book)

(3) SLP(C) No. 9046-47 of 1999 (Rejoinder Affidavit on behalf of the Petitioner State of Manipur)

These are Supreme Court Cases.

The writer here will draw attention to the esteem readers only to SLP(C) No. 9046-47 of 1999(Rejoinder Affidavit on behalf of the Petitioner State of Manipur).

The writer of this book, under Chapter V: The claims of the Bishnupriya, from page 32 of this book has printed a memorandum of the Bishnupriya in toto to page 40 of this book. The memorandum is of 1992.

On page 4 of the memorandum and on page 36 of this book the following is written: ‘No.-2. The Parishad made available extracts from Linguistic Survey of India Vol. III Part III page 20 as “There is also a degraded class called Kalachaya or Bishnupriya which consists of doms or other Bengalis of low caste. They speak a language which is different from the true Manipuries". This is a complete twisted and distorted version of page 20, Vo. III Part III of the Linguistic Survey of India by G.A. Grierson. The writer has commented on page 42 of this book for your knowledge and the writer will further give you the Xerox of the page 20, Vol III Part III of the Linguistic Survey of India by G.A. Grierson a bit latter in this chapter.

Further you may note ‘No-2. The Parishad made available extracts from the Linguistic Survey of India Vol III Part III page 20 as’ in the memorandum of the Bishnupriya of 1992. The ‘Parishad’ here meant Manipuri Sahitya Parishad. The underlying meaning of this sentence in memorandum of the Bishnupriya of 1992 ‘No.2. The Parishad ————— page 20 as’ is that the Manipuri Sahitya Parishad is involved in the twisting and distorting the Fact/Version of G.A. Grierson in the Linguistic Survey of India, Vol. III Part III page 20 by implication.

The rejoinder affidavit on behalf of the petitioner State of Manipur in the Supreme Court Case No. SLP(C) No. 9046-47 of 1999 was signed and verified by A. Sukumar Singh, Joint Secretary, Department of Law, Govt. of Manipur on 10th August, 2000 at New Delhi. This is on record. At Sl. No. 13 of the Rejoinder Affidavit signed by A Sukumar on behalf of the Govt. of Manipur says "13. That the contents of Para 13 of the counter are wrong and denied. It is denied that the ‘Bishnupriya’ community have their origin from Manipur. The Linguistic Survey of India Vol. III Part III page 20 have reported that ‘There is also a degraded class called Kalicha or Bishnupriya which consists of descendants of dooms and other Bengali low caste ……….. they speak a language which is different from that of the true Manipuri and is in fact closely allied to Vulgar Bengali.’ This statement itself indicates that the origin of their language and place."

This statement of the Rejoinder Affidavit of the Govt. of Manipur in the Supreme Court Case in Sl. No. 13 of the Affidavit is almost the same thing as the Memorandum of the Bishnupriya gave at page 4 of the Memorandum at Sl. No. 2 in 1992 alleging that made available by the Manipuri Sahitya Parisad. This statement of the Rejoinder Affidavit of the Govt. of Manipur also is a twisted and distorted fact /version of the page 20, Vol. III Part III of the Linguistic Survey of India by G.A. Grierson published in 1904. The Rejoinder Affidavit was given by the Govt. of Manipur after 8 years of the Memorandum of the Bishnupriya with dance in the tune of the Bishnupriya. The last sentence of the Sl. No. 13 of the Rejoinder is also of Dubious Nature. It does not directly challenges the origin of the Bishnupriyas. It challenge only their language.

Now you please see the Xerox of the page 20, Vol. III part III of the Linguistic Survey of India by G.A. Grierson with your own eyes to see how it is twisted and distorted :


The above is the Xerox copy of the page 20 of the Linguistic Survey of India by G.A. Grierson (1904) mentioned in both the Memorandum of the Bishnupriya of 1992 and the Rejoinder of the State of Manipur in the Supreme Court Case SLP (C) No. 9046-47 of 1999. In the memorandum of the Bishnupriya of 1992, the words "Kalachaya or Bishnupriya” are found alleged to be extracted from page 20, Vol. III Part III of Linguistic Survey of India, at the same time in the Rejoinder of the State of Manipur the words "Kalicha or Bishnupriya” are found in the alleged to be quotation from the same page 20, Vol-III Part III of the Linguistic Survey of India. In both the memorandum and Rejoinder the word ‘Bishnupriya’ in the same spelling as used by the Bishnupriya Community is used found. Though the other word used in the memorandum conmitantly with Bishnupriya is “Kalachaya” whereas in the Rejoinder the word used commitantly with Bishnupriya is ‘Kalicha’

But in the page 20, Vol. III Part III of the Linguistic Survey of India, of which both the memorandum and Rejoinder alleged to be quoted, as you find in the above Xerox are the words ‘Kaleichaya or Bishnupuri’. In both the memorandum and Rejoinder both those words ‘Kalacheiya or Bishnupuri’ are twisted and distorted in the memorandum as ‘Kalachaya or Bishnupriya’ and in the Rejoinder as ‘Kalicha or Bishnupriya’. But in both the memorandum and the Rejoinder one common venture of both is to implant ‘Bishnupriya’ in history or historical records twisting and distorting the actual historical records in the Vol III Part III of the Linguistic Survey of India.

The writer gives the esteemed readers another Xerox from the pages of the Linguistic Survey of India by G.A. Grierson. The following is the Xerox of page 419 ‘SUPLEMENT Mayang’ of Vol. V Part I (1904).

The above is the xerox copy of page 419 of the ‘Supplement, Mayang’ Vol. V Part I of the Linguistic Survey of India by G. A. Grierson published in 1904. In the Xerox of the supplement, the first four words of the 7th line in the first para are ‘Bishunpuriya Manipuris’ and ‘Kalisa Manipuris’. In the supplement the last three lines in the para last but two paras are ‘In the Manipur state, the headquarters of Mayang are two or three plain villages near Bishnupur (locally known as Lamangdong), 18 miles to the south-west of Imphal’. From these findings of historical records, the Linguistic Survey of India and other relevant records, it is firmly established that the word and concept ‘Bishnupriya’ was not in any historical record or written record in relation to Kangleipak, Manipur since 18th century A.D. On the other hand, it is firmly believed that the word and concept ‘Bishnupriya is a product of CONSPIRACY of the Mayangs who were called ‘BISHNUPURI’ or ‘BISHUNPURI’ or in other terms ‘Kalacheiya’ or Kalisa’ by the local indigenous people, from the word Bishnupuri, with the great CONTRIBUTION from present Manipur in the 2nd half of 20th century A.D.

There is another very great Fall-out. Shri Ch. Manihar Singh in his book, A CLARIFICATION ON THE BISHNUPRIYAS IN RELATION TO THE MANIPURIS, writes, at page 9 of the book, as under :

“Praying to Godess Kalimai of the family of Pukhrambam Kala Raja Aribam (the elder one), an account of the origin of this family hailing from the west is given here ———— During the reign of Gambhir Singh, the Meitei king in Saka 1749 the Mayang Kalishas are Christened as ‘Bishnupriya’ and invested with the sacred thread” giving reference to Kalisharon of the Sanggai Phammang.

At page 16 of the book, Shri Manihar Singh gives the following: “It is, therefore, indisputably clear that the Mayang Kalisha were formerly worshippers of Goddess Kali and not Vishnu. They got the name ‘Bishnupriya’ only after Maharaja Gambhir Singh conferred it on them along with their admission to the Manipuri vaishnav society in saka 1749 i.e. 1827 A.D.”

The saka 1749 is in Christian Era 1827 A.D. (1749 + 78). This is the 3rd year of kingship of king Gambhir Singh. It was 77 years before the publication of the Linguistic Survey of India by G.A. Grieson who published in 1904 A.D. If the Bishnupuri or Bishunpuris or Kalisha or Kalacheiya or Kalachaya, whatever be the name of these war captives, lived in Manipur as ‘BISHNUPRIYA’ more than 75 years, a very long one generation years, there is no reason why the word or concept ‘BISHNUPRIYA’ should not be reflected in the Linguistic Survey of India by G.A. Grierson in 1904 A.D. This is a logic or this is a conscience of human kind. No body should dare to challenge!

It is very strongly believed that the word or concept of ‘BISHNUPRIYA’ is a product of conspiracy in the 2nd half of 20th century A.D. to STEAL THE GENIUS OF KANGLEIPAK by these war captives.