15 Cases where True Indology exposed Devdutt Pattanaik

I am one out of such thousands of Twitter users who finds True Indology ( @tiinexile ) to be the best available source of knowledge regarding India’s History.

I decided to compile those 15 cases where True Indology has exposed fraud claims of Devdutt Pattanaik on Twitter.

Case 1

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim : 


True Indology’s Response: 

"A woman is pure. Nothing about her is impure. Without her, no man would exist"- Kokashastra "Where women are revered, there the Gods rejoice"- Manusmriti Hinduism is the only extant religion that worships feminine as divine. I challenge you to produce a source for the statement

Case 2

Devdutt Pattanaik's :

Article - A classical language by devdutt pattanaik. Below screenshot is from that article

True Indology’s Response: 

In this article, Devdutt Pattanaik says that Prakrit came earlier than Sanskrit. I would have laughed at his ignorance, his utter lack of basic linguistic knowledge, and moved on, but this misconception seems to be very widespread.

We can rely on two sources to establish chronology 1)Traditional Sources 2) Modern linguists Every traditional source including every single ancient Prakrit Grammarian says that Sanskrit came earlier than Prakrit Every modern linguist worth his salt also agrees.

For instance, here is a chronological table by Leonid Kulikov who is a professor of linguistics at Leiden University. He assigns a date of 1200 BC+ for Vedic Sanskrit and 500 BC for Prakrits 


 Also, check out this blog - Devdutt Pattanaik Abusive Tweets.

Case 3 

 Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :


True Indology’s Response:

The "Adikavi"(First poet) of Telugu was Nannayya, a Brahmin The "Adikavi" of Kannada was Pampa, a Brahmin. The "Adikavi" of Gujarati was Narsinh Mehta, a Brahmin It was a Brahmin reformist who first brought Dalits into temples. Trust @devduttmyth to turn everything to Brahmin hate.

The earliest Marathi literature was by Hemadri, a Brahmin minister of Ramadeva. The earliest known literature of Maithili comes from Vidyapati. It is absolute nonsense to say that Brahmins opposed the birth of local languages. Yet, @devduttmyth peddled this lie everywhere.

@ShreyasTambe1 @devduttmyth Wrong. Satavahanas were Brahmin kings. Gautamiputra Satakarni called himself ekabrahmana(The foremost brahmana). Gatha Sattasai was not written in Marathi. It was written in Prakrit. Hemadri first began writing in Marathi and he also invented Modi script.

Case 4

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :

Indology’s Response: 

The correct phonetic sound of "BherunDa" (भेरुण्ड/ಭೇರುಂಡ) is labio-velar voiced aspirate bhe(भे/ಭೇ) and NOT voiced labio-velar be (बे/ಬೇ) 2. "be" does not mean "two" either in Kannada or Sanskrit. भेरुण्ड/ಭೇರುಂಡ means 'terrible' 3. The biggest myth is your scholarship.

Case 5

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :


True Indology’s Response:

If Yudhiṣṭhira was just a "character of an Epic created 2000 years ago", how did Pāṇini mention Yudhiṣṭhira in Aṣṭādhyāyī (8.3.95) dating back to at least 2400 years? How did Sātavāhanas mention him in inscriptions dating back to 2100 years? Dropped your brain somewhere?

In Aṣṭādhyāyī (8.3.95), Panini explains गवियुधिभ्यां स्थिरः Sutra. Basically, he says that the sibilant *s preceded by front vowel * I becomes the palatal retroflex *ṣ. As an example, he cites the name of Yudhiṣṭhira. What Pāṇini explained is what today's linguists call "Ruki".

If Yudhiṣṭhira was a "2000-year-old fictional character" inspired by King Ashoka as Romila Thapar's and Devdutts of this world claim, how did Chanakya (c.320 BC), the minister of Ashoka's grandfather, mention Yudhiṣṭhira in his Arthaśāstra? I dare you to answer @devduttmyth

@devduttmyth In Chapter 8 of Arthaśāstra, Kautilya compares hunting to gambling. Kautilya says gambling is a bigger vice than hunting and recounts "the history of Yudhiṣṭhira" who lost everything in gambling From Arthashastra 8.1 (English translation by Shamsastry).

Buddha praised King Yudhiṣṭhira as " wise, righteous, greatest alms-giver". Recorded in ancient Buddhist scriptures. Ashoka was a Buddhist king who tried to rule like great kings praised by Buddha. So, who inspired whom? Is it so hard for this "Eminent historian" to figure out?

Buddha praises Yudhiṣṭhira as "the righteous king who formerly ruled Indraprastha and set entire Bhāratavarsha in commotion with alms-giving" (Dhūmakāri-jātaka, Dasabrahmana Jataka). Ashoka ruled 200 years after Buddha. But this genius says Ashoka was born before Yudhiṣṭhira.

Case 6

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :

True Indology’s Response:

Even the word "Urdu' is a foreign Turkish word meaning "military camp" Urdu was born in invader camps. Until 1800, there was no such thing as "Urdu language".The language was simply called "Hindi". In 1800, poet Mashafi was the first one to call this language "Urdu"

Case 7

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :

True Indology’s Response:

Hey Mythologist, Please spare us at least on Dussehra. Go back and learn your basics. Ravana is 20 handed, not 10 handed. He is described as विंशत् भुजम् = 20 handed in Ramayana विंशत् भुजम् दश ग्रीवम् दर्शनीय परिच्छदम् | विशाल वक्षसम् वीरम् राज लक्ष्मण लक्षितम् ||-3.32.9

Case 8

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim : 

True Indology’s Response: 

Rajputs never practiced ambush? Ever heard of Durgadas Rathore? He was Aurangzeb's most wanted. For 28 years, Aurangzeb searched for him without any success. Because Durgadas was an expert of ambush and guerrilla After Aurangzeb died, he kicked Mughals out and liberated Marwar.


What they keep telling you: Jain Marwadis financed East India Company What they DO NOT tell you: Jain Marwadis also financed Marathas and Sadhus At one point, they were desperately trying to finance anyone who could get rid of their Nawab, the Jihadi rapist Siraj-ud-daulah

Case 9

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :


True Indology’s Response:

Wrong. Panini never said anything like that. It was Patanjali who said "when you need pots, you go to a potter but when you need words, you don't go to a grammarian. You go to the people who speak the language" He also nowhere said "market". Go back and read up your basics.

So you @devduttmyth owe an apology to @misranityanand for falsely maligning him

Case 10

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :

True Indology’s Response:

India's "first empire" was NOT exclusively Buddhist. Chandragupta Maurya patronised Vedic Hinduism and Jainism. Bindusara patronised Vedic Hinduism Ashoka was Buddhist. His descendant Samprati again favoured Hinduism. Stop writing nonsense and read-only primary sources.

You are factually wrong. Mauryans DID NOT "value Pali". In fact, there was not a single inscription issued by Mauryans in canonical Pali. In Eastern India, they used Ardha-Magadhi. In Western India, they used a language closer to Pali In North West, they used Gandhari

Source: Taken from the article 'The Prakrits of Ashokan inscriptions' by renowned Epigraphist Richard Salomon (Oxford University Press 1999)

Case 11 

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :

True Indology’s Response:

Sanskrit manuscripts dating back to 6th century CE and written on paper were discovered in Gilgit (Jammu and Kashmir) in 1931. Some of these manuscripts are still housed in Srinagar Museum. These manuscripts were written on paper even before your Islam was born.

Here is a manuscript from the Gilgit collection. Written with ink on paper recording Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sutra. The language is Sanskrit & the script is (Proto) Sharada. Dates back to the 6th century CE

The documents have been dated to the beginning of the sixth century. Ancient paper manuscripts were found in remote arid Gilgit but not in a cultural center like Varanasi.All thanks to the climate! Testimony of foreign travelers like Yijing(7th century) confirms the widespread use of paper.

Case 12

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :

True Indology’s Response:
Fool! You are wrong again! There is the presence of a veil even in the earliest Indian temple art.

This is an image of a Yakshi excavated from an ancient temple site in Gandhara (2nd century CE). One can clearly see her veil. This was 500 years before the Islamic religion was even born.

And here is another depiction of a Yakshi (folk goddess) from Bharhut, Madhya Pradesh (2nd century BCE). One can very clearly see her head covering. This was depicted 800 years before Islam I could go on and on. The fact is that veils are very prominent in Indian temple art.

Nobody is talking about "covering face". Devdutt claimed and I quote "in no temple art is a woman shown covering her head". I just gave a few examples which prove his statement wrong.

case 13

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :



TL Response : 

It was Gandhi himself who described Savarkar as "Veer" ("brave").

When you really have no idea, you must STOP writing nonsense and maligning national heroes!

While Congress and liberals incessantly malign VeerSavarkar, this is what their father Gandhi had to say "I met Savarkar in London. He is brave, clever, patriot, revolutionary. Saw evil of the British Govt much earlier than I did

He is in Andaman (jail) for having loved India"

Case 14

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :


True Indology’s Response: You are WRONG again! NO Vedic text (whether Samhita, Brahmana, Aranyaka, or Upanishad) talks about Matsyanyaya. It is elaborated upon in Arthashastra and alluded to in Shantiparva of Mahabharata.

But I don't expect a fraud mythologist like you to know anything about Vedas

Case 15

Devdutt Pattanaik’s Claim :

True Indology’s Response:

You are WRONG as always!
There is NO Rgveda manuscript that dates back to Gupta times!
The one from the Bhandarkar library that you are citing in your screenshot (5/1875-76) is a Sharada manuscript that dates back to only 15th century CE!

It was used by Max Mueller!

Punjabi and Odia are indeed from the same Indic language family but Hurrian has got nothing to do with the Indic language family!

It is funny to see these illiterates, who think Hurrian is Indic, teach me linguistics.

Does this tongue have any Adhikara to speak about Dharma and Shastras? I feel sorry for everyone who considers him an expert on Hindu scriptures. I feel sorry for those who have to learn Hinduism from the mouth of this pervert. - True Indology

Devdutt tweet's link -















Check out this blog - Devdutt Pattanaik Abusive Tweets.


  1. Splendid! It feels great to read your explanations written in such a profound manner. There is so much to learn from you.
    Im glad you are out there helping the world learn so much with all the himalayan knowledge that you have. God bless you!

    1. It was indeed a pleasure to read these tweets .... True Indology is an awesome guy.... I would love to meet him once in this life.

  2. It was great! Enjoyed reading. Keep exposing these frauds!

  3. True Indology is the greatest historian who makes Celebrated left historians look so foolish.

    May the almighty give you a long life to expose these fake historians.

    Highly obliged to see real history of India by True Indology.


  4. I wish i had history teacher like true indology in my school days, but I'm thankful i had boring history teacher that's why i never got intrest in history Full of propaganda.

  5. I have been following True Indology since long. He always stands right with logical scriptures in evidence. Devdutt is a myth. True Indology should shred his mask, and accept the adulation of his followers/country.

  6. Keep the good work we need a sangraha of his tweets which divided by topic because Twitter is definitely not keeping them safe


Post a Comment