A HISTORICAL EVIDENCE
that Proves the FALSEHOOD of the Present History, Literature etc. of Manipur
by Wangkhemcha Chingtamlen.
Haoreibi-gi engkhol-da, lasing polang leibani,Hui-na yen-na sokani,.........Konnaraba ting ting chaoro!
-Anonymous Patriot
"A copy of a Puya, a sacred and holy document left by the ancestors of the Meeteis, after all Puyas were burnt down by King Pamheiba Garibaniwas and his notorious dharma guru Santi Das Gosai was discovered and came to the possesion of the Khuwai Meetei Thoukal Langkal Malup, a registered association of the Meetei Researchers on 17/10/1970 from Mr. L. Songkhup Koireng of the Long-nga Koireng Village, an Imphal West hill village.
On the cover of the puya the following is hand written :-
What is written is in the original Meetei 18 alphabets. What is written is : "Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok Puyane Lepna Kangpio ||0||" The English meaning of the hand-written on the cover of the Puya is : "Please know for certain it is Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok Puya".
In the introductory portion of the Puya the following is hand-written : -
The following is the introductory portion written in english alphabets :
"Puya Asi ningthem Pamheipa Hakthakta Sinthokpane Lepna Khangpio || Pamheipa Ningthem Hakthak Phaopata Maliyapham Palcha Cheihi Kumsing Lee cheising Cheichat 3107 Sulapane v Cheihiki Kumhou Ahanpa Numittaki Sinthokpa Houpana Numit 15 Ni Changna Wakchingki Thaninta Loiyev Leileek Asi Mangpa Yatapana Chaopa Eina Sinthokhoupanev Leileek Asi Eenung Eeyek Khunung Eeyek Suplapa Houphamki Puyane Lepna Khangpio ||0||"
The following is the introductory porton of the Puya in Bengali alphabets from the publication by the Khwai Meetei Thoukal Langkal Malup of the Puya :
The following is the meaning of the introductory portion of the Puya in English :-
" Please know for certain that this puya is copied during the reign of Ningthem Pamheipav upto the reign of Ningthem Pamheipa Maliyapham Palcha Era has been counted 3107 years (for the puya)v Copying started from the beginning day of the year, completed in 15 days on the fullmoon day of wakching v As this book cannot be destroyed I, Chaopa copied it out v Please know for certain that this book is the Puya of origin containing Eenung Eeyek Khunung Eeyek |0|”
A MSS sheet of this Puya was sent to the New Delhi to confirm or otherwise the information given in the introductory portion of the Puya itself that the Puya was copied during the reign of Pamheiba Garibaniwaz in the first half of 18 Century A.D. The following is the Xerox-copy of the letter of the Manna Apunba Marup in this regard to New Delhi :-
The following is the answer - letter-xerox-copy from New Delhi to the letter of the Mannaba Apunba marup shown above.
What are given above are the historical facts (evidence) which are irrefutable by any argument, historical or scientific or literary in nature. The above mentioned Puya came to the hands of an Association of Meetei Researchers on 17/10/1970. After about 19 years in the hands of the Meetei Researchers and after serious study of the Puya for 19 years, the Meetei Researchers began to feel that if the informations given in the introductory portion of the Puya itself “This Puya is copied during the reign of Ningthem Pamheipa”, that is,during the reign of King Pamheiba Garibaniwaz in 1709-1748 A.D., “ As this Book cannot be destroyed” etc. are true ( not manipulated), the Meetei has discovered a copy of the original Puya of the Meetei Race containing their origin, origin of their alphabets, origin of every terminology etc. which was burnt down during the reign of King Pamheiba Garibaniwaz in the first half of 18th Century A.D. With this object in view, the Meetei researcher sent a MSS this object in view, the Meetei researchers sent a MSS sheet of the Puya: To B.N. Tandon (chemist), Cultural Conservation Laboratory, National Museum, Department of Culture, Janpath, New Delhi, for confirmation or otherwise of the informations given in the introductory portion of the Puya itself through a special representative Mr. L. Devadutta. You have seen above the answer of the Cultural Conservation Laboratory, New Delhi to the enquiry of the Mannaba Apunba Marup in 1989. The enquiry - letter from Imphal and the answer-letter from New Delhi are exact copies of the letters exchanged between Imphal and New Delhi.
From the documents mentioned above in the hands of the Meetei Researchers, it may be very clear and very certain that the Meetei Race has a copy, copied in the first quarter of 18th Century A.D. during the reign of King Pamheiba Garibaniwaz, of the original Puya of the Meetei Race, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok Puya, Nobody can doubt it and challenge it.
Direct Historical Evidences
As the information given in the introductory portion of the Puya Copy that the Puya was copied during the reign of Pamheiba Garibaniwaz from the original copy of the Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok etc. are correct and certified to be correct by the cultural laboratory authority, New Delhi, the following are the direct historical facts (Evidences) discovered :-
1. The introductory portion is the very hand-writing of the copier, Chaopa at the moment in the first half of the 18th Century A.D. when he began to copy the Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok on the first day of te new year. And the text of the Puya is the copy of the original Puya Chaopa copied taking 15 days from 1st Day of the year to the 15th day of Wakching, fullmoon day.
2. The second very important thing discovered is that in the first half of 18th Century A.D. the Meetei used 18 alphabets only, not 35 alphabets. In the first line of the introductory portion please note the two words “Pamheipa” and Khangpio”. If the Meetei used 35 alphabets as the Hindu does (specially Bengali) and two words should have been written as “Pamheiba” and “Kangbio” as we generally write to day after Hindunization. This means the Meetei did not use b (
) upto 18th Century A.D. at least. Then please note the word Sinthokpane” in the first line. If the Meetei used 35 alphabets as we speak and write to day after about 300 years of Hindunization, the word should have been written as “Sindokpane”. This means upto 18th Century the Meetei did not use d (
) please note the word “Sinthokpane” is used three times in the introductory portion. Please further note the last word of the second sentence “Sulapane” and the beginning words of the last two sentences “Laileek” in the introductory portion. If the Meetei used 35 alphabets as we do today, the words “Sulapane” and “Laileek should have been written as “Surabane” and “Lairik” as we speak and write today. This further tells you the Meetei did not used R (
) and b () upto 18th Century A.D. Please also note the words “Cheihiki”, “Numittaki” and “Wakchinki” in the 3rd sentence of the introductory portion. If the Meetei used 35 alphabets in the 18th Century, the words should have been written as “Cheihigi”, “Numittagi” and “Wakchingi”. This clearly tells you the Meetei did not use of g (
) upto 18th Century A.D.
If you read the text of the Puya further, you will find that the number of alphabets used are only 18 alphabets, not 35. You will not find any 
in the text of the Puya.
An independent corroborative evidence that the Meetei did not use 35 alphabets even upto the beginning of the 20th century A.D. in their writing, you will find in Dr. G. A. Griesrson. “Pronunciation - K, t, p and ch are in old manuscripts, generally written instead of g, d, b and j respectively, and the same is also often the case in modern writing”. )Linguistic Survery of India, vol. III Part III page 24)
This independent evidence from Dr. G.A. Grierson further strengthens the finding that the Meetei Race from deep B.C. used only 18 alphabets upto 18th Century A.D. at least, not 35 as we do today. Dr. Grierson said this in the beginning of 20th Century in his invaluable work, Linguistic Survery of India. If you note the words “Often the case in modern writing” in the aobe (quote), you may safely conclude that the Meetei Race upto the beginning of 20th Century A.D., that is, even after Hindunization of about 200 years, used 18 alphabets only in their writings. These are all automatic conclusions from the Discovery of the Meetei Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok.
3. Third and very important historical fact discovered is the beginning of the Meetei Era. You please ntoe the second sentence of the introductory Portion : “Upto the reign of Ningthem Pamheipa Maliyapham Palcha Era has been counted 3107 years (for the Puya)|” (for the puya) has been added by the writer. (If some respectable reader find better interpretation, the wirter will accept the interpretation). From this we know the Meetei Era started 3107-1709 = 1398 + BC by Meetei King Maliyapham Palcha, assuming that Mr. Chaopa, the copier counted from the 1709 A.D. the year Pamheiba Garibaniwaz ascended the throne of Kangleipak. So today the Meetei Era, now we generally use as Maliyakum, is 3398+. This + is, the writer assumes, the Meetei Era may be earlier than the Puya itself. This is the direct evidence from the discovery of the Puya.
“If you further read the Puya you will find about the end of the Puya that Maliyapham Palcha, the son of King Khum Khum started Meetei Era. Since then the Meetei used Meetei Era in the name of Maliyapham Palcha kumsing Cheichat.”
4. The next important evidence discovered is what month is the first month of the year of the Meetei. Please note the 3rd sentence of the introductory portion of the puya - “copying started from the beginning day of the year, completed in 15 days on the full moon day of Wakching” The meaning and import of the sentence is very clear. Mr. Chaopa, a high dignitary in the palace of king Pamheiba Garibaniwaz having the custody of the original Puya was Mr. Angom Chaopa who became known as Angom Gopi in Hindu name in later history, started copying o the Puya on the first day of the year and copying completed on fullmoon day of Wakching taking 15 days. The unambiguous and clear meaning and import of the sentence is what Wakching is the first month of the year of the Meetei Race. Many scholars, including of Meetei religious faith, having high modern education, even if they have seen this Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok, say Sajibu is the first month of the year of the Meetei Race. This is sheer intellectual illiteracy. They do not know the meaning of the sentence and also they do not know the meaning of the words ‘Wakching’ and ‘Sajibu’. This is very unlucky for the Meetei Race.
5. Another very important historical evidence discoveredis the fact of burning of the Meetei Puyas by King Pamheiba Garibaniwaz and his notorious dharma guru Santi Das Gosai. Many books - Sembi Mukaklei, Pamheiba Larei Lathup etc. mention the fact of burning of the Meetei Puyas, but no book mention the actual day of burning in Christian Era as the Meetei did not even hear the words Christianity and Christian Era by then. But it is generally believed that the burning of the Puyas was between 1721 and 1725 A.D. Please note the 4th sentence of the introductory portion of the Puya - “ As this book cannot be destroyed I, Chaoba copied it outv” As Mr. Angom Chaopa was a dignitary in the palace, he knew the affairs of the palace very intimately. The 4th sentence indicates and confirms what we already knew from many sources that all Meetei Puyas were burnt down to obliterate the Meetei’s culture, history, origin, literature, religion, knowledge of science etc. and the Puya was copied in top secrecy by Mr. Chaopa who happened to have the custody of the Puya. The words, “cannot be destroyed” may kindly be noted pointedly. This is the Direct historical evidence of the burning of the Puyas.
6. The next very important discovery, every man and woman in the Meetei Race must note very carefully with love and gratitude to their ancestors, is that now they have the copy of the Puya of their true origin in their hands so far grouping in the wild darkness becuase of some deception and trick played upon them during the last some years since 1709 A.D. The Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok which was discovered by the Meetei Researchers in 1970 is direct gift to the present living generation Meeteis by their dead ancestors reminding them that the dead helps the living and the living generation must help their dead ancestors also.
Please note very carefully the last sentence of the introductory portion of the Puya telling you - “.... this book is the Puya of origion containing Eenung Eeyek Khunung Eeyek”. The original copy of the Puya was imminently to be burnt down was certain to Mr. Chaopa, a palace dignitary who happened to be the custodian of the Puya, copied it out and smuggled out, kept hidden in a hill village, the villagers of which were very unhappy with the onslaught of Hiduism, where the influence of the palace was the least, at the risk of his own death if detected. The Puya, after waiting about 300 years hidden in a village for the true sons and daughters of the Meeteis, came to the hands of the Meetei Researchers in 1970 A.D. Mr. Angom Chaopa, the brave son of Kangleipak will never be forgotten by the Meetei Race for his invaluable Gift to the Meetei Race for all generations to come. The Meetei Race will never forget the Long-nga Koireng village also for its safe custody of the invaluable Puya for about 300 years and also Mr. L. Songkhup Koireng, the very person who handed over the Puya to the Meetei Researchers forever.
Eeyek, we generally translate it, is alphabet in English. The Meetei thinks that the alphabets are given by God. The original alphabets given by God with sound and shape are called Eenung Eeyek (literally means drawn like picture in the blood) and the alphabets used by the people (the Meetei) imitating the Eenung Eeyek are called Khunung Eeyek (Khunung = in the habitation, Eeyek = picture in the blood). In such way the Puya describes the origin of 18 alphabets of the Meetei Race. Regarding the origin of the Meetei Race Pakhangba (literally means the man who knows the Father, that is, the man who knows the Creator of the Universe) has seven sons called Salai Talet ( 7 salais). They are Mangang, Luwang, Khuman, Angom, Moirang, Khapa-Nganba and Salai Leisangthem in order of seniority. The present Meetei generation is the direct descendants of Pakhangpa through his seven sons (seven salais). The Puya gives these things in clear terms.
The writer further emphatically says that the Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok is the only source of true origin of the Meetei Race, culture, literature etc. And any book so called Puya by Hindu Pseudo intellectuals regarding origin of the Meetei race is a pack of lies deserved to be thrown to a waste paper basket.
What I have shown you above are direct historical evidences given to us by the discovery of the Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok. The original Puya was 3107 years old in the first quarter of 18th century A.D. when the Puya was burnt down and what we are having now is about 300 years old copy of the original Puya. These are direct historical evidences from the discovery of the copy of the original Puya by the Meetei Researchers. Now the writer will show you the direct consequences from the discovery of the Puya.
Consequences from the Direct Historical Evidences
The following are the direct consequences from the discovery of the Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok :-
1) The present name of the State, Manipur :
has no two groups of alphabets like swar and Benjon as the Hindu did. The Meetei used these 18 alphabets only in their writing, so in their documents and records upto the reign of King Pamheiba Garibniwaz, the first Hindu King in the land in the 18th Century A.D. but according to Dr. G.A. Grierson upto the beginning of 20th Century A.D. You have seen all these above. So in the records, written documents, so to say history etc. of a Race having only these alphabets, can there be any words like
etc. before King Pamheiba Garibaniwaz in the first half of the 18th Century A.D. ? The people at that time might not even dream of the word "Manipur" before king Pamheiba Garibaniwaz. This is the only logical, sensible consequence from the discovery of the Puya. Nobody can build dream-building outside logic.
So, the name of the land now called MANIPUR WAS NOT MANIPUR UP TO THE REIGN OF KING PAMHEIBA GARIBANIWAZ in the first half of 18th Century A.D. is certain from the discovery of the Puya and hence there cannot be any history of Manipur before Pamheiba Garibaniwaz. This cannot be denied This is a clear logic and consequence.
2) Poireiton Khunthokpa as a source of History :
One of the so called Puyas invented probably very recently within less than 100 years during the 20th Century is the Poireiton Khunthokpa. Poireiton Khunthok by M. Chandra Singh is an M.A. (Manipuri) reference book. In order to disintegrate unity of the Meetei Race, the common origin of the Meetei Race, both Hills and Plain the enemies of the Meetei Race invented this so called Puya, Poireiton Khunthokpa. Interpreting and using Poireiton Khuntokpa, Shri B. Kulachandra Sharma. Brahmapur Thangabat Mapal says in his book Meitrakpakki Khunthok - Khundarol at page 41/42 that Poireiton came to this land (now called Manipur) at about 500 A.D. from the east as a leader of a group 53 men and women, the Meetei's two salais - Luwang and Khuman are his descendants. Just contradictory to our living tradition that the Meeteis are the direct descendants of seven sons of Iputhou Pakhangpa (Grand father Pakhangba) of which Luwang and Khuman are second and 3rd sons of Iputhou Pakhangpa. Just contradictory to the direct evidence of the discovery of the Puya, Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok. Poireiton is a fiction character will never be able to be proved as a historical character. We have already seen that there are only seven salais - Mangang, Luwang, Khuman, Angom, Moilang, Khapa-Nganpa, Salai Leisangthem - The seven sons of Iputhou Pakhangba. You will see this in the discovered Puya written in 18 alphabets. We have seen this also that the Meetei Race used only 18 alphabets since deep B.C. Poireton Khunthokpa as a source of history of this land now called Manipur is simply bogues. The Cheitharol Kumbaba which suffered many wholesale changes and destruction of the original at the hands of Hindu Kings admits that there are only seven salais (page 86 - 1967 Edition) contradicting the Meitrabakki Khunthok-Khundarol which says 7 yeks, 9 salais and 11 Salailands (Page 42) without giving proper and exact reference book. Even Mr. T.C. Hodson in his impartial book, the Meitheis first published in 1908 mentioned only seven saleis (Salais), though there are serious mistakes in matter of the names of the salais because of the social conditions prevailed that time and informants he met to get his informations (Please see appendix I of the book). The words, sentences written in Poireiton Khunthokpa are all recent words and sentences of Hindu times used in puzzling way to mislead the common Meetei probably less than 100 years old written in 20th Century A.D. Moreover many words used have no roots in Meetei Vocabulary simply to say. the 'Meitei Hindu', Pseudo intellectuals may not be able to answer this charge. Can any Hindu intellectual, scholar show the words 
prominently occuring in the book Khunthokpa have any root relating to the Meitei way of worshipping 
in the Puya) ? In a book so called Puya, Thirel Layat the words with the same meaning and concept as in Poireiton Khunthokpa in a little different spelling - 
are found. Poireiton Khunthokpa is a product of late Hinduism in Manipur, not an original historical document. For a race having no R () in the alphabets/vocabulary upto 18th Century A.D., can there be any word like 'Poireiton' in their historical/original document in 5th Century or earlier records? Poireiton Khunthokpa is not a source of history of this land now called Manipur. This may be very clear and certain from the study of the intorductory portion and the text of the copy of the original Puya. There are three Poireitons so far we find in the so called Puyas. In Poireiton. But in Leithak Leikharon, there are two more Poireitons-Senkheiren Poireiton and Khongphang Atonba Poireiton. (page 81). Can we believe Poireiton Khunthokpa as a source of history ?
3) Cheitharol Kumbaba as a source of History :
Many hindu Pandits, hindu histories, specially in Manipur commit the common fallacy that the present Manipur is a part of India, that is, Bharat since deep B.C. This may be due to their wrong premises that this land is the Manipur of Mahabarata. This is wrong politically becuase Manipur became part of India in 1949 only. Historically it is proved beyond doubt that no Hindu influence was there on this land and people upto 18th Century A.D. up to the reign of Pamheiba Garibaniwaz by the discovery of the copy of the original Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukhok Puya. Even culturally and religiously, the land and people of present Manipur had no relation whatsoever with present India beyond 18th Century A.D. This cannot be denied by any sensible people.
Reputed historian of Bengal, Shri R.C. Majumdar in his Pandita Raja Atombapu Sharma Memorial lecture said on 15th Nov. 1966 at Imphal : "The circumstantial narratives in the Mahabharata, mentioned above, under the six different items, to which a few isolated references may be added, are all concerned with Magadha and Bengal with only two important exceptions, viz, the Kingdom of Pragjyotisha and Manipur. Both of these have been located outside Bengal, in Assam, the former being identified with Kamarupa on the Brahmaputra valley and the latter with the place where we meet to day, still bearing the old name. But neither of these identifications is altogether free from doubt, and as this question assumes a special importance in view of the locality where this lecture is being delivered, I shall consider it in some details in my next lecture" (page 14, 15) Shri R.C. Majumdar delivered his next lecture the next day on 16 Nov., 1966 at the same place. He says " Secondly, some details mentioned in the Ramayana and Mahabharata in connection with Pragjyotisha is more in consonance with its situation in the North-Western part of India than in the eastern. In the Ramayana Sugriva asked the search party going to the west to look for Sita in Praggjotisha. As the direction was given with reference to Kishkindhya, this agrees more with Giljit area than with Assam. In the digvijaya parva of the Mahabharata Arjuna is said to have reached Pragjyotisha in the course of his northern expedition, but this kingdom is not mentioned in connection with the eastern expedition of Bhima even though he is said to have reached the Lauhitya river. It is significant that even Kalidasa, who identified Kamarupa with Pragjyotisha, does not include its conquest in the eastern expedition of Raghu in the course of which he conquered Vanga and Suhma, but makes it a part of his northern expedition" (page 41)
"But in the Asvamedhik-Prava the three countries where Arjuna had to fight for the horse are successively named Pragjyotisha, Sindhu and Manipur, whether Manipur be identified with the present Manipur in the eastern India or located in Orissa, the mention of this place between Pragjotisha in Assam and Sindhu or Sind, i.e. the two extreme limits of northern India seems to be an anomaly. It is not unlikely therefore that Sindhu is an interpolation and in that case juxtaposition of Pragjyotisha and Manipur certainly favours tha identification of Manipur with present state of that name in eastern India" (page 44)
Please read "Expansion of Aryan Culture in Eastern India" published by the Atombapu Research Centre, Imphal, Manipur June 1968.
Shri R.C. Majumdar, the reputed historian in the heart of hearts felt Arjuna never reached present Kamarup on the Brahmaputra and the present Manipur on the hills, assuming that Mahabharata is historical, but to respect the high sentiments of the organisers of the memorial lectures consisting of immigrant Bamons (Brahmans), Royal families and their henchmen twisted the texts of the Ramayana and Mahabharata to bring the present Kamarup and Manipur in the Ramayana and Mahabharata folds.
In the Asvamedhik-Parva according to the next of the Mahabharata, the Mahabharata here Arjuna had to fight three neighbouring countries - Pragjyotisha, Sindhu (Present Sind in Pakistan now) and Manipur successively for the horse. The reputed historian says occurrence of Sindhu between Pragjyotisha and Manipur in the Asvamedhik-Parva is "an anomaly" and "an interpolation" to justify the identifications of the present Kamarup in Assam with the Pragjyotisha and present Manipur withe the Ma nipur in the Asvamedhik-Parva of the Mahabharata geographically using the word 'juxtaposition'. The humble writer feels that this is simply a twist of the Mahabharata text to serve the wishful thinking of a section of population of Manipur that this present Manipur is the Manipur of the Mahabharata.
In such situation, even the reputed Historian, R.C. Majumdar who has spent many years of his life to the "Indian Culture in Burma and South-East Asia" cannot claim the present Manipur is the Manipur of the Mahabharata, and also that the Pragjyotisha of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata is the present Kamarupa n Assam, some people's, who are getting high Western Education, whom people generally call them historians and scholars claim that this present Manipur is the Manipur of the Mahabharata is simply a brazen faced stand. This stand produces a wave of wild-goose chase among research shcolars apparently lacking insight in their research materials.
Now the writer will show the readers the value of the present Cheitharol Kumbaba as a source of history of this land now called Manipur which was an independent country upto 1891 A.D. in the light ofthe new discovery by the Meetei researchers and also in the light of the very nature of the present Kumbaba.
In a recent newspaper letter by Shri R.K. Jhalajit Singh, a noted historian and writer of Manipur of present time says : "History of Manipur is a part of Indian history. As soon as the Cheitharol Kumbaba is opened it is said — In Kali Era is Kalyabda. This Era was prevalent through out India before sakabda Era" (Poknapham - April 21, 2000) This peremtory assertion is generally the attitudes of Hindu Pandits, writers and historians in Manipur. but this attitude becomes futile and may lead to isolation from the comity of the intellectuals. The writer will show this in light of the unacceptable facts in the Cheitharol Kumbada itself and in the light of the discovery by the Meetei Researchers. In the Cheitharol Kumbada Pakhangba is shown as the founder of the first political kingdom in this land, ascends the throne in 3135 Kali Era equating 33 A.D. He married Laisana one of the women who came with Poireiton, a person and a character shown in Poireiton Khunthokpa book ( The writer has a copy of Poireiton Khunthokpa edited by Khumallambam Yaima Singh — 1971 Ed.) about which the writer told the readers earlier in this book. Involvement of 'Poireiton' and his group in the early history of the Meetei is a real indicator that the present Cheitharol Kumbada is not the original Meetei Kings' Chronological record. This may be very certain from the facts recorded in the present Cheitharol Kumbada itself "Led by Haobamcha Pukhramba begins to write the written records of the peoples origin for the Salais" (Chei. Kum. page 80-1967 Ed.). This is the time of King Pamheiba Garibaniwaz when hindu traditions and customs were imposed upon the Meetei. The whole Meetei people were divided and separately put under the 9 gotras. Meetei Hindus' present gotra tradition began from this time. After burning the Puyas, the most important destruction during this time of Pamheiba Garibaniwaz was the destruction of the Meetei Royal chronicle records and Royal lineage of the Meetei. Since then Pakhangba got his second name Jobista. All these we already knew from many literary sources including Larei Lathup. This record of Cheitharol Kumbada at page 80 is a corroborative evidence. Again at page 86 of the Kumbada says "on 10th Ingen Friday the record of the origin of the people of seven Salais is written". This is also during the time of Pamheiba Garibaniwaz. From this also, it is doubly certain that the Meetei's original records of their origin has been destroyed and changed to the Hindu's. When we are very certain that the Meetei Era started about 1400 BC or earlier and the Meetei's written records in 18 alphabets were there in deep B.C. can any body believe that a Hindu king in the 18th Century A.D. will start writing about the origin of the Meetei Race. Simply absurd. In such way, the present Cheitharol Kumbada is the result of at least 5 changes at the hands of Hindu Kings since 1709 A.D. above all these, we are very certain that Pakhangba (written as Pakhangpa in the Puyas) founded the first Meetei Monarchy earlier than 2000 B.C. from the discovery of the copy of the original Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok Puya. So, the 'Kali Era' (a Hindu concept) 3135 equating to 33 A.D. (in Christian concept) may be simply a concoction which no body will accept now in the 21st century A.D. The records of reigning time of Pakhangba 120 years, Khuyoi Tompok 10 years, Taothingmang 100 years and sudden drop to 15, 15, 17, 17 years etc. according to the present Cheitharol Kumbada are very doubtful.All these might have been done to bring Pakhangba's reign within A.D. instead of in B.C. The present Cheitharol Kumbaba runs into more than 700 pages of which the non-hindu 49 kings cover few pages, the rest 27 hindu kings cover the entire Kumbaba. Non-hindu king Kiyamba annexed Kabaw valley to the Meetei country in 1475A.D. and lost in Hindu period completely. No territory is added to the Meetei country during hindu period. can we believe all the non-hindu kings are all lame ducks? One very amazing fact published in London in a monthly magazine, History today, January, 1962 edited by the Peter Quennel and Alam Hodge at page 55 "When, in 1907, the young Raja completed his schooling and came to age, he was formally installed on his throne, Like his ninety-one predecessors, he was descended from Pakhangba, the sacred snake" is written about Churachand Maharaj at the time of his installation tothe throne of Manipur. Then, if we assume this "ninety-one" as a fact, a historical fact, we are missing 17 kings in the present Cheitharol Kumbaba upto Maharaj Bodhachandra (please see at page 1..). Is not your suspicion to the present Cheitharol Kumbaba doubled ? Now the writer leaves to my learned readers the question of using present Cheitharol Kumbaba as a source of Meetei History to ponder over the matter seriously. Any error in the judgement will put the Meetei Race as obscure Race and as a satellite of the Hindu.
4) Other so called Puyas as source of the Meetei History and Culture :
At the outset before writing about some obviously spurious books introduced as Puyas by some people having nefarious hidden programmes for the future of this Race, the humble writer seriously warn research shcolars using these books as reference books to get their doctoral degrees probably in the expectation of future employment. One of the writer's friends who got his doctoral degree under the guidance of the non-Mnaipuri Gauhati University Professor sicnerely told the writer that he was advised by the guide to use books only published by a particular organisation in Manipur to get his doctoral degree as reference books. One of the writer's officer friends employed in a cultural related department confessed to the writer that one professor of the Manipuri Department of M.U. warned him against the use of books written by Yumnam Tamhajao etc. as reference books. The Meetei Race wants the Manipur University and the Govt. departments related with Art and Culture to be agents persuing real wisdom, real impartial knowledge hunters, not guided agents against the indigenous people of Kangleipak. Now the writer will show spurious books so called Puyas as reference books in their research works of old literatures, cultures etc. of this land becomes unholy (crime too against humanity).
"[a symbol with chanda-bindu] he Layingthou Asuppa Laigi Ningthou Thoithoiba - o" Leithak Leikharon edited by Shri Yengkhom Bhagya published by the Manipuri Sahitya Parishad is one of the books so called Puyas used by different research workers in Manipur in old literatures, culture etc. of this land as authorative Puya and the above quote is the opening sentence of the book, This is a reference book of M.A. (Manipuri). How can an sensible person who has some knowledge of philology and Etymology of the Meetei Language accept this book as original Meetei literature, not to talk of the overwhelming crusing evidence standing against this kind of literatures by the discovery of Wakoklon Heelel Thilel Salai Amailon Pukok Puya. The composition words in the sentence are just contradictory each other. Can the second word "Layingthou" = La+ying+thou carry the meaning of the following words "Laigi Ningthou"? Just funnya ! The word "Layingthou" = La+ying+thou cannot carry any sensible meaning in the context of the Meetei's old cultures and traditions. Most probably the book was concocted by an immature person who had very little knowledge of philology and Etymology of the Meetei Language in the late Hindu period. At page 9 of this book the words "Taibangpan Mapu", "Atiya Sidaba" and "Athingkok Sidaba" are used, most probably the writer of the Leithak-leikharon did not have the perfect knonwledge of these words at the time of writing the book. The way of use of these words clearly indicate in this direction. At page 79 "Piyainu gives birth to Poireiton " is written. If you read only this page 79 of the book, you will laugh alone to see the constructions of the sentences, using the word like "Atingkok", an important concept of the Meetei knowledge of space. You have seen in this book about Poireition Khunthokpa book already as only a concocted book. Can any body in Manipur say the frequently used words "Lairel Taoroinai", "Taoroinai" etc. in Laithak Leikharol, Panthoibi Khongkul etc. are old original Meetei words ? Now the writer will survey the book Panthoibi Khongkul translated in Modern language by Shri Moirangthem Chandra Singh, Sahitya Ratna, also published by the Manipuri Sahitya Parishad, one of the books so called Puya frequently used by researchers for doctoral degree in Manipur. This book also is a reference book of M.A. (Manipuri).At page 47 of this book ".... Tangcha Ngangkoina Pampa Kei Ul Setpa lilla khaol yetnapa Samlang Jatanungta Kangka Laicha Ipuipa ... Mityeng humpal longpa" is written. The writer really and franky speaking is not sure of the meaning of the sentence quoted above. The word "Ngangkoina" (= Ngakkoina?) is not certain to the writer. But in free English translation, the writer attempts like this : "Snake round the neck dressed in tiger skin, snake round the shoulder and chest, perennial Ganges water in the hair Jata ..... three eyes ..." Thsi is said in the description of Nongpok Ningthou which is described as Nongpok Chingkhei Apanpa in the Puya, one of the Seven Primary Gods of the Meetei Race. These seven primary gods, the Puya calls seven Laipungthous. In this Panthoipi Khongkul, the Meetei original god, Nongpok Chingkhei Apanpa (Nongpok Ningthou) becomes Shri Mahadeva. At page 56 in the description of Panthoibi "Cutting the heads of men, catching children put in the tong-gol ..." (Tonggol is a bamboo-made article like a jug for putting fish after catching). Thus Panthoibi becomes Shrimati Durga Devi in the Panthoibi Khongkul as an original Puya of the Meetei Race? Is it authorative past literature of the Meetei Race? The Meetei Race is to think seriously if we are to keep our Identify clear and to defend ourselves from obliteration.
Next the writer deals with Ponbi-lang, a so called Puya by N. Manijao. This book is written in the form of verse in different stanzas (3rd edition, 1986). The following is the first stanza :-
" [a symbol with chanda-bindu] Hung Hung Atingkok Kouparu, Shri Mari, Chak Karasi, chak Kumpang, Malem, Tengpanba, Malang, Laihca, Khampi, Korou, Malem Angang-nga, Wangmana, Luna-Khu, Thapi, Thapa, Sana Makoi, Wakhu, Wuphong, Nga, Sharoi, Malemv ||1||Under the verse-stanza, the above stanza has been translated into modern language and we do not know who translated this into modern language, by the writer himself, N. Manijao Pandit Sahitya Shiromani or by any other person. The translation runs into three/four pages. The first line of the translation runs like this in free English Translation : "Luwang Kurum Leikoiba (Luwang Tourist of the world ?) asked the religious leader Mangang very politely about the birth, death etc. of the world" How mane gang and Luwang, the first two salais of the Meetei come into picture in the above first stanza of the Ponbthi-Lang is a wonder to the writer, most probably to all common readers also. Not a single word indicating meaning the concept of Mangang and Luwang is seen in the stanza.
The twelve stanza at page 56 runs like this :-
"He chak karasi, Angai Taipang Panba Phaipirel Hayi Palpak Pirel Hayi, Leisang Pirel Hayi, Chingkhong Pirel Hayi, Laklel Pirel Hayi, Samtin Pirel Hayi, Leikoi Pirel Hayi, Chin Pirel Hayi, Kal Pirel Hayi, wul pirel Hayi, wao Pirel Hayi, Liri Pirel Hayi ||12||The translation of the above stanza in terms of modern language runs into several pages. In the translation of the above stanza, the institutions of the 6th day Leihul (Asti in Manipuri Hindu term), the 11th day yumsengba thouram (Household purification of the hindus) and 12th day Lanna thouram (12th day shorat - Shradha Ceremony of Manipuri Hindu) are mentioned. Burning of the dead body which started in the time of Pamheiba Garibaniwaz also mentioned in the translation. Any body who reads this stanza of Ponbilang will wonder how these religious institutions (Hindu institutions in Meetei language) of Leihul, Yumsengba, and Lanna thouram and also burning of the dead body come into picture in the translation. For the writer these institutions are not even implied in the verse-stanza. The translations are really unconnected with the text. Reading Ponbi-lang reminds the writer fo the Institution of Lairik Thiba-Haiba of late Hindu Period which met a natural death today in the society. In Lairik Thiba-Haiba two persons are necessary. The first person will sing a hindi or Sanskrit verse in very peculiar way and sound, the second person will translate into Meetei language. The audience do not know what the first person sings/says, they know only what the second person translates. But whether the first person and second person sing/say the same thing or differently is only a quess-work.
The Meetei had a Puya called Polpi-lang written in 18 alphabets dealing with body and soul and any copy is not discovered upto this day after the whole sale burning of the Meetei Puyas in the 18th Century A.D. The Meetei had not any Puya in the name of Ponbilang. In the light of the discovery that the Meetei did not used b (¤) upto the 18th Century A.D. and also seeing the nature of the book Ponbi-lang even incorporating the event of burning dead body which was very recent historical even of Pamheiba Garibaniwaz's time in the name of Puya, we may not be indoubt that this book Ponbi-lang is a very late Hindu fabrication. The explanation given in the book about the 12 months of the year and their names also are wrong. The reader may kindly note the word 
= Leikoi in the verse. If the bok is old Meetei literature/Puya, the word should have been written as
Next the writer tells you about the book so called Puya, Khongchomnupi Nongkarol by Shri Moirangthem narendra Singh, Published by the Manipuri Sahitya Parishad in 1965. The book is translated into modern language by the writer himself. This book also is a reference of book of M.A. (Manipuri) This book sems to indicate that the book is written in modern spelling forms by some particular organisation from the older book Khongchannupi Nongkarol which was itself a late Hindu period production. At page 2/3 it is written - "....Gwa yachu Shainati Chamara phingou inchai Shetna thangsang oiram hulnati palpa pungtati thoithoipi Palli yirat chaona Chaorel houna....." The writer cannot give exact meaning of this quote in modern language. But the words "Gwa Yachu Shainati" mean eating betel nut with coloured teeth is certain to the writer. And also the words "Khoimom Lairemma Bhubalni turka" mean goddness Durga of the Hindu faith is also certain to the writer. Every intellectual/scholar knows and agrees that Hinduism comes to this land now called Manipur only in the first half of the 18th Century A.D. Nobody dispute it. Then in a literature as ld as the Meetei civilization itself having more than 2000 years in its background will associate a word and a concept like goddess Durga is inconceivable. Khongchom Nupi is one of the primary heavenly bodies is one of the books fabricated in the Hindu Period. Further you please not the word-composition and spelling of the words in the sentences of the 
soem partisan organisations to remodel Meetei literatures to destory originality of the Meetei Race. The Meetei original Puya never had such spelling system. The spelling 'Kwa' is used at page 1 and the samething is spelt as 'Gwa' at Page 2. Every sensible intellectual/scholar will agree with teh writer of this assessment. At page 5, you see the word "Chingkhong Poireitol" Chingkhong Poireitol/Poireiton is never a historical figure though some insincere hindu elements of the Meetei society claims to be so. At page 18, " ........................... Langkampi chinghaunu chingkhong Poireitolna Shalon Wak ........" is written and the sentence is translated in modern language as this " .... habitually undutiful songstress chinghaunu incarnated by Poireitol ..." If this is so of Poireitol/ Poireiton incarnating as a habitual undutiful singing girl as is seen in the book, how Poireiton/Poireitol was a historical figure? Occurance of the words "Chingkhong Poireitol" in the book questions the very authenticity of the Khongchom Nupi Nongkarol as an original Meetei Literature.
The people know and the writer also knows that there are many so called puyas in Manipur. The writer with little resource at his command cannot write and bring out all the pictures painted in those so called puyas. The writer shows only some examples. The writer leaves the remaining work of showing all the ugly pictures to the people of Kangleipak, particularly to the young people as a bounden duty to their great ancestors.