Posted by: ramprasadneupane October 30, 2009
Login in to Rate this Post:
1 
? 
Liked by
?
Liked by
Incidently, the dating of the Mahabharat War has been a matter of challenge
and controversy for a century or two. European scholars have maintained
that the events described in the ancient Sanskrut texts are imaginary and
subsequently, the Mahabharat derived to be a fictitiou tale of a war fought
between two rivalries. Starting from the so- called Aryan invasion into
Bharat, the current Bharatiya chronology starts from the compilation of
the Rigved in 1200 B.C., then come other Ved's, Mahaveer Jain is born,
then Gautam Buddha lives around 585 B.C. and the rest follows. In the meantime,
the Brahmanas, Samhi- tas, Puranas, etc. are written and the thought contained
therein is well-absorbed among the Hindu minds. Where does the Ramayan
and Mahabharat fit in ? Some say that the Ramayan follows Mahabharat and
some opine otherwise. In all this anarchy of Indian histography, the date
of the Mahabharat (the mythical story!) ranges between 1000 B.C.to 300
B.C. Saunskrut epics were academically attacked occasion- ally - an attempt
to disprove the authencity of the annals noted therein. For example, the
European Indologiest Maxmuller, tried the interpret the astronomical evidences
to prove that the observations recorded in the Hindu scriptures are imaginary,
probably because it did not match the prevelant views of European historians!
All the scholars have relied on this inscription found in the Jain Temple
at Aihole prepared by one Chalukya King Pulakeshi. It says, according to
scholars, that the temple was constructed in 30+3000+700+5 = 3735 years,
after the Bharat War and 50+6+500 = 556 years of Shaka era in Kali era.
Today Shaka era is 1910. Hence 1910- 556 = 1354 years ago the temple was
constructed. Thus the year of inscribing this note is 634 AD. At this time
3735 years had passed from the Bharat War. So the date of the War comes
to 3101 BC. This is also the date of Kali Yuga Commencement. Naturally,
it is evident that relying on the beginning of Kaliyuga Era and holding
that the War took place just before the commencement of Kaliyuga, this
inscription is prepared. It is obvious from the Mahabharat that the War
did not happen near about the beginning of Kaliyuga. (I have considered
this problem fully at a later stage.) If we can see that the inscription
is prepared by relying on some false assumption, we have to neglect it
because it has no value as an evidence. Moreover the interpretation done
by the scholars is doubtful because they have not considered the clauses
separately and they held Bharat War and Kali Era as one and the same.
http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/mahabharat/mahab_vartak.html
and controversy for a century or two. European scholars have maintained
that the events described in the ancient Sanskrut texts are imaginary and
subsequently, the Mahabharat derived to be a fictitiou tale of a war fought
between two rivalries. Starting from the so- called Aryan invasion into
Bharat, the current Bharatiya chronology starts from the compilation of
the Rigved in 1200 B.C., then come other Ved's, Mahaveer Jain is born,
then Gautam Buddha lives around 585 B.C. and the rest follows. In the meantime,
the Brahmanas, Samhi- tas, Puranas, etc. are written and the thought contained
therein is well-absorbed among the Hindu minds. Where does the Ramayan
and Mahabharat fit in ? Some say that the Ramayan follows Mahabharat and
some opine otherwise. In all this anarchy of Indian histography, the date
of the Mahabharat (the mythical story!) ranges between 1000 B.C.to 300
B.C. Saunskrut epics were academically attacked occasion- ally - an attempt
to disprove the authencity of the annals noted therein. For example, the
European Indologiest Maxmuller, tried the interpret the astronomical evidences
to prove that the observations recorded in the Hindu scriptures are imaginary,
probably because it did not match the prevelant views of European historians!
All the scholars have relied on this inscription found in the Jain Temple
at Aihole prepared by one Chalukya King Pulakeshi. It says, according to
scholars, that the temple was constructed in 30+3000+700+5 = 3735 years,
after the Bharat War and 50+6+500 = 556 years of Shaka era in Kali era.
Today Shaka era is 1910. Hence 1910- 556 = 1354 years ago the temple was
constructed. Thus the year of inscribing this note is 634 AD. At this time
3735 years had passed from the Bharat War. So the date of the War comes
to 3101 BC. This is also the date of Kali Yuga Commencement. Naturally,
it is evident that relying on the beginning of Kaliyuga Era and holding
that the War took place just before the commencement of Kaliyuga, this
inscription is prepared. It is obvious from the Mahabharat that the War
did not happen near about the beginning of Kaliyuga. (I have considered
this problem fully at a later stage.) If we can see that the inscription
is prepared by relying on some false assumption, we have to neglect it
because it has no value as an evidence. Moreover the interpretation done
by the scholars is doubtful because they have not considered the clauses
separately and they held Bharat War and Kali Era as one and the same.
http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/mahabharat/mahab_vartak.html