Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Revisiting the dates of MBh by Aareni

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

IndiaArchaeology , " aareni " <aareni wrote:

 

 

Arcaeoastronomy of MBh

 

This is a perennial topic of interest to many in India and abroad.

Considering the importance of MB and Krishna for our culture and

religion the topic is rightly a benchmark. However, establishing

historicity by analysis and presenting evidences objectively is

another matter. Having spent considerable time on this subject I like

to present the following points.

 

1) The war is only one incident in MB. We should not be looking for a

date in isolation, for this event. Historicity demands the text story

line has to be internally compatible all through. Since the text as we

know has come down in different recensions from various parts of the

country, social, religious and cultural themes could have been added

and altered. There can be no strong motivation to add eclipses and

planetary positions into the text. However, even assuming this has

happened (since there are at least three layers of text in MB) this

does not make the material unhistorical. What we should question is

whether there is a set of celestial observations as a central core.

The text may be in error due to copying and transmission problems.

Also, when the meter (Chandas) differs we can suspect that, that part

may belong to a different period or editor. After scanning the period

(500-3250BC) I found only 1443-93 BC to represent the core celestial

observations. These are eclipses in Sabha, Bhi., and Maus.paravans and

planets in Udyoga and Bhi.P. About planets at KarNa's death, observe

that the meter changes. Also, the different editions do not agree with

each other at this position on planet descriptions.

 

2) MB has two eminent, long period historicity constraints. These are

the three (NOT TWO as some have worked up) solar eclipses (SE1, SE2,

SE3), with either SE1 or SE2 or both being a duo. Please see my paper

for details of the text.

 

http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/maha/

<http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/maha/> mbheclipse/

 

 

These have to be sequenced at the required interval of 13-15 years

and 35-36 years. This minimum info is correct since all editions agree

and there is no change in style of narration at these places. The 36

year figure appears in Stri.P; and twice in Mausala P.

 

3) Several solutions are possible for the above sequence. Fortunately

planetary statements, the most reliable ones being from Udyog. P come

handy for further work. Saturn is mentioned thrice. Twice in the same

position near Rohini, but a third time near Vishakha. The argument of

N. Achar that this third Sanaiscara is a comet is not justifiable. See

his Mythic Society Paper p.79 where he states that he believes verse

VI.2.25 also refers to comets. In his recent article in the ISERVE

Proceedings he selectively ignores this position of Saturn. This has

not prevented him from writing a footnote wrongly describing my

approach, which he has either not read or not understood. Specifically

he attributes to me " Iyengar assumed that part of the text in Bhishma.

Parvan actually belongs to Sabha Parvan and would rearrange the text

of the epic to suit his model. " This is not just a

wrong remark but is loaded with extra meanings. I wasn't pushing any

preconceived model. I only demonstrated in my IJHS-2003 paper that

after arriving at 1478 BC for the war without any assumptions, the

second tricky position of Saturn, Mars and Venus get satisfied for a

date in 1493 BC fifteen years before the War position of 1478 BC.

 

4) Now about the case of 3067BC. I find no solution fitting the

required positions.(See Q. J of Mythic Society, XCIV, 1-2, 150-186.)

15.10.3067BC is a SE day, but no LE occurred before or after a

fortnight as correctly pointed out by Chandra Hari. On K.K.Ashtami

night Mars was near Shravana and not between Jyestha and Anuradha as

demanded. An SE 35 year later was possible (11.5.3031, 5.11.3031 BC)

as claimed originally by Srinivasa Raghavan. Interestingly 15 years

prior to 3067, an SE was possible on 21.7.3081 BC. This was also not

accompanied by an LE. Moreover the crucial testing statements of

Saturn at Vishakha, Mars at Magha, Venus circling (retrograde) near

Purvabhadra were not satisfied. Hence, we cannot accept the above

epoch containing 3067 BC as a possible historical period when some

people could have made naked eye observation of the sky near

Kurukshetra, matching with MB text.

 

5) Questions are sometimes raised regarding solstice, interval of 68

days, 42 days etc. When the goal is historicity, within-an-year

constraints loose their sharpness and hence importance. Some of these

are valid for any year, with minor adjustments. The eve of the War was

Kartika Purnima, when the conversation took place. With the war

starting on Krttika/rohini it ends on Shravana after 18days. So

Balarama's 42 day travel can be fitted neatly into any year with the

Pushya-krttika-sravana cycle. Hence, insistence on this to prove or

disprove a macro-date for MB is irrelevant. 12.10.1478 as found in my

paper satisfies this automatically. War start cannot be taken on

Amavasya. " sangraamam yojayet " may just mean 'let it be planned'. Any

way this talk was in private between two persons, not involved in the

direct preparations. Vyaasa's statement of KP before war is more

authentic.

 

6) About death of Bhishma, it can only be said, there is confusion.

He passed away after Uttarayana-puNyakaala is clear.

120470031/.nivRtta.maatre.tv.ayana;uttare.vai.divaa.kare./

The number of days between the start of the war and his death is

ambiguous in the text. Please read the following: All editions

describe how Krishna+Pandavas meet Bhishma, and K tells Bhi 'you have

still 56 days to live'

0120510141/.pancaa.zatam.SaT.ca.kuru.praviira.zeSam.dinaanaam.tava

.jiivitasya

This happened on a Purnima as it is said moon arose in front as sun

was setting in west.

0120520323/.puraz.ca.pazcaac.ca.yathaa.mahaa.nadii.pura.RkSa.vanta

m.girim.etya.narmadaa.//

0120520331/.tatah.purastaad.bhagavaan.nizaa.karah.samutthitas.taam

.abhiharSayamz.camuum

 

I wonder why some scholars insist on the 68 day interval between start

of war and death of Bhishma. If you take what Krishna had to say as

above this interval should be 84/85 days. This is another reason why

we should not discuss MB without bringing in decade long constraints.

BORI edition contains only 154 chapters in Anushasana Parvan. The

famous verse 'Maaghoyam..' is not available in all editions and has to

be kept out of discussion on Historicity, even if it be valid from a

religious point of view. The Bhishmastami argument highlighted by some

Hindus is not very critical to the issue. Firstly, it is a religious

concept. Second, it is not true that all over the country it is

accepted in the same way. I cite one counter example. Please see

Skaanda puraana-Prabhasa Khanda-Vastraapatha Mahatmya: Ch.15 verses

30-40. This is the Bhishma pancaka starting with Ekadashi

Pancopavasaah kartavyah sampraapte Bhishma-pancake|

Ekaadas'im samaarabhya pancami poornimaa-dinam|

Consider the interval of 84/85 days cited above. If 12.10.1478BC is

taken as K.Purnima (MB war eve), Maagha-sukla-astami falls after 82

days on 2/3 Jan 1477 BC with Krttika/Rohini. This is too close to what

Krishna had to say (as per Vaishampaayana)about Bhishma. If you add

another 3 days you get Ekaadashi. It was uttarayana of course.

 

7)Is MBh Archaeoastronomy sufficient to prove that Krishna existed as

a historical person around the dates obtained as solution? Most likely

yes; if the numbers do not contradict other astronomical statements in

MBh and Krishna related Puranas. Those who hold on to the c 3000 BC

figure have to interpret how the Polestar could have been wandering or

what is the meaning of Abhijit competing with her sister Jyestha-

Rohini only to vanish. See more at

http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/maha/krishnalore/

<http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/maha/krishnalore/>

 

8) MBh has footprints of 15 years and 36 years. The first is through

two solar eclipses and position of Saturn stated once in RohiNi and

again in Vishakha. The second longer period is through the eclipse

heralding the end of the Yadavas as interpreted by Krishna. Ignoring

the seemingly contradictory position of Saturn is to throw the baby

along with the bath tub. Suryaputra can be taken to be a comet, but

not Shanaiscara.

 

9) A comment on two eclipses at 13 day interval: Many capable people

have worked on this and arrived at solutions satisfactory to

themselves. But we have to first ponder over the text to give this as

data to our computers to avoid GIGO. The famous shloka reads

Candra-suryAvubhau grastau eka mAse trayodshIm (bhI.p. 3.29)

 

This is interpreted by many as two eclipses at interval of 13 days.

What the astronomical tradition of the country has to say on this? The

commentary of Utpala on Brihatsamhita should be read by every one

interested in the above verse. Utpala quotes it as 'ekamAse

trayodashe'. He understands it as the thirteenth month=adhika mAsa. He

is quite clear on this. " evam atra adhika mAse yaduktam tadeva

shobhanam r.shi vacanAt ekamAse trayodasha-iti " . In the VaraNasi

Sampurananada Sanskrit Univ edition by KC Dvivedi a foot note appears

to state that ekamAsIm trayodashIm iti prAmAdikah pATho vibhAti |

 

So much for importance of textual criticism before advertising for

spectacular planetarium softwares, used by NASA in arriving at the date

of MBh!

 

Is there evidence of similar Arshaprayoga in ancient texts?

Yes. In the Shatapatha Br. In describing Manu's Flood the word used

for year is samA. (1.8.1.[5] sa yatithau tatsamAm...). SayaNa clearly

says this is Arsha and explains it as 'samAyAm' in Saptami-vibhakti.

 

10) Those arguing for c 3000 BC date for MB have to sort out the

Shatapatha text also. According to them what would be the date for

Manu's Flood appearing for the first time in Sh.Br? This appears in MB

also as an ancient incident.

 

11) About Horses in MB, when Krishna is approaching Hastinapura for

rapproachment between the cousins in the Udyoga parvan, Dhritarashtra

syas had he known about K's proposal he could have sent him the best

'KHARA (donkey/mule) drawn chariot which is the fastest in the country

covering 14 yojanas per day. We have to accept that in MB horses were

not the fastest or horses came at a later layer of the text.

 

12)A time-distance study of the places and the time periods mentioned

are equally important in appreciating MB. This lead Kosambi to propose

that Ur-Dwaraka could not have been the present day Dwaraka. My

investigations also lead to similar conclusions. See

http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/maha/dwaraka/

<http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/maha/dwaraka/>

 

13) MB knows the drying up of River Sarasvati. It connects the river

with IriNA or the Ran-of-Kutch. It mentions that Rann would lose its

sanctity since Sarasvati moved away towards the desert. Did this happen

c 3000BC? For related discussions see

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3246595/Geographical-Location-of-Vedic-Irina

<http://www.scribd.com/doc/3246595/Geographical-Location-of-Vedic-Irina>

 

thanks

 

RN Iyengar

 

IndiaArchaeology , JK <tiptronicus@> wrote:

>

> What about the passages in MB which refer to the invasion of Yavanas?

> Would'nt that move the date of the epic or later redactions to a much

later

> date, post Alexander?

>

> JK

>

>

> On 6/25/08, Paul Kekai Manansala p.manansala@ wrote:

> >

> > IndiaArchaeology , " Francesco Brighenti "

frabrig@

> > wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > IndiaArchaeology , " JK " <tiptronicus@>

wrote:

> > >

> > > > If the date for MB is found as around 3000 B.C.E, doesn't it

have

> > > > to correlate with other data, like the arrival of horses in

India?

> > > > Or is it accepted that the original event was a minor battle

which

> > > > was embellished later?

> > >

> > > This point is of great relevance because horses and chariots are

> > > essential to the narrative structure of the MBh, and they can in

no

> > > way be considered a later " embellishment " . Indeed, what would the

MBh

> > > be without horses and chariots?

> > >

> > > Question: were horse-drawn chariots used in warfare in India at

3000

> > > BCE?

> > >

> >

> > I suspect your question is an archaeological one?

> >

> > In terms of archaeological evidence, there is no clue that

horse-drawn

> > chariots were ever used for warfare in India.

> >

> > Regards,

> > Paul Kekai Manansala

> > *Nusantao Martime Trade Network and World

History<http://sambali.blogspot.com/>

> > *

> >

> >

>

 

--- End forwarded message ---

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...