PDA

View Full Version : Mahabharat War 16 Oct 5561 BCE?



devisarada
28 April 2008, 09:21 PM
Dr. P.V. Vartak believes he has convincing evidence that the Mahabharat War began on Oct 16, 5561 BCE.

Here is the link to his website where he gives his evidence. It sounds reasonable to me, a layperson. Would anyone care to express an opinion?

satay
29 April 2008, 12:59 AM
Namaskar Devi,
The link is missing from your post. Please provide the link.

devisarada
29 April 2008, 08:14 AM
Sorry about that, here is the link:


http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/mahabharat/mahab_vartak.html

Indra
29 April 2008, 02:38 PM
Dr. P.V. Vartak believes he has convincing evidence that the Mahabharat War began on Oct 16, 5561 BCE.

Here is the link to his website where he gives his evidence. It sounds reasonable to me, a layperson. Would anyone care to express an opinion?

Mahabharat is the greatest text i ever read:) I think i will read it again since it was some years ago i read it and forgot most things. :)

Sagefrakrobatik
10 May 2008, 11:06 AM
Very interesting. I'll read this when i get sometime.

ScottMalaysia
28 June 2008, 03:18 AM
Wait a minute: According to my Hindu calendar, we are in year 5109 of Kali Yuga, which began once Krishna left the earth and returned to Goloka. Unless Krishna lived for two thousand more years after the Mahabharata (which isn't mentioned in the Mahabharata book), wouldn't that make the Mahabharata war around 3100 BC?

Sagefrakrobatik
15 August 2009, 10:36 AM
Well does anyone want to say anything so is the real date 3,000 BC.

Eastern Mind
15 August 2009, 03:56 PM
Vanakkam, Namaskaram:

So does this really matter? Of what use is a precise date? What matters is now. We can take the poem and do several things with it.

1) Read it carefully, translated or not, and try to find lessons that we can apply to our lives today, now.

2) Read it as an epic narrative poem, and appreciate it as a work of brilliant art, now, as iof it were written yesterday.

3. Ignore it altogether and lean on our own intuitive knowledge.

4. Appreciate as a theory on ancient Indian history.

This is all up to the individual. But its date. I just don't get it. My apologies.

Aum Namasivaya

devisarada
15 August 2009, 11:40 PM
I wouldn't be quite so dismissive, Eastern.

Although Hinduism, unlike Christianity does not stake its validity on whether a given narrative is historically accurate;

those who have an interest in ancient Indian history might find it of value if there were evidence that the Mahabharat war could be proven to be a historical event rather than a mythical epic poem.

Whether it was an actual historical event or not, the lessons learned from it are of the same value.

Eastern Mind
16 August 2009, 06:06 AM
I wouldn't be quite so dismissive, Eastern.

Although Hinduism, unlike Christianity does not stake its validity on whether a given narrative is historically accurate;

those who have an interest in ancient Indian history might find it of value if there were evidence that the Mahabharat war could be proven to be a historical event rather than a mythical epic poem.

Whether it was an actual historical event or not, the lessons learned from it are of the same value.

Namaste.

Gee, I didn't intend to sound dismissive.

Oh, I agree with you. Your key words are "those who have an interest in ancient Indian history" I suspect most Indians don't, although I could be wrong. Of course there are lessons to be learned, but those same lessons are repeated all over scripture, and all over day to day experiences and observations as well. I certainly wasn't saying Mahabharata is a crock. I just personally find historians a curious lot, but its always to each his own.

Aum Namasivaya

rcscwc
09 September 2009, 01:20 AM
Wait a minute: According to my Hindu calendar, we are in year 5109 of Kali Yuga, which began once Krishna left the earth and returned to Goloka. Unless Krishna lived for two thousand more years after the Mahabharata (which isn't mentioned in the Mahabharata book), wouldn't that make the Mahabharata war around 3100 BC?

There is astronomical data in the Book, which could only have been observed. That could not be cooked by back calculations.

Variation in dates explained by the different astronomical software used for exploring the past configuration of heavenly bodies. Still the year is absolutely not later than 5100 BP.