Mahabharat is a Story or History
19th century European scholars and so many Indian scholars(?) maintain that the events described in Mahabharat are imaginary. Their theory has been that Ramayan, Mahabharat, Vedas, Upanishads and the Puranas were written about 200 years before Buddha, somewhere around 700BC.
Here are some reasons to believe that this is actually a history:
- The country is named Bhaarat after the king Bharat (son of Dushyant & Shakuntala). What country would be named after the hero of a novel!
- There are too many changes in the Sanskrit language of these texts to occur in 200 years.
- European scholars brought the nomadic Aryan tribes, into India after 1500 BC. How could these Aryans create Sanskrit language, gain so much knowledge and write all these texts before 700 BC?
- Great Indian thinkers including Lokmanya Tilak, Sri Arbindo, and Dyanand Sarasvati rejected the European theory.
- It is absurd to say that these texts are fiction, because of its poetic nature. It was a custom to write everything (even Mathematical formulae) in poetic form.
- The time and place of events have been accurately recorded. All such recordings are redudant for a Maha-kavya.
- The details of the weapons, and wars are given to a minute detail, which is very boring for a “story”.
- The texts record some common dynasties, incedents, people and events. No two novels would have the same incedents, same people or same dynasties unless they are recording history.
- It is written in the texts from time to time that it is a “History”.
- A number of dynasties with their long lineage of kings (more than 50 from Manu) have been presented in the work. If it were just fiction, 4-5 kings would have sufficed to build the story on.
- Maurya, Gupta and Indo-Greek dynasties, are also recorded in our Puraanas. These dynasties are accepted only because, they are also recorded by Greek historians. What about the dynasties that existed before the Greek historians?
Timeline for Mahabharat:
- A tablet found in the Mohenjodaro sites(Not only statue of Krishna, but also of Shiva and Durga were found. This means that the people in the Sarasvati-Sindhu valley considered Krishna & Shiva as their gods. Also the “Arya” Krishna existed before “Aryan Invasion” destroyed the Saraswati valley! Knock! Knock! Anything wrong in the Aryant Invasion Theory?), dated 2600BC, depicts Lord Krishna.
- An Egyptian Pyramid, dated 3000 BC, has a verse from the Bhagavad Geeta.
- From Vishnu Puraan it is known that the Kali Age started on February 20, 3102 BC. Mahabharat occured, before the end of Dwapar, hence 3102 BC seems to be the lower limit for Mahabharat.
- Using the position of planets(During early times, it was not customary to keep a count of years. Panchang & Shaka came into being sometime in the last 5,000 years. Thus, the early Hindus gave the positions of Vernal equinox, Saptarshi & the planets to define exact time. This evidence from Ramayan and Mahabharat has been used to calculate the times for the events.) mentioned in Mahabharat, dates have been calculated for the great war. The great Aryabhatta calculated 3100 BC. Dr. Patnaik calculated October 16, 3138 BC. Dr. P.V. Vartak proves this date to be October 16, 5561 B.C.
Between Rama and Krishna there were about 60 kings. Say, each king ruled for about 35 years. (The history of India from 300 BC to 1700 AD, shows each king ruled for 40-45 years). So even after assuming a lower range of 35 years, one can say that Rama existed atleast 2000 years before Krishna. So Rama existed latest in 5100 BC and earliest in 7500 BC. (Dr. P. V. Vartak has calculated the birth date of Rama as 4th Dec 7323 BC.)
Dushyant’s contemporary Anaranya was Rama’s 40th ancestor. Thus Dushyant, must have existed @1200 years before Rama. That gives the time frame of 6300 BC – 8800 BC for Dushyant and his contemporaries: Parshuram, Vishwamitra, Vasishta and Bharat.
Anaranya, was the 62nd decendant of Manu. Thus Manu existed atleast 2000 years before Dushyant. So, Manu must have existed sometime between 8300 BC and 10,800 BC.