From: kishore patnaik
Message: 59299
Date: 2008-06-18
Many of us are tempted to go for the 1504 bce for Mbh war for the following (probably obvious, yet let me recount) reasons:1. Some people believe that Betdwaraka pertains to around 1500 bce (which is a wrong position- it pertains to much ealier times and I think we are yet to correctly date Betdwaraka. I remember a news item that a wood artefact was found in the excavations, which could throw good light on the dating of the ruins. Obviously, the findings did not see the day of the light2. Some people still believe in AIT/AMT which gives the year 2000 bce as the earliest time Aryans landed in India. Based on this, dating around 1500 bce to 1300 bce for MBh (depending upon how fast Vedas could be composed) Noone wants to discuss such evidences as Mitanni contracts(1380 bce) vis a vis these dates.3. The PGW of Hastinapur is dated to 1500 bce which many want to believe as excavations of Kauravas and Pandavas ' Hastinapur(which they are not) The city of Hastinapur is3. It is possible that we are too aware of the resistance we face for arguments like these from the likes of Brian M Scott. 1500 bce may be an easier deal we propose rather unconsciously.Truly speaking, Sarojbala, an officer with Indian Govt tries to prove this in a systematic way without much success of course: http://www.sulekha.com/redirectNh.asp?cid=327831But to start with, Mbh describes Saraswati, which has totally dried up by 1900 bce. Hence, Mabh must have occured prior to 1900 bceSecond point that one would have to make in this connection is the traditional dating for Buddha is 1807 bce. I would post a message later regarding how the date of 6th century for Buddha was riddled with self contradictions and place Buddhism( as preached by Buddha) prior to Buddha. Some handiwork of chronologists!!!Astrologically, the dating of Veda Vyasa - Dhritarashtra argument (ref KE's link of NA- http://sarasvati96.googlepages.com/VyasaDhritarashtrasamvada.pdf) has occured at a time when Saturn was in Taurus, Sun(with Rahu) in Libra, Moon (with Ketu) in Aries and Mars in Scorpio.This has been posted by me in IC on 2nd March 2004 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization/message/52671 Interestingly, Kalyanramanji posted his message 5 years ago also. You would find a reply of Chandrahari on the pages of IC, refuted by KR:" --- In IndianCivilization@yahoogroups.com, Chandra Hari
<chandrahari81@...> wrote:
>
> I had a double mind as to whether I should reply or
> not to this effort to project 3067 BC as related to
> epic war and astronomical references. A proper refu-
> tation of the work of Prof. N. Achar and the support
> by Sri Kalyanaraman requires a little time for which
> I am incapaciated at present due to ill health and
> other responsibilities. Also, I am presently away
> from my station and thus devoid of my references.
> My philosophy and spirit for the quest of truth inspire
> me to call the work as bogus being showing only part
> of the astronomical references - that is the chosen
> ones - and interpreting even the chosen ones to suit
> their notions and placing the astronomical data vaguely.
>
> Look for example the retrogression of Mars: When was
> Mars retrograde? When was the winter solstice and when
> was the 8th tithi? See how even the chosen references
> are diluted?
>
> Many references quoted - as I have already pointed
> out are applicable for every year in which the new
> moon falls near Jyehstha. Those who are familiar
> with astronomy behind the calendar only will be able
> to understand the gimmick involved in placing such
> data as justifying the 3067 BC year.
>
> In my past communications, I did refute his data on
> eclipses and exposed his claims on eclipses. I am
> not bragging - I have studied and worked on this
> subject and has reliable astronomical computations
> obtained uing the VSOP87 and the latest theories
> of celestial dynamics.
>
> Those who are sincerely interested in the topic
> need to have a look at the works of Prof. PC Sengupta
> and KL Daftari to understand as to how a proper
> research work on the subject is presented and in
> what way the paper of Prof. Achar is inferior to
> be treated as a research paper on the subject. It's
> a paper aimed at promoting the pet notion that
> 3067 BC is the year of epic war by quoting some
> planetarium software to give authenticity to the
> claim in the minds of general public.
>
> I am sorry to make this comment. But the repeated
> claims demand it. Let Prof. Achar get the paper
> published in a journal if his astronomical
> interpretaions and data are sound enough to gain
> the recognition of his peers - Professors who are
> editors and referees of the journal.
>
> chandra hariDr KNS Patnaik also has given a detailed chronology of MBh. He opines that there were eclipses during the month of Aswayuja http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/mahabharat/mahab_patnaik However Kalyanraman posted his own dating based on NAKrishna's departure on Revati Sept. 26, 3067 BCE
Krishna's arrival in Hastinapura on Bharani Sept. 28, 3067 BCE
Solar eclipse on Jyeshtha amavasya Oct. 14, 3067 BCE
Krittika full moon (lunar eclipse) September 29, 3067 BCE
War starts on November 22, 3067 BCE (Saturn in Rohini, Jupiter in
Revati)
Winter solstice, January 13, 3066 BCE
Bhishma's expiry, January 17, 3066 BCE Magha shukla ashtami
A fierce comet at Pushya October 3067 BCE
Balarama sets off on pilgrimage on Sarasvati on Pushya day Nov. 1,
3067 BCE
Balarama returns from pilgrimage on Sravana day Dec. 12, 3067 BCE
On the day Ghatotkaca was killed moon rose at 2 a.m., Dec. 8, 3067
BCE
Anand M Sharan posted his findings that it could be 2156 bce http://www.engr.mun.ca/~asharan/bihar/MBH2.htmHowever, I have refuted this date based on a web article http://www.boloji.com/astro/00325a.htm However, Sharon refused this saying that what has been refused is 2056 bce and not 2156 bce. He wanted me to post the detailed chronology. I posted that of Patnaik.Aareni does not believe that Krishna was born in Rohini. He thinks it could be Abhijit.Kak has also posted his views on Sulekha.com but the same is not accessible now.hope this helps,Kishore patnaik
"