Talk:Mahabharata

Edit request from Kalpathyram, 13 September 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Puranic literature presents genealogical lists associated with the Mahabharata narrative. The evidence of the Puranas is of two kinds. Of the first kind, there is the direct statement that there were 1015 (or 1050) years between the birth of Parikshit (Arjuna's grandson) and the accession of Mahapadma Nanda, commonly dated to 382 BCE, which would yield an estimate of about 1400 BCE for the Bharata battle.[1] However, this would imply improbably long reigns on average for the kings listed in the genealogies.[2] Of the second kind are analyses of parallel genealogies in the Puranas between the times of Adhisimakrishna (Parikshit's great-grandson) and Mahapadma Nanda. Pargiter accordingly estimated 26 generations by averaging 10 different dynastic lists and, assuming 18 years for the average duration of a reign, arrived at an estimate of 850 BCE for Adhisimakrishna, and thus approximately 950 BCE for the Bharata battle[3]

Kali Yuga (Devanāgarī: कलियुग [kəli juɡə], lit. "age of (the male demon) Kali", or "age of vice") is the last of the four stages that the world goes through as part of the cycle of yugas described in the Indian scriptures. The other ages are Satya Yuga, Treta Yuga and Dvapara Yuga. The duration and chronological starting point in human history of Kali Yuga has given rise to different evaluations and interpretations. According to one of them, the Surya Siddhanta, Kali Yuga began at midnight (00:00) on 18 February 3102 BCE[4] in the proleptic Julian calendar, or 23 January 3102 BC in the proleptic Gregorian calendar. This date is also considered by many Hindus to be the day that Krishna left earth to return to his abode. Most interpreters of Hindu scriptures believe that earth is currently in Kali Yuga[5]. ^ 1. A.D. Pusalker, History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol I, Chapter XIV, p.273 ^ 2. FE Pargiter, Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, p.180. He shows estimates of the average as 47, 50, 31 and 35 for various versions of the lists. ^ 3.Pargiter, op.cit. p.180-182

^ 4. The Induand the Rg-Veda, Page 16, By Egbert Richter-Ushanas, ISBN 8120814053 ^ 5. The Holy Science, by Jnanavatar Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri, Yogoda Sat-Sanga Society of India, 1949

Kalpathyram (talk) 05:56, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I've cancelled out the direct request; as it said, This template may only be used when followed by a specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".. If discussions resultt in such a specific request, please use another {{edit semi-protected}}. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  03:07, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

add info

http://bombay.indology.info/mahabharata/statement.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.117.211.196 (talk) 10:41, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request: new versions

There are three recent Mahabharata versions that should be added.

One is the full English translation by the author Ashok Banker. His own page should also be updated. Another is an English condensation by the author Sharon Maas: Sons of Gods, the Mahabharata Retold, working under the pen name Aruna Sharan. Sharon's page should also be updated. A third is a derivative work: Palace of Illusions by Chritra Banerjee Divakaruni. This is a novel based on the Mahabharata: it is the first person narrative of one of the female characters, Draupadi (Panchaali), telling the Mahabharata story from her viewpoint. All of these authors have Wikipedia pages. I am reluctant to add them myself due to Conflict of Interest: I am Sharon Maas.

Thank you, Arunadasi (talk) 13:08, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Greek influence on the Mahabarata story

It is important to speak to the similarities and coencidences found between the stories and characters in Homer's Iliad and Odyssey to the two Indian epics the Mahabharata and the Ramayana.

This subject has been skirted by most scholars in the past to avoid the wrath of criticism from generally India based Hindu scholars. But for the Wikipedia to be fact based, this subject must be adressed - who wrote it, why it was written, when was it written and does it refelct Indian culture and society of the time.

1. Chariots in Mahabharata (Technology deficit) Indian warfare of the time based on archeological evidence collected in reputable museums (Delhi, Patna and Kolkata museums) suggests that India did not have the technology of chariot warfare. The only chariot or Ratha in India is found in Puri, Orissa in the Ratha Yatra festival and it is a very crude hand pulled contraption. However, this technology was used by Greeks, Egyptians and Romans of the same period and even before and this must have been known to Indian writers.

If you look at the two paintings in the Wikepedia page showing the use of chariots, it is clear that if a chariot was built to these specifications, no horse would be able to pull it, let alone move quickly for warfare. This is not the case for paintings and bas releif found in Egypt or Greece of much older antecendence that show a workable chariot technology. In fact the second painting on the Wikepedia page shows the warriors wearing Mughal clothes and head dresses; which makes the picture more ridiculous. In essence there really was not this level of warfare technology in India during the period of the Mahbharata.

2. Timing of the texts (why was it written) The two epics in India seem to surface only after the visit of Alexander to the subcontinent and the revelation of Greek culture to Indian writers, including the writings of Homer, Pluto and Socrates.

The timing also needs to be reviewed in the local context in India. At the time of Alexander's visit, Brahmanism or the core tenet of Hinduism of four casts including Priests, Warriors, Traders and Untouchables was on its way out because of the influence of Buddhism. This may explain the reason for writing a new text to revitalize the basic tenets of Hinduism and reestablish the caste system which recognized the superirotiy of Brhamins over Buddhist monks who could be anyone including women. This would answer why the text was wirtten and why it would would have a very nebulous origin - written by Vyasa with the help of Ganesha a Hindu God of mixed animal and human form (similar to Horus in Egypt).

The idea perpetrated that the text always existed or that it has devine origin is to completely shutter any debate or questioning by the general public, an Indian tradition which has been mantained to this day by India based intellectuals of Hindu origin.

3. Karna The character of Karna is suspiciuosly close to Achilles the hero of Homer's Odyssey - Karna is an invincible warrior, born of the Sun god and a mortal woman Kunti. No one can vanquish Karna except in an unchivalrous manner as Achilles was hunted down. Karna's chariot is ensnared in sand or mud and as he tries to salvage his chariot he is hunted down by Arjuna in an unchivalrous manner. The problem with this story is that chariots were never used in warfare in India and the story seems to be a version of actual events recorded in an Egyptian bas relief of an acutal war where Hittite chariots carrying pairs of warriors bogged down in the sand in northenr Egypt and were encricled by lighter Egyptian chariots carrying one person, led by the army of Ramases.

4. Arjuna shooting his arrow through the eye of a wheel

This event is baed on the story when Odyssey returns home and has to prove to Penelope that he is truely her husband Odyessey. He not only strings a bow but shoots the arrow through a very difficult target. The Greek story is a credible because at that time Greeks used a compound bow; which is very difficult to string and only few people could string a particular bow.

However according to arceholgoical evidence the Indian subcontinent did not have compound bow or even long bows. There is no arcehological evidence at all in Delhi, Patna or Kolkata museums that indicates that such a technolgoy existed for warfare in India. Most wepaons used were the Axe, the javelin and similar crude weapons. The idea of fighting with bows and arrows was lifted from a foreign text. Also no Indian temple of the puruported period of writing of the Mahbharata shows anything resembling this sort of warfare, while Egyptian, Greek and Roman temples are full of bas relief which confirm the technolgies mentioned in Homer's text for warfare. In esence there is no physical evidence or corroboration of the core battle scenario described in the Mahabhrata. At best it is just an Indian version of various foreign stories and none of it is local event with the inspiration being the Iliad and the Odyssey.

4. Swaymvara

The story of a woman chosing a husband from many suitors based on their demonstrated level of valour seems to be lifted from Penelope's story. Odyssey had to fend off many suitors of Penelope upon his return to Greece by demonstrating his valour. This is an entirely credible story corroborated by historical records of Greek women's status in society including stories about the conduct of Alexander's mother, who was a historical person. This was not the case for Indian women and the story of Swaymavar which repeats in the Ramayan seems just that a story albeit a foreign one. There is no evidence of this custom being practiced by Royal families anywhere in India or any other families in the betrothal of tehir daughters. Again a Greek story repeated verbatim in Indian script.

According to historical research, daughters in India were either given to temples as Deva Dasi for work in the temple or betrothed to the highest bidder in a process called Kanay dan (literally giving away a daughter) or same as Go dan (giving away a cow). Women and children were traditionally treated as commodities in ancient India; which continues to this day and manifests itslef in child labour and trafficing of women across modern India as we write this article. The idea of Swayamvar is a make believe fairy tale based on foreign customs.

5. Physical evidence of the Mahabhrata story - paintings, temple carvings, rock cut carvings

Most of the physical evidence that can be connected to the story seem to be of recent lineage. The freize in the walls of Angkor Wat or no older than 10 th or 11 th AD. The painted manuscript on the Wikepedia page of Mahabharata is around 10 th century AD. Even the places in India such as caves where apprently Pandavas had slept turn out to be old Buddhist rock cut caves which were forcibly converted to Hindu themes. For example the caves of Ajanta and Ellora were Buddhist caves which were converted later on to Hindu themes.

Most of the physical evidence such as paitings and pictures or temple carvings in India that may depict the Mahabhrata and Remayana story are extreemly recent. Majority were created after the arrival of muslim rulers in India to possibly create arceholgoical evidence of the Hindu caste system in an attempt to prevent mass exodus of the lower castes away from Hinduism and also possibly to prevent the construction of mosques in holy places.

"What reliable sources - who is a relaible source - the one who screams the most. If you can challenge any of the specifics of the items 1 to 5 then say so. Who on earth is a reliable source on a document which does not have an author and is purported to be written by an elephant headed man."

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.104.11 (talk) 18:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC) 

You seem to have provided the reasons why this doesn't belong here - it hasn't been discussed among scholars. Please read WP:NOR. We can only add information to the article based on what we call 'reliable sources' as defined in WP:VERIFY and WP:RS. And this page is not an appropriate venue to discuss the issue, it is not a talk forum but a page where we discuss improvements to the article based on what reliable sources say about the topic. Dougweller (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 January 2012

Please replace the word "EPIC" with "Religious Text" > When Bible and Quaran aren't called epics ....Why you Mention > Mahabharatham and Ramayana as an Epic.Its against our Religion.Its our > Holy Thing.Please remove epic in all the content related to this.Please > Mention it as Religious Text.its Provocating our feelings >

62.189.77.47 (talk) 05:27, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

N Not done, it's not supposed to be offensive, it's what they're known as, see Indian epic poetry--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)