Analysis & Criticism: 3067 BCE as the year of Mahabharata War, Part – 8 of 10

Prof. Achar and his testing of Raghavan’s date of 3067 BC for the year of MBH War – Part-8

In this part, I will analyze observations (8), (9) and (10) of Achar.

All 3 observations are related to Bhishma Nirvana. Achar consider them critical for determining the timing/year of MBH War. Since I have identified ~23 specific observations related to Bhishma Nirvana, it is critical for a reader to understand that Achar has simply IGNORED ~20 observations related to Bhishma Nirvana.


(8) Bhisma passed on the day of (or one day after) Winter solstice, after lying on the bed of arrows for 58 nighs.

This very observation from MBH text, considered critical by Achar FALSIFIES year 3067 BC. According to the day proposed by Achar/Raghavan, Bhishma passed away on 17 January 3066 BC. The day was 4 days after the day of winter solstice and not ‘on the day of winter solstice’ or ‘one day after winter solstice’ as required by MBH statement. The day of winter solstice was 13 Jan 3067 BC.

And per this timeline of Achar/Raghavan, Bhishma was only on the bed of arrows for 46/47 nights and not for 58 nights, as alluded by this MBH text. This also FALSIFIES year 3067 BC.


(9) Either 1/3 of Paksha or 1/3 of Month of Magha was expired at thetime of Bhishma Nirvana

This MBH reference when interpreted may mean that day of BhishmaNirvana was Magha S 4, Magha K 4 or Magha S 8.

The day proposed by Achar = 17 Jan 3066 BC does fall on Magha S 8 and thus would corrobrate, in principle this MBH reference. So why did I not include this reference as corroborating 3067 BC? The reason is in validating one reference of MBH War (related to Bhishma Nirvana), Achar/Raghavan had to ignore non-corroboration of 22 other references related to same incident.. namely Bhishma Nivana.

So, while lunar day, per proposal of Achar/Raghavan, may match for 3067 BC, duration of Bhishma lying on bed of arrows or timing of BhishmaNivana per its coincidence with day of (+1) Winter solstice do not match!

So why Achar/Raghavan feel compelled to keep Bhishma waiting for 4 days, beyond the day of Winter solstice. THE ANSWER IS THE VERY NEXT –INTERPOLATED–BY ACHAR’S OWN ADMISSION-MBH REFERENCE.


(10) Also quotes interpolated reference and claims that this single reference is sufficient to get to exact date of MBH War.. but nowhere explains how one goes about doing it. The reference he mentions is (interpolated even by his admission) is that Bhishma passed away on the day of winter solstice when Moon was near Rohini and Magha S 8.

Achar thinks (and writes) that this single reference was sufficient to come up with a date for MBH War! The reality is far from the truth. Multiple other MBH researchers have shown duration of 58 days and Magha S 8 (e.g. Holay, Gupta, Vartak) for their proposed timeline. Thus it is imporant for a reader to understand that no unique date or year can be derived from this —interpolated—observation.

Even more critical, at closer examination one may realize that this —so called interpolated obseration.. is not providing any indepedant information.. since Magha S 8 also means ‘Moon in Rohini’. In addition —interpolated or not… whoever made/wrote/inserted this observation had in his mind, first day of Margashirsha (Kartika Amavasya) as the first day of MBH War, unlike the assertion of Achar/Raghavan)…since 30 days of Margashirsha + 30 days of Pausha + 8 days of Magha make it 68, and Bhishma fell on 10th day of War and thus was on the bed of arrows for 58 days…..AT LEAST THIS WAS THE LOGIC IN THE BACKGROUND OF WHOEVER INSERTED THIS REFERENCE.

On the other hand, Achar/Raghavan propose Margashirsha S 11 (and not Amavasya) as the first day of War. (BTW their proposal for first day of war is FALSIFIED by 30+ observations (simple observations of lunar tithi, phase and positions) of MBH text (chapter 8 of my book).

So in one breath, Achar accepts this observation, but not the underlying logic of the person who created this observation. All the fun!

To be continued….


One thought on “Analysis & Criticism: 3067 BCE as the year of Mahabharata War, Part – 8 of 10

  1. Pingback: Heavy Bakwas & Bogus Astronomy | Nilesh Nilkanth Oak

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s