Analysis & Criticism: 3067 BCE as the year of Mahabharata War, Part – 9 of 10

Prof. Achar and his testing of Raghavan’s date of 3067 BC for the year of MBH War – Part-9

In this segment, I discuss consequences of MBH observation related to Tirthayatra of Balarama. Achar considers this observation not only critical in determining the timing of MBH War, but also quotes it repeatedly in showing how proposals of other researchers are disqualified due to this observation. I encourage readers to read this post of mine, do their own investigation and reach their own conclusion(s).

Brief Background for this observation: After Krishna returned from unsuccessful peace mission, from Hastinapur, Balarama arrived at the Pandava camp. Balarama decided not to participate in the War and left Pandava camp and began tirthayatra of Sarasvati. He heard about the updates of War including that Bhima was soon to fight with Duryodhana (so he heard the news on 18th day of War) and balarama rushed to witness this fight between his disciples.. (Club fight and club students!) Bhima and Duryodhan on the last and 18th day of War.

In this context, Balarama makes a comment that…

(11) Balarama began his Tirthyatra on Pushya nakshatra and after 42 days, ended it on Shravana nakshatra. Balarama returned to Kurukshetra to witness club-battle b/w Bhima and Duryodhana.. on the last and 18th day of the War.

This MBH reference (from Shalya parva) states that Balarama began his Tirthyatra on Pushya (moon in Pushya) and after 42 days, ended on Shravana (moon in Shravana).

Recall reference #2 of Achar, when Krishna was in Hastinapur and Moon was in Pushya. Since Balarama left Pandava camp, after Krishna’s return from Hastinapur (and since Balarama also began his yatra on Pushya)….We can conclude that at least a month (lunar month from Pushya to pushya ..27.3 days) went by before Balarama began.

Pushya and Shravana are separated by 13 nakshatras in between (and 15 nakshatras including both of them), thus 1.5 rounds of moon through them provide a range of 13x 3 = 39 to 15 x 3 = 45 days. I am writing this calculation to show that any nakshatras separated by 13 of them in between will end with similar scenario of 42 days, if 1.5 rounds of moon are considered.

If you found above calculations confusing.. just remember the point I am trying to make. The point is this. Anyone claiming this observation to predict or corrborate their proposed year of MBH war, must show that Balarama left on Pushya, arrived on Shravana, spend 42 days traveling AND BALARMA WAS PRESENT TO WITNESS THE FIGHT BETWEEN BHIMA AND DURYODHANA ON THE 18 AND LAST DAY OF WAR + OTHER MBH OBSERATIONS SHOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH TIMELINE FOR BALARAMA YATRA SO PROPOSED.

All observations -30+ related to positions, phases and Tithi of moon contradict timeline proposed by Achar/Raghavan.

Worse, this very observation contradicts timeline of Achar/Raghvan, let’s see WHY AND HOW.

Moon was near Pushya on 1 Nov 3067 BC .

(War began, per Achar/Raghavan) on 22 Nov 3067 BC and lasted for 18 days.. i.e it ended on 9 December 3067 BC). This scenario creates a BIG PROBLEM for above observation. What is it?

In order to match, 42 days and nakshatra Shravana of above observation, the day of Balrama return from Saraswati Tirthayatra was 12 December 3067 BC and moon near Sharavana…3 FULL DAYS AFTER THE LAST DAY OF MBH WAR.
(BTW, these dates above are quoted by Achar).

Thus Balarama of Achar/Raghavan could not attend the club fight between Bhima and Duryodhana. While Achar may be ok with it and may not find anything wrong if Balarama missed this club fight between Bhima and Duryodhana, MBH text and MBH knowers would have problem with Balarama NOT ATTENDING THE FIGHT.

Since people feel offended when ‘hand waving’ is termed ‘hand waving’, I will use another more appropriate analogy. The analogy is of a girl/woman wearing extremely skimpy one piece miniskirt/dress.

Imagine the dilemma of this girl/woman. If she tries to hide her upper body parts, area of her upper legs is visible, if she tries to hide her upper legs, area of her upper body parts is visible.

After this visual/mental distraction.. please let’s get back to Balarama Tirthaytra.

(1) If Achar makes Balarama begin his Tirthayatra 3 days earlier than his prposed timing (say 29 Oct 3067 BC instead of 1 Nov 3067 BC)…Balrama no longer begins on Pushya and no longer ends on Shravana, but he can still travel for 42 days and still attend fight between Bhima and Duryodhana…..as required by MBH text.

(2) If Balarama leaves on Pushya (1 Nov 3067 BC) but cuts short his trip by 3 days, then he can attend fight of Bhima and Duryodhana, but then he can no longer have his trip for 42 days and must return 3 nakshatra before Shravana!

(3) Achar/Raghavan decided on making sure Balarama met conditions of above observation (Leaving on Pushya, arriving on Shravana and total duragion of 42 days) and not worrying whether he attended Bhima-Duryodhana fight or NOT.

(4) Of course the most appropriate option for a girl/woman in this case is to change into another appropriate dress ASAP (or in case of Achar/Raghavan…realize that 3067 BC is not doing the job it suppose to do and give it up ASAP)

So.. Not only this observation failed to corroborate 3067 BC, but also FALSIFIED 3067 BC.

There is one more observation (#12) of Achar which I will address in my future post.

To be continued….

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Analysis & Criticism: 3067 BCE as the year of Mahabharata War, Part – 9 of 10

  1. Pingback: Balarama’s Tirthayatra of Sarasvati | Nilesh Nilkanth Oak

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

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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