Can ‘Tamasic sceptics’ of my timeline handle the inferences of their own skepticism?

Welcome to introduction of few Tamasic sceptics.


One ‘BRF Peter’ is going round and round in Tamasic skeptical circle on many (self-confused) points of Mahabharata evidence.

Of course one of his points is that ‘Krishna went to Hastinapur on the peace mission, at the end of Sharad season and during the lunar month of Kartika’


Shri Prabhakar Phadnis prefers to stick to timing of Krishna leaving on peace mission to Hastinapur at the end of ‘Sharad season’.  He does not insist on the identification/designation for the ‘lunar month of Kartika’


Recently one of the readers of my book – Shri Ganesh Puranik also wrote and quoted few specific references of Mahabharata text.

The question/concern/objection they have raised is based on few stray references of Mahabharata text.

Let’s analyze where their objections fall, based on my framework for knowledge production.

They quote selective reference(s) of Mahabharata text which appear to conflict with my proposed timeline.  This is a problem of ‘irrational‘ thinking. To make it worse, they choose not to test the consequences of their selective claims.

Thus inaction sets in. They are incapable or unwilling (not exactly sure which one) to explore the consequences of the specific references they quote, by testing them and reaching some conclusions and to see if even they would agree with their own conclusions.

This behavior falls into quadrant (3) – Tamasic sceptic.

(For definitions and characteristics of behaviors for each of the 4 quadrants, please read..

Traits of 4 quadrants

(To be fair, Shri Prabhakar Phadnis has indeed ran many simulated scenarios and also acknowledged the ‘futility’ in his words of ‘reconciling’ number of these Mahabharata text references.  Unfortunately, in spite of his simulations and his inferences, he sticks to his (imagined) objection to my timeline.  I may mention that he does accept/recognize/endorse my work on AV observation and its corresponding conclusions).

What is the selective (and arbitrary) objection of these individuals/readers?

It can be summarized under the heading…

Season of Kartika & timing of Mahabharata War

Let’s look at what their argument is…

Shri Ganesh Puranik writes..

Mahabharata Book 5 Chapter 81
6 [व]
ततॊ वयपेते तमसि सूर्ये विमल उद्गते
मैत्रे मुहूर्ते संप्राप्ते मृद्व अर्चिषि दिवाकरे
7 कौमुदे मासि रेवत्यां शरद अन्ते हिमागमे
सफीतसस्यमुखे काले कल्यः सत्त्ववतां वरः
8 मङ्गल्याः पुण्यनिर्घॊषा वाचः शृण्वंश च सूनृताः
बराह्मणानां परतीतानाम ऋषीणाम इव वासवः

“Vaisampayana continued, ‘The night having passed away, a bright sun arose in the east. The hour called Maitra set in, and the rays of the sun were still mild. The month was (Kaumuda Kartika) under the constellation Revati. It was the season of dew, Autumn having departed. The earth was covered with abundant crops all around.


Here The month of Kartika is starting with Hemant (after Sharad ritu is over). Margashirsha would start in the middle of Hemant. Margashirsha being Agrahayana will start in the middle of Hemant.

While likes of BRF Peter and Shri Puranik insist on interpreting ‘Kaumde masi ‘ (my translation – month of lotuses) as that of lunar month of Kartika, Shri Phadnis does not insist on the designation/identification of lunar month of Kartika.

All three of them insist on this time of Krishna visiting Hastinapur, on peace mission, at the end of Sharad season.

Shri Ganesh Puranik has also quoted one additional reference from the Mahabharata text that, in his mind (and per translation of Krishna Mohan Ganguli), refers to lunar month of Kartika occurring after the end of Sharad season.

Shri Ganesh Puranik writes…

Also elsewhere there is clearer reference to the Kartika being part of Hemant (or at least after Sharad)

The Mahabharata, Book 12: Santi Parva: Apaddharmanusasana Parva: Section CLXXI

Brahmanas. Every year (on the days of full moon) of the months of Ashadha and Magha, a large number of Brahmanas used to receive from the Rakshasa chief, after proper honours, the best kinds of food that they desired. Especially, on the day of full moon in the month of Kartika, after the expiry of autumn, the king used to give unto the Brahmanas much wealth of diverse kinds, including gold, silver, jewels, gems, pearls, diamonds of great value, stones of the lapis lazuli variety, deer-skins, and skins of the Ranku deer.

तासु ते पूजिता राज्ञा निषण्णा द्विजसत्तमाः | व्यराजन्त महाराज नक्षत्रपतयो यथा ||१३||
ततो जाम्बूनदाः पात्रीर्वज्राङ्का विमलाः शुभाः | वरान्नपूर्णा विप्रेभ्यः प्रादान्मधुघृताप्लुताः ||१४||
तस्य नित्यं तथाषाढ्यां माघ्यां च बहवो द्विजाः | ईप्सितं भोजनवरं लभन्ते सत्कृतं सदा ||१५||
विशेषतस्तु कार्त्तिक्यां द्विजेभ्यः सम्प्रयच्छति | शरद्व्यपाये रत्नानि पौर्णमास्यामिति श्रुतिः ||१६|| </b?
सुवर्णं रजतं चैव मणीनथ च मौक्तिकम् | वज्रान्महाधनांश्चैव वैडूर्याजिनराङ्कवान् ||१७||

I want to thank Shri Ganesh Puranik for bringing it to my attention this reference of Mahabharata text.  I was not aware of this reference. 

For the context, Bhishma is telling Yudhishthir of a historical incident of the past (past with respect to the time of Mahabharata war itself, however, we do not know how far in the past with respect to timing of Mahabharata war)

Gita press translation of this Shlok states that the season of Sharad ended with the full moon of Kartika (as opposed to Krishna Mohan Ganguli translation that full moon of Kartika occurred after the end of Sharad season).

We will explore the implications of all translations.

My response….

(1) Claim for timing of Krishna, visiting Hastinapur on peace mission’ at the end of Sharad season, based on few stray references, is rather decisively falsified by crisp and clean chronology of Bhishma Nirvana based on 6 specific references of Mahabharata text.  Readers may read it here…

(2) Leaving aside the exact timing (designation/identification of lunar month) of Krishna’s visit to Hastinapur, the translation of ‘कौमुदे मासि’ as ‘Kartika masa’ is wrong, incorrect, false, unjustified (unless backed by other evidence), etc.

(3) However, let’s for the sake of argument, assume that the claims (translation or insistence or claim of Lunar month of Kartika during the season of Hemanta is true.

What would be the timeframe that would lead us to if lunar month of Kartika has to coincide with the first part of Hemant season (as claimed by Shri Ganesh Puranik)

Again, the phenomenon of ‘Precession of Equinoxes’ is our friend.

Here is what we find…..

(1) Full moon of Kartika coinciding with the end of Hemant season (day of winter solstice) would occur around 4138 CE (some 2000 years in future!)

(2) Full moon of Kartika coinciding with the middle of Hemant season would occur around 2209 CE (i.e. essentially in our times).  Anyone checking a copy of current Panchang can easily verify this fact.

(3) Full moon of Kartika coinciding with the beginning of Hemant season would occur around 107 CE (some 2000 years before our times/present)

And while we are at it, let’s find out the timing when lunar month of Kartika would have coincided with the middle of Sharad season (since few other ‘Tamasic sceptics’ do make such argument for the timing of Mahabharata war and then run like hell, without bothering to check the implications of their casual and careless outburst!)

(4) Full moon of Kartika coinciding with the middle of Sharad season would occur around 2200 BCE

If indeed these sceptics trust the translations of these Mahabharata references, then they can indeed move themselves from their ‘inaction‘ and lead to ‘growth of knowledge’ if they propose…

(1) Alternate timeline of their own effort or one of their choice from more than 130+ claims and then test such claim against ‘ALL‘ relevant evidence of Mahabharata text.


(2) Alternate translations that would corroborate my proposed timeline of 5561 BCE (originally proposed by Dr. P V Vartak) for the year of Mahabharata war.


(3) Potential transliteration/transcription/ translation/transposition or insertion/interpolation nature of these specific Mahabharata references.

This is how they can transform themselves from being  ‘Tamasic sceptics’ to ‘Dharmic Superstars’.






3 thoughts on “Can ‘Tamasic sceptics’ of my timeline handle the inferences of their own skepticism?

  1. Your problem Shri. Oak is that you insist on being right! The necessity of ‘naturalness’ of the sequence of events must outweigh any astronomical calculations. If you want to claim that Krishna Shishtai took place well in the monsoon period and the War itself started before end of monsoon, you have to provide ‘natural’ justifications for why it should be so. There was no reason whatsoever for starting such a major war before rains ended, ground dried, soldiers became free from cultivation work. Krishna clearly says that the right time has arrived to Karna. The war was fought by a very large number of prominent Maharathis. Bhishma, Drona, and all others were not idiots to start the war in rain! Astronomy is not the Be All and End All. If your astronomical interpretations lead to such absurd conclusions about the time of war, something is seriously wrong with the Astronomy! Bhishma himself says that he spent 58 painful nights on bed of arrows. No one in the entire text has contradicted it. If you stretch it to 95+ days based on astronomy, it needs to be further researched. Why, oh why, Vyasa has not called Bhishma a fool or a senile one if his statement was so hopelessly wrong? No. Bhishma and Vyasa are right and you are wrong. If you refer to my view about ‘Sharadante’ mention about my above stated reasoning also. Otherwise you are not doing justice to me.

    • Shri Phadnis writes…

      “If you refer to my view about ‘Sharadante’ mention about my above stated reasoning also. Otherwise you are not doing justice to me.”

      Fair point.

      I will write a blog note and state reasoning of Shri Phadnis behind ‘Sharadante’ too. I will also quote the relevant references (Krishna stating land is dry, no mud, water clear or even Uluka stating more or less the same) before the war.

    • Regarding your other charge… “Your problem Shri. Oak is that you insist on being right”

      If true, I would consider my behavior extremely reprehensible.

      What specific act of mine made you state such a thing?

      I have admitted my errors, mistakes and much more on numerous occasions. I have made many mistakes in the past, and will make many more in future.

      Specifically, based on our interaction, I can point out few…

      (1) My claim for corroboration of Mars, Venus, Mercury together on the last day of the war. I had claimed based on they being seen on the western horizon.

      You pointed the error in translation (west vs. east) and I wrote a note stating it and its implications.

      (2) I had claimed evidence for each of the 6 days (again my claim based on other Mahahbharata evidence for Bhishma-Yudhi samvad length of 6 days).

      You pointed out that while you are not necessarily objecting to my claim of duration of 6 days, I can not truly claim specific evidence for each of the 6 days. This was based on specifics of Nakul asking question to Bhishma on one of these days.

      This meant I could not claim specific evidence for all 6 days but only 5. I admitted to it and wrote a blog article about it.

      (3) ‘Fall of Abhijit’ – I had interpreted it to mean ‘Abhijit’ went to the vana (in my book). Based on extensive discussions with you and very much as a result of that discussion, I realized that the Devi’ identification is better suited with that of nakshatra Dhanishtha (rather than Abhijit).

      I tested my ‘Fall of Abhijit’ based on this modified assumptions and posted my outcome on my blog. I acknowledged your contribution. In fact, when I revise my book and mention my improved contribution (with Devi= Dhanishtha), I still plan on retaining my original, albeit inferior (Devi = Abhijit) interpretation.

      Because I see the value for readers in seeing how I went from one interpretation to another. This is all consistent with the method of scientific growth and growth of knowledge. There is nothing to be ashamed of in being wrong. In fact I insist on storing such efforts (at least mine) for the benefit of future researchers.

      And I truly look forward to the day when another researcher will propose a day/year for either Mahabharata or Ramayana, that would make it a better proposal than 5561 BCE.

      Where comes the question of me insisting on being right!

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s