How many Vyaasas are there?

[N.R.Joshi]

 

August 31, 2014

 

Respected Scholars, Namaskat!

 

How many VyAsas were there?

(1) According to my understanding Krishna DvaipAyana VyAsa composed the original epic Mahabharata (Jaya).

 

(2) BAdarAyan VyAsa composed Uttara MimAmsA

 

(3 )The third VyAsa composed VyAsabhAs’ya on Yoga sUtras. In VyAsaBhAs’ya the Buddhist doctrine and customs have been very severely dealt with by the author. This VyAsa is then certainly different from the first two VyAsas.

 

(4) Which VyAsa composed BhAgavata PurANa ? Some scholars believe that Bhagavat Purana was composed in 11th century AD. If that is true then he is another Vyaasa.

 

(5) Who is Veda VyAsa? The same as the first VyAsa?

 

Please help me to clear my confusion. Thank. N. R. Joshi

____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
FixYourBloodSugar.com

[Nagaraj Paturi]

There are two views with regard to this:

 

1. Traditional Indian

 

2. Modern-western

 

Even according to 1, Vyasa of Yogasutra bhashya is not considered to be the same as the Vedavyasa to whom all other works mentioned by you are attributed.

 

The word vyāsa means classifier. Vēdavyāsa means classifier of vēdas.

 

Bhāgavata purāṇa is included among aśṭādaśa purāṇas.

 

According to traditional view, Vēdavyāsa is the author of all the aśṭādaśa purāṇas, Mahābhārata and Brahmasūtras.

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Dr.Raghavendra.Bhat]

Respected Dr Nagaraj Paturi ji,

It is very nice, 

But what about 2.(2. Modern-western)?

We are very grateful if your good self will explain the same with textual references..

Dhanyavaadah.

warm regards,

Dr Raghavendra Bhat
+91 8956610988

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Modern -western researchers give the dates which are centuries apart for various books that are believed to be authored by Veda Vyāsa.

 

As a result, they consider the authors of all these books to be different from each other.

 

 

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Vedavyasa with the help of his four disciples classified the Vedas in the late Dwapara yuga. To my understanding the Vayu Mahapurana says that before the classification of the Vedas, all the Vedas and the Puranas were together was a composite called the Yajurveda. After the classification of the four Vedas, the puranas were given the status of Veda by calling it the fifth Veda.

It was Vedavyasa, who composed the Mahabharata after the passing away of the Pandavas and obviously it was composed in the beginning of the Kali yuga. After writing the Mahabharata the sage Vedavyasa wrote the Bhagavata purana on the advice of Narada and this means the Bhagavata Purana was also written in the beginning of the Kali yuga and it cannot be a part of the Ashtadasha Mahapuranas.

The Bhagavata purana which says "Krishnastu Bhagavan Swayam" is considered the highest of the Puranas. The other Bhagavata forming the part of the Ashtadasha Mahapuranas is obviously the Devi Bhagavata or the Mahabhagavata purana.

Regards,

[sadasivamurty rani]

According to Sri Vishnu Mahapurana and also According to Devi Bhavagavata Mahapurana in every Dvapara yuga of every Caturyuga one Veda Vyasa is born. The list of the Vedavyasas of the present Kalpa as found in the Sri Vishnu Mahapurana is as follows:

 श्रीपराशर उवाच।

वेद्द्रुमस्य मैत्रेय शाखाभेदास्सहस्रश:। न शक्तो विस्तरात् वक्तुम्॥ संक्षेपेण श्रुणुष्व तम्।

द्वापरे द्वापरे विष्णु: व्यासरूपी महामुने। वेदमेकं सुबहुधा कुरुते जगतो हित:। 

वीर्यं तेजो बलं चाल्पं मनुष्याणामवेक्ष्य च। हिताय सर्वभूतानां वेदभेदाऩ् करोति स:।

ययासौ कुरुते त्वा वेदमेकं पृथक् प्रभु:। वेदव्यासाभ्धाना तु सा च मूर्तिर्मधुद्विष:।

यस्मिन्मन्वन्तरे व्यसा ये ये स्युस्तान्निबोध मे। यथा च भेदश्शाखानं व्यसेन क्रियते मुने॥

अष्टाविंशतिकृत्वो वै वेदो व्यस्तो महर्षिभि:। वैवस्वतेऽन्तरे तस्मिन्द्वापरेषु पुन: पुन:। 

वेदव्यासा व्यतीता ये ह्यष्टाविंशति सत्तम! चतुर्धा यै: कृतो वेदो द्वापरेषु पुन: पुन:॥

द्वापरे प्रथेमे व्यस्स्वयं वेद: स्वयंभुवा (१)। द्वितीये द्वापरे चैव वेदव्यास: प्रजापति:(२)।

तृतीये चोशना (३) व्यासश्चतुर्थे च बृहस्पति: (४)। सविता(५) पंचमे व्यास: षष्ठे मृत्यु:(६) स्मृत: प्रभु:।।

सप्तमे च तथैवेन्द्रो (७) वसिष्ठश्च(८) अष्टमे स्मृत:। सारस्वतश्च (९) नवमे त्रिधामा (१०) स्मृत:॥

एकादशे तु त्रिशिखो (११) भरद्वाजस्तत: (१२) पर:। त्रयोदशे चान्तरिक्षो(१३) वर्णी (१४) चापि चतुर्दशे॥

त्रय्यारुण: (१५) पंचदशे षोडशे तु धनंजय:(१६)। ऋतंजय:(१७) सप्तदशे तदूर्ध्वं च जय: (१८) स्मृत:।

ततो व्यासो भरद्वाज: (१९) भरद्वाजाच गौतम:(२०)। गौतमादुत्तरो व्यासो हर्य्यात्मा(२१) योऽभिधीयते॥

अथ हर्य्यात्मनोऽन्ते च स्मृतो वाजश्रवा (२२) मुनि:। सोमशुष्कायण: (२३) तस्मात्त्रुणबिन्दु: (२४) इति स्मृत:॥

ऋक्षोऽभूद्भार्गव:तस्माद्वाल्मीकिर्योभिधीयते(२५)। तस्मादस्मत्पिता शक्ति: (२६) व्यासस्तस्मादहं मुने (२७)॥

जातूकर्ण: अभवन्मत्त:कृष्णद्वैपायनस्तत:(२८)। अष्टाविंशतिरित्येते वेदव्यासा: पुरातना:॥

एको वेदश्चतुर्था तु तै: कृतो द्वापरादिषु। भविष्ये द्वापरे चापि द्रौणिर्व्यासो भविष्यति।

व्यतीते मम पुत्रेऽस्मिऩ् कृष्णद्वैपायने मुने॥

There is a slight variation in the names of these 28 Vedavyasas in Srimad Devi Bhagvata Mahapuranam.

I hope this information may be useful in this context. 

Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty

[Nagaraj Paturi]

AadaraNIya Sunilji's words are, as always, good samples of the traditional Indian way of looking at these issues. Dvapara Yuga, Kali Yuga etc. are all part of the 'Indian mythical'/' Indian mythological' cyclic time which is different from 'historical' linear time. 'mythical'/'mythological' and 'historical' are two different ways of looking at the past. Neither is more superior to or more 'correct' than the other.

 

Levi Strauss, the epoch-making cultural anthropologist, in his book 'Myth and Reality' asks his readers to imagine what would be the reaction of myth-believing people, not exposed to what we call 'history', to the 'historical' accounts of the past. He says such people, after hearing the 'historical' accounts of the past would say, "Oh! That is what your mythology says!" Mythology is the myth-believer's history and History is history-believer's mythology.

 

Belief in mythology as the 'real' accounts of the past and belief in the infallibility and inalterability of the myths is not peculiar to traditional Indian society. Plato was such a strong believer in mythology as the 'real' accounts of the past and belief in the infallibility and inalterability of the myths that he wanted to banish poets from his dream commonwealth because of their tendency to alter narrative details of myths in their poetic works. ( Kalidasa's S'akuntala story is an altered version of the S'akuntalopakhyana of Mahabharata. No one sought to banish such people in ancient or medieval India even in their dream proposals .)

 

Even religions which are often described as 'historical' or 'history-centered'  are in fact anchored to myths for the validity of some of their central beliefs.

 

There is a huge amount of modern western scholarship dedicated to make sense of myths / mythology , particularly the mythical way of looking at the past in the disciplines of philosophy, psychology, cultural anthropology, religious studies, literary criticism etc. Prof. Mircea Eliade, the guru and paramaguru of many of the contemporary professors of religious studies focussed on the beauty of the Indian mythological concepts such as cyclic time and went on to show how most of the contemporary western, apparently non-religious theories too are modelled in the lines of the myths of linear time of those societies.

 

Coming to the present point of discussion, one Vedavyasa who classified vedas composing many other works such as Brahma Sutras, Mahapuranas and Mahabharata is a mythological idea and different authors composing different books of that set is a historical idea. Neither of them is more correct than the other. Both are valid within their paradigms. To be aware that they belong to two different paradigms of understanding and not to mix the two paradigms of understanding with each other solves many of the issues of contemporary times.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sunil bhattacharjya]

If Levi Strauss talked about the Chaturyuga system as mythical he was obviously unaware of the astronomical aspect of the Chaturyuga.There is a precessional cycle, where relatively speaking the Pole-star makes a circle, the period of which varies from 22,000 to 26,000 years, the mid-value being 24,000 years. This 24,000 years  cycle is equal to one ascending Chaturyuga of 12,000 years plus another descending cycle of the Chaturuga of 12,000 years. So generally speaking,  there is nothing mythical labout the Chaturyuga cycles. Of course the Shastras say that king is the cause of the kaala and that can alter the yuga period at micro level. The Kali yuga according to the Vishnu purana and the Bhagavata Purana started on the day Lord Krishna passed away. The Mahabharata war took place at the fag-end of the Dwapara yuga as given in the Mahabharata also, in the following verse :

Antare caiva samprapte kali dvaparayo radhut |

Samanta pancake yuddham kuru pandava senayoh ||

Here “antare” means “between” and “iva Samprapte'” means “as if reached”. The verse therefore refers to the war just before the end of the Dwapara yuga and  just before the beginning of the Kali yuga. Several scholars in the past has misunderstood this verse, which led them to think that the Mahabharata war took place in the Kali yuga, whereas the Mahabharata war actually took place towards the end of the Dwapara yuga, i.e., in the ending Sandhyamsha of the Dwapara yuga. Now even though the Kali yuga started in 3102 BCE, the kali could not exert its full force till Yudhishthira was on the Earth as Yudhishthira went for Swargarohan only after 25 years of the start of the Kali yuga, as the Puranic Kali-yuga-rajavrittanta tells us. It is also believed that the virtuous Parikshita also cinstrumental in keeping the Kali's power at bay till he was living , i.e., till the first 25 years of the Kali yuga.

Regards,

[Nagaraj Paturi]

AadaraNIya Sunilji,

 

 

'Levi Strauss called chaturyuga mythical' was not there in my message.

 

Whoever calls chaturyuga mythical, it appears, you want to differ with him. You have your right to your arguments for 'chaturyuga is not mythical' . I just wanted to avoid misquoting.

[Tukaram Bhattiprolu]

  

     Mr.Nanasaheb,

                          I give here under some slokas from Yoga Vasishta where sage Vasishta explaining Rama the truth of samsara

   1. इमं व्यासमुनिं तत्र द्वात्रिंशं संस्मराम्यहम् |
       यथासंभव विज्ञानदृशा संदृश्यमानया ||
   2. द्वादशाल्पधियस्तत्र कुलाकारेहितैः समाः |
       दश सर्वे समाकाराः शिष्टाः कुलविलक्षणाः ||
  
   3. अद्याप्यन्ये भविष्यन्ति व्यासवाल्मीकयस्तथा |
      भृग्वन्गिरः पुलस्त्याश्च तथैवाप्यन्यथैवच ||

   4.  नराः सुरर्षि देवानां गणाःसंभूय भूरिशः |
       उत्पद्यन्ते विलीयन्ते कदाचिच्च पृथक्पृथक् ||
   5.  ब्राह्मी द्वासप्ततिस्त्रेता आसीदस्ति भविष्यति |
       स एवान्यश्च लोकाश्च त्वं चाहंचेति वेद्म्यहम् |
   6. क्रमेणास्य मुनेरित्थं व्यासस्याद्भुत कर्मणः |
      संलक्ष्यतेऽवतारोऽयं दशमो दीर्घदर्शिनः||
   7. अभूम व्यासवाल्मीकियुक्ता वयमनेकशः |
       अभूम वयमेवेमे बहुशश्च पृथक्पृथक् ||
   8. भाव्यमद्याप्यनेनेह ननु वाराष्टकं पुनःपुनः |
      भूयोऽपि भारतं नाम सेतिहासं करिष्यति ||
   9. कृत्वा वेदविभागं च नीत्वानेन कुलप्रथाम्|
      ब्रह्मत्वं च तथा कृत्वा भाव्यं वैदेहमोक्षणं ||
  10. वीतशोकभयः शांतनिर्वाणो गतकल्पनः
       जीवन्मुक्तो जितमना व्यासोऽयमिति वर्णितः||
                                     मुमुक्षुव्यवहारप्रकरणं -तृतीय सर्गात्

[sadasivamurty rani]

Thank you Yadu ji!

Respected scholars! Pranams to all!

This morning I posted the content from the Vishnu Purana. Now I am adding the information  from Srimad Devi Bhagavata Purana also.

द्वापरे प्रथमे व्यस्ता: स्वयं वेदा: स्वयंभुवा (१)। प्रजापतिर्द्वितीये तु द्वापरे व्यासकार्यकृत् (२)॥

तृतीये चोशना (३) व्यासश्चतुर्थे तु बृहस्पति:(४)। पंचमे सविता (५) व्यास: षष्ठे मृत्यु: (६) तथापरे॥

मघवा (७) सप्तमे प्राप्ते वसिष्ठस्त्वष्टमे (८) स्मृत:। सारस्वतस्तु (९) नवमे त्रिधामा (१०) दशमे तथा॥

एकादशेऽथ त्रिवृषो (११) भरद्वाजस्तत:(१२) परम्। त्रयोदशे चान्तरिक्षो (१३) धर्मश्चापि (१४) चतुर्दशे॥

त्रय्यारुणि: (१५) पंचदशे षोडशे तु धनंजय: (१६) । मेधातिथि: (१७) सप्तदशे व्रती (१८) ह्यष्टादशे तथा॥

अत्रि (१९) रेकोनविंशेऽथ गौतमस्तु (२०) तत: परम्। उत्तम (२१) श्चैकविंशेऽथ हर्यात्मा (२२) परिकीर्तित:॥

वेनो  वाजश्रवाश्चैव (२३) सोमोऽमुष्यायणस्तथा (२४)। तृणबिन्दुस्तथा व्यसो (२५) 

भार्गवस्तु(२६) तत: परम्॥ ततश्शक्तिर्जातुकर्ण्य: (२७) कृष्णद्वैपायनस्तत: (२८)॥

अष्टाविंशतिसंख्येयम् कतिथा या मया श्रुता॥

                     - इति देवी भागवते प्रथमस्कन्धे अध्याय: ४

Warm regards,

Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty

On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 9:11 PM, Dr. Yadu Moharir <ymoh...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Thanks Dr Ratni

I was also looking for the exact source.

Yadu

---

From: 'sadasivamurty rani' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bvpar...@googlegroups.com" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 1, 2014 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} How many Vyaasas are there?

[Dr.BVK Sastry (G-Mail-pop)]

Namaste

 

The  information details on  thread  ‘ How many Vyasa’s are there, started by Dr. Narayan Josihi ji  has once again shown the  slippery ground of the construction of history of Indian traditions.  

While the ‘ quotes’ are excellent and sourced to  important works, the meaning of the words and the larger picture does not seem to be any clearer than it was at the beginning !

Here are the reasons for this :

 

a) All the quotes about Vyasa, are inextricably linked to the concept of Yuga concept, the work done in the junction of yugas; and the time scale of ‘Yuga – Kalpa-Manvantara ’,   is not understood in a unanimous way for constructing a ‘ linear time scale’ ,  the basic premise of a  ‘ history of a society  ’. Can one portray a time line of  ‘Vyasa’ ( or in this case Many Vyasas)  that can be reasonably visualized ? Along with the contribution of each named  ‘Vyasa’ ? Hoping repetition is avoided !

 

b) The statement < The list of the Vedavyasas of the present Kalpa as found in the Sri Vishnu Mahapurana is as follows:..  >   leads to further complexity of analysis and comprehension here. With the given ‘ Faith’  understanding that between 6^th to 13^th century , all the Vedantaacharyas  had the ‘  blessing of Veda-Vyasa’ for their commentaries, where does one position ‘Vishnu-Purana’ as a historic document and ‘ Veda-Vyasa-Pramapara’ lineage? 

 

c) A side question:  Does any ‘ Unabridged, edition of Mahabharata’s  contain any reference to Vyasa’s as the ‘Guru-parampara’ of  ‘Suta-Puranikas’? Most likely, the critical editors would have chopped off such references as ‘ mythical –mystical and unhistorical interpolations’!

 

Thanks in advance for the helpful clarifications.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Nagaraj Paturi
Sent: Tuesday, 02 September, 2014 1:34 AM
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} How many Vyaasas are there?

 

AadaraNIya Sunilji,

---

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4745 / Virus Database: 4015/8133 - Release Date: 08/31/14

[Dr. T. Ganesan]

The Bhagavata purana which says "Krishnastu Bhagavan Swayam" is considered the highest of the Puranas.

By whom ?

Ganesan

On 01-09-2014 22:38, sunil bhattacharjya wrote:

[Haresh Gala]

Namaste,

According to My understanding, Different Duties were given to different groups/Clans/Gotras.

VED Vyas and its Down Generations all called themselves same Name( Like Surname Today ) for Many Group Activities  They are all VYAS Grp of People.

Since Duties are assigned for Keeping particular  'VED' and related Knowledge ( Written and Oral ) to these Grp VYAS all must have Added / Modified content in the name of VED Vyas and that tradition was continuous for many centuries.

In Purans there is a Traditions of Writing history aftter Particular Period in Future Tense format and Earlier in Past Tense Format. This does not mean , History ( Content ) was not added as Time progressed.  This Methods and ways some text are written has created confusions in many minds and we have lost thinking how to Interpret them Correctly and in Unbiased Way.

Hope we see both Mythology ( with Historic content ) and History in Right Way and Interpret things with Practical Realities of Life of Past as seen from many archaeological finds.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

In Padma purana, if my memory serves me right, Now you may ask me as to how the Padma purana, composed earlier than the Bhagavata purana can say about the Bhagavata purana, which was composed last. For that you will have to look at the Panchalakshana of the puranas, which permits the puranas to be updated.

Regards,

Sunil KB

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Quote

Can one portray a time line of  ‘Vyasa’ ( or in this case Many Vyasas)  that can be reasonably visualized ?

Unquote

Yes, This is important. But to my knowledge there is no systematic statement on this in the puranas or elsewhere. We only know that Badarayana Vyasa, who wrote the Brahmasutra,  belonged to the fourth generation after Vedavyasa, who classified the Vedas, and that is according to the Sama Vidhana Brahmana, if my memory serves me right. 

However Manu permits descendents, direct or otherwise, to adopt the names of the persons of the former generation, There were 30 Janakas, starting with Janaka, who was the foster-father of Mother Sita. This may make it generally difficult to find out precisely which Vyasa wrote what. My personal feeling is that the date of the Vyasa, who wrote the commentary on the Yoga-sutra of Patanjali, might not have been before the 13th century BCE, again assuming that Patanjalai was a contemporary of Panini.

Regards,

[sadasivamurty rani]

Pranams to all scholars!

In the progressive discussion on the topic "How many Vyaasas are there?" if it is keenly observed nowhere  the question of "Historic Documentation" was spoken of in the initial mail triggered in this string. For two reasons the citations from Vishnu Maha Purana and Devi Bhagavata Maha Purana were given by me. The first reason is the TITLE OF THE   STRING ITSELF i.e. How many Vyaasaas are there?

The second reason is the fifth question of the same initial mail of this string i.e. <(5) Who is Veda VyAsa? The same as the first VyAsa?> When the scholar who initiated is prepared to accept many VYAASAS giving some information from some authentic sources is not felt wrong by me. Moreover while saying < The list of the Vedavyasas of the present Kalpa as found in the Sri Vishnu Mahapurana is as follows:..  >  I did not pass any comments of my own. Simply I have given the texts from both the Maha Puranas (Vishnu and Devi Bhagavata). 

When the very question is about the number of VYASAS where does the question of complexity arises if the list of VYASAS is given? 

In this context I have a few questions - 

My next question is about the word HISTORIC. Can there be any specification of HISTORIC and NON HISTORIC DOCUMENTS as far as our INDIAN HISTORY is concerned? Can we distinguish between the HISTORIC PERSONALITIES and MYTHOLOGICAL PERSONALITIES? 

Can there be any definite proof to accept VEDA VYASA as a HISTORIC PEROSONALITY? If there is no definite proof and if we have to conclude him as a part of Mythological sections how Vishnupurana and Devi Bhagavatha cannot be worthy sources to speak about him? 

My curiosity is about two more things: 

1. a ‘ linear time scale’ ,  2. the basic premise of a  ‘ history of a society  ’

First I I would like to ask about the second one "The History of Society". If our PURANAS cannot be accepted HISTORIC DOCUMENTS to speak about our ancient India which historians can help us to know about our Ancient Indian Society? 

a) Are they Historiographers of Enlightenment School such as_ James Mill, Robert Orme, Buchanan, Tyler and Dubois, Elphinstone, Grand Duff and Willima Erskine?

b) Or are they the Sympathetic historians like - Sir William Jones, Cunningham, Wilkinson, Munro, Malcolm and others?

c) Or are they the Evangelical Historiographers like Shore or Grant?

d) Or are they the Administrator Historiographers like Mark Wilks, Grant Duff, James Todd, Babington Macaulay, William Hunter, Co. GB Malleson?

e) Or are they the Rationalist Historians like - Rajendralal Mitra, RC Dutt, Ray Chaudri etc?

f) Or are they Economist Historians like - Major D. Basu, RC Majumdar,  Cy Chintamani and Surendranath Banarjee?

g) Or are they Marxist Historians like - Hiren Mukherjee, R. Plame Dutt, Kosambi and others or their latter influenced professors like Romilla Thaper, Dr. Bipin Chandra and others?

COULD WE GIVE ANY COMFORTABLE PLACE TO THE NATIONALIST HISTRIANS LIKE - Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Swami Vivekananda, VD Savarkar, Mrs. Annie Besant and others who tried to bring out volumes of Indian history with true National Spirit?

 In this context I would like to quote a few lines from HISTORY- ITS THEORY and METHOD written by Prof. B. Sheik Ali, Former Vice Chancellor of Mangalore University who speaks about the Historic validity and content of PURANAS.

QUOTE:

"The scope of the Puranas, eighteen in number, is very wide indeed, almost a popular encyclopedia of ancient and medival Hinduism dealing with religious, philosophical, historical, personal, social and political matters.  These books contain accounts of kings and Rishis, religious beliefs, worships, observances and philosophy, personal social and political ordinances about all kinds of miscellaneous matters. To make proepr use ofhtis rich material superficial knowledge of Sanskrit will not help. We need great proficiency. With their commentaries it may not be possible to understand their real meaning. 

Even today Good many a thinker of past like Vyasa, Valmiki, Kalidasa, Panini, Kautiliya and others have not been fully rehabitated in history.....

do find in the literature of the past whether Ramayana or Mahabharata or Puranas or the Heroic Poem or the legends, plenty of material which is the hard core of History such as customs and manners, methods of warfare and art of government, trade and commerce, farming and agriculture, philosophy and religion, education and learning, genealogy of kings and rulers and all other essential aspects that form culture."

Now Indian needs NATIONALIST HISTORIANS and not the RATIONALIST HISTORIANS any more. 

Now I would like to deal with the a ‘ linear time scale’ -

We never hesitate to tell our children and grand children that Valmiki and Vyasa were the contemporaries of Rama and Sri Krishna. We never hesitate to tell them that Rama belongs to Treta Yuga and Dvapara Yuga. Even at a very tender age at which they cannot understand about YUGAS we tell them these stories of RAMA and KRISHNA as happenings in the YUGAs specified above. 

But here we prepare to give very tough fight in the forums like this arguing against the YUGA and KALPA concept. 

All our  day to day ritualistic activities are based not on Christian era but strictly following Vikrama Saka which according to our Indian Astronomers began in 58 BC and Salivahana Saka began in 72 AD. 

But we are not able to accept KING VIKRAM. We speak about Chandra gupta Vikramaditya only. We doubt about the deeds of Salivahana. 

We accept Yudhisthira Saka but not Yudhisthira. 

In our everyday Sandhyavandana and Nitya pujas in the sankalpa we say - 

अद्य ब्रह्मण: द्वितीयपरार्थे स्वेतवराहकल्पे वैवस्वतमन्वन्तरे कलियुगे प्रथमपादे....अस्मिन् वर्तमानव्यावहारिकचान्द्रमानेन ....संवत्सरे उत्तरायणे / दक्षिणायने...मासे ....पक्षे.......तिथौ....वासरे...नक्षत्रे...योगे....करणे...शुभतिथौ.....शोभने मुहूर्ते...

Is this not Linear Time Scale? 

While the western time scale consists of Seconds - Minutes - Hours - Days - Years and finally Era...

We have still larger units of time - Beginning with: Lipta we have in progressive order - Vighadiya- Ghadiya - Tithi  and Vasara - paksha - Masa - Rtu - Ayana - Samvatsara - Yuga - Mahayuga (Caturyuga) - Mavantara - Kalpa (A Day of Brahma), Brahma's Year and Brahma's Purva parartha and Dvitiya Parartha...and all these time units are in our regular ritualistic use...still we feel delicacy to accept their validity...??????? 

Why this weakness? or Is this a kind of hypocricy? (Accepting this time scale in all our Samskaras and Nitya Karmas...we hesitate to accept them as a part of our historic legacy). When we cannot believe them can we stop using them in the marriages and other auspicious samskaras in our houses? 

SO LET US THINK IN A WAY REQUIRED TO REBUILD OUR INDIAN HISTORY FROM OUR OWN SOURCES (Vedic, Puranic and Itihasa Sources). First let us refrain ourselves from using the word MYTHOLOGY referring to our ITIHASAS and PURANAS. 

Warm regards to all. 

Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Namaste,

You seem to be very sceptic about the ancient history abd the ancient Indian chronology but many like me are not. that is because the puranic chronology has been proved by astronomical observations. Dr. Narahari Achar has proved beyond doubt, using astronomical software and data from the canonical texts that the date of Lord Buddha and the date Kanishka are respectively in the 19th century and 13th century BCE. His papers are available in the Scribd. The same way he also showed that Adi Shankara lived in the 6th century BCE. Unfortunately, for this brilliant scholar, he had problem in finding out the correct date of the most important landmark in the ancient Indian History, that is, the date of the Mahabharata war and that is because he did not recognise that fact the Kali yuga started in February 3102 BCE. Brahmagupta had given long ago the traditional information that the Sakanta kala or the Shalivahana saka started in the 3179th year of the Kali era. The Mahabharata also says in the Vanaparva that the Kali would start soon (achiraat) and it did, when Lord Krishna passed way. The puranas say that on the very day Lord Krishna passed away, the Kali yuga started and that means that the Mahabharata war occurred 36 years before the start of the Kali yuga, that is towards the end of the 3139 BCE. Even the date of Ramayana is roughly known to be about 3500 years before the Date of the Mahabharata war and a definitive work on that should appear soon, as attempts have been going on that . So puranic persoanlities are not necessarily mythical. That is not to say that there were no exaggerations and one objective for that atiranjan could have been the manoranjan of the readers.

Regards,

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

The dates of Vyasa can be discussed on another thread.

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[Dr. T. Ganesan]

According to your  statement, then, somebody, a devotee/follower of VaishNava BhAgavatapurANa, updates the PadmapurANa at a later period by adding a few [his own ?] passages extolling the BhAgavata purANa. How can such a view be considered as THE ACTUAL/ORIGINAL VIEW OF THE PADMAPURANA ?

Ganesan

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

Dear Sunilji,

 

If you have a reference to Dr. Narahari Achar's work on the date of Adi Sankara, I would appreciate it. I am not aware of it and I haven't found anything online that shows that he worked on it. I have found references to Dr. Achar's work on astronomical dating of the Mahabharata and Satapatha Brahmana and even one to the date of Buddha, but not of Adi Sankara.

 

Please note that as far as I am concerned, this is only a request for a direct pointer to Dr Achar's work, not an invitation to debate the date of Adi Sankara once again.

 

Best regards,

Vidyasankar

On Thursday, September 4, 2014 9:30:48 PM UTC-4, Gitarthi wrote:

Namaste,

You seem to be very sceptic about the ancient history abd the ancient Indian chronology but many like me are not. that is because the puranic chronology has been proved by astronomical observations. Dr. Narahari Achar has proved beyond doubt, using astronomical software and data from the canonical texts that the date of Lord Buddha and the date Kanishka are respectively in the 19th century and 13th century BCE. His papers are available in the Scribd. The same way he also showed that Adi Shankara lived in the 6th century BCE. Unfortunately, for this brilliant scholar, he had problem in finding out the correct date of the most important landmark in the ancient Indian History, that is, the date of the Mahabharata war and that is because he did not recognise that fact the Kali yuga started in February 3102 BCE. Brahmagupta had given long ago the traditional information that the Sakanta kala or the Shalivahana saka started in the 3179th year of the Kali era. The Mahabharata also says in the Vanaparva that the Kali would start soon (achiraat) and it did, when Lord Krishna passed way. The puranas say that on the very day Lord Krishna passed away, the Kali yuga started and that means that the Mahabharata war occurred 36 years before the start of the Kali yuga, that is towards the end of the 3139 BCE. Even the date of Ramayana is roughly known to be about 3500 years before the Date of the Mahabharata war and a definitive work on that should appear soon, as attempts have been going on that . So puranic persoanlities are not necessarily mythical. That is not to say that there were no exaggerations and one objective for that atiranjan could have been the manoranjan of the readers.

Regards,

...

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Vidyasankarji,

I read the piece on the astronomical dating of Adi Sankara by Prof. Achar, quite  sometime ago.  As far as I remember it could be  either in Dr.Kosla Vepa's mail or in one of the mails of Dr. Kalyanaraman. Can you kindly give me a little time for me retrieve that ?

Regards,

Sunil KB

--

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Coming back to the original question, what is interesting is that the idea of 'multiple Vyaasas' also has two perspectives.

 

1. traditional Indian 2. modern western

 

Modern western idea of multiple Vyaasas is that different extant works considered to be those of Vyasa are in fact written by different individuals in different historical moments sometimes several centuries apart.

 

Traditional Indian view of multiple Vyaasas can not be mixed with this. For example, it can not be said that one of the extant works is authored by one of the PuraaNa-listed Vyaasas and another by another PuraaNa-listed Vyaasas.   

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Nagaraj Paturi]

please read

 

 another PuraaNa-listed Vyaasas.   

as

 

another of the PuraaNa-listed Vyaasas   

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Damodara Dasa]

Hare Krishna.
Dear Sirs,
Here I would like to highlight one thing - the information of a
person's being tri-kala-jna that is mentioned in many of Vedic
Literatures. These puranas, Vedas, etc are been accepted as being
written by rsis who are tri-kala-jnas (one who knows past, present and
future). It may be an unacceptable phenomenon according our tiny
brains to accept, but if one neutrally studies Vedas and puranas one
will at least be able to conclude that it was a widely accepted
concept in the Vedic times. Now for our empiric minds there is
something to look at:
Just read Srimad Bhagavatam, 12th Canto, Chapter 1,2. There the
qualities of today's age are mentioned in minute details which proves
to be correct. One who is expert in astrology knows that these vedic
systems did have very detailed system to know future events in
details. And vyasa-deva is known as Mahamuni, means the best of all
the munis. He is also known as tri-kala-jna. So it is not surprising
to find the mention of Bhagavata purana in other puranas like
padma-purana (which is contented to be highly tempered) and Matsya
Purana (the oldest one). The author knew that he is to write that
also.
Moreover, the age of knowledge cannot be determined only by knowing
when it was penned down; this is very logical. Now there is another
conception in Vedic literatures, that of this knowledge's being
eternal. It is manifested to us in different proportions at different
times by the medium of rsis like Vyasadeva. Thus Bhagavata Purana
although, penned down later, did not came into existence at that time,
it was already there. Bhagavad-gita 4.1-2 gives the pramana for its
(this knowledge's) being of much older origin than at the time Krishna
taught it to Arjuna.

Now regarding Bhagavata Purana's origin and importance and this very
topic under discussion, one of the very famous Gaudiya Vaisnava
Scholar Acharya, Jiva Gosvami, has written one book called
Tattva-sandarbha. It is in Sanskrit and discusses this issue with all
logic, cause & effects, etc. It is attached with this email. I would
request scholars to go through this text.

Regarding a list of different Vyasas being mentioned: Vyasa is a rsi
that is given responsibility to make the knowledge of Vedic literature
inteligible to people of kali-yuga who are short memoried (SB 1.1.10).
Thus he expands the extent of explanation just as more explanation is
required to teach a topic 1st standard student compared to a 10th
standard student. Also he needs to write the instructions as people in
kaliyuga won't be able remember much; otherwise in other yugas a
disciple used to remember whatever a teacher teaches just by once
hearing it (sruti-dhara). Thus the Vedas are known as sruti.
So for every kaliyuga there is one Vyasa and the list names of Vyasas
are mentioned for different kaliyugas. Krishna-dvaipayana-vyasa is the
name of Vyasa for this kaliyuga (current time) and he is the author of
puranas etc. According to vedic version he is ciranjivi (long-lived) -
he is to live at least till the end of this kali-yuga and he is the
person who will initiate satya-yuga of next cycle (refer to cyclic
time discussion thread in this group) after this kali-yuga is at end.
Thus it is not amazing that vyasa can be author of different books
composed with a very great time difference if we accept the statements
of vedic literatures mentioning long life of vyasadeva. (Logically
speaking "if it is not in my experience, it must not be true" doesn't
seem to be a very sound logic).

[Note: I have reference for each statement and someone interested can
ask for it.]

Thankyou,
Damodara Das
09737475085

On 9/5/14, Dr. T. Ganesan <gan...@ifpindia.org> wrote:
>
> According to your statement, then, somebody, a devotee/follower of
> VaishNava BhAgavatapurANa, updates the PadmapurANa at a later period by
> adding a few [his own ?] passages extolling the BhAgavata purANa. How
> can such a view be considered as THE ACTUAL/ORIGINAL VIEW OF THE
> PADMAPURANA ?
>
> Ganesan
>
>
>
> On 04-09-2014 21:08, sunil bhattacharjya wrote:
>> In Padma purana, if my memory serves me right, Now you may ask me as
>> to how the Padma purana, composed earlier than the Bhagavata purana
>> can say about the Bhagavata purana, which was composed last. For that
>> you will have to look at the Panchalakshana of the puranas, which
>> permits the puranas to be updated.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sunil KB
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Dr. T. Ganesan <gan...@ifpindia.org

>> <mailto:gan...@ifpindia.org>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> /The Bhagavata purana which says "Krishnastu Bhagavan Swayam" is
>> considered the highest of the Puranas.//
>> /

> --
> निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

--
www.bvks.com
www.speakingstrongly.com

[Bvk sastry]

Namaste

This precisely is the contentious issue being debated. Should the thread issue here be inviting < chiranjeevi vyasa> to intervene and resolve this issue of ours living in < kali- yuga>?

1) one : < vedic times>.. What is that ?

2) two ; which version of which veda? -- <. According to vedic version he is ciranjivi (long-lived) -he is to live at least till the end of this kali-yuga and he is the person who will initiate satya-yuga of next cycle (refer to cyclictime discussion thread in this group) after this kali-yuga is at end. >

The borders of faith, logic, mystic do not coalesce properly here, unless one consciously overlooks it.

I have no difficulty if this topic is placed in faith or mystic basket. Certainly not in science, history segments.

Regards
Bvk Sastry

Regards
Bvk Sastry

Sent from my iPhone

> <sat-sandarbha_-_1_-_tattva_sandarbha_-_jiva_gosvamin.doc>

[Bholanath Dash]

Dear Sir
 Please see NCC volume 32 under vyaasa entry. you may get some idea.

Regards
Bholanath

*******************************************

Dr. Bholanath Dash

Mobile: +91 9040226344

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

 I think we must pick this thread from where Prof. Paturi left and focus on what Dr. Joshi asked.

This is not a historical perspective but a view one can get from Puranic mythology.

Bhagavata is a superior literary piece but doesn't make Vyasa a ciranjivi to support the view that he is the compiler of Vedas, Brahma Sutars and Puranas. He is said as 6th Krishna Avatara or 1/6 amsha of Krishnaas. Hence he is known as Krishna Dvaipayana. One can arrive at different conclusions given by different Puranas. According to some puranas  Brahma, creator first created, Veda-s, Purana-s, dharmashastra-s and taught them to the  sages and not the sages did not copose the puranas .This information is there in Bhagavata Purana.

Relevant quotes can be given by searching the puranas.

वेदो धातृमुखादभूदिममृषिर् व्यासो विभज्य स्वयं
शिष्येभ्य: प्रददौ, पुराणनिवहान् वेदार्थसारानथ।
चक्रे, तान् लभते स्म मे गुरु, रिमे ज्ञाता मयैषां द्विजाः!
सर्गादीनि च लक्षणानि; सकलं ब्रह्माश्रयं वर्तते।।

Now the historical question needs to be discussed

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com> wrote:

There are two views with regard to this:

 

1. Traditional Indian

 

2. Modern-western

 

Even according to 1, Vyasa of Yogasutra bhashya is not considered to be the same as the Vedavyasa to whom all other works mentioned by you are attributed.

 

The word vyāsa means classifier. Vēdavyāsa means classifier of vēdas.

 

Bhāgavata purāṇa is included among aśṭādaśa purāṇas.

 

According to traditional view, Vēdavyāsa is the author of all the aśṭādaśa purāṇas, Mahābhārata and Brahmasūtras.

On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 3:10 AM, N.R.Joshi <gira...@juno.com> wrote:

 

August 31, 2014

 

Respected Scholars, Namaskat!

 

How many VyAsas were there?

(1) According to my understanding Krishna DvaipAyana VyAsa composed the original epic Mahabharata (Jaya).

 

(2) BAdarAyan VyAsa composed Uttara MimAmsA

 

(3 )The third VyAsa composed VyAsabhAs’ya on Yoga sUtras. In VyAsaBhAs’ya the Buddhist doctrine and customs have been very severely dealt with by the author. This VyAsa is then certainly different from the first two VyAsas.

 

(4) Which VyAsa composed BhAgavata PurANa ? Some scholars believe that Bhagavat Purana was composed in 11th century AD. If that is true then he is another Vyaasa.

 

(5) Who is Veda VyAsa? The same as the first VyAsa?

 

Please help me to clear my confusion. Thank. N. R. Joshi

____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
FixYourBloodSugar.com

--

निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[R. N. iyengar]

My dear Ajit,

Since as the moderator you wrote "Now the historical question needs to be discussed" I like to point out the following.  Issues of faith and belief are beyond external analysis. but if some one claims his/her belief is historical, then others will have a say because it has to be their history also! Changing slightly what  Dr.Nagaraj posted  i see there are two groups: a) Saampradaayika b) Vaichaarika. The two are not independent nor against each other. (a) likes to brush under the rug historical sequencing of which event in the Puranas precedes or succeeds what. Overall historicty of Krishna does not mean all that is said about his 'times" in the various Puranas are sequentially consistent. Examples of such instances would definitely make  group (b) to point out interpolations or late nature of the redaction of such texts.  At best contents of parts of the Bhagavata and parts of MB may be by the same person; but certainly not the whole.  Apart from its high literary style Bhagavata has not maintained the (hi)story line of MB in the same fashion. Balarama is said to have traveled to south India (Tirupati, Kancji, Srirangam, Kerala, Kanyakumari) before reaching Kurukshetra to witness the fight between Bhima and Duryodhana. In MB Balarama travels only for 42 days, where as in Bh he is said to travel for one year.  I find this to be  a-historical even though I am not a westerner, but a believing Vaishnava. There are many other such contradictory episodes in the various puranas. I for one feel that there was only one sage Vyaasa author of Jaya and one seed-Purana, out of which the 18 have evolved as the branches of a tree. 

All this does not make the संप्रदाय to be branded as अवैचारिक . The intention seems to be different from narrating linear/cyclic history. Perhaps they wanted the readers to forget the time line and perceive self, life, world, universe in a different way, where historical personalities are mere supports in a play.

Regards

RN Iyengar

On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 10:44 AM, rniyengar <narayana...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

No I wrote the post as a member unless there is mod or moderator note the views will be my views not as a moderator

Prof. RNI's quote "I for one feel that there was only one sage Vyaasa author of Jaya and one seed-Purana, out of which the 18 have evolved as the branches of a tree. "

I don't know what you are saying you are at liberty to believe in myths

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[Damodara Dasa]

Hare Krishna.

Yes, I think what BVK Sastry sir says is right. Science and history
segments (as defined by current standards) cannot tolerate such
interventions. The reason is that the basic assumption of theirs is
not to accept any description that cannot be explained by the medium
of current understanding and observation; such things fall under the
category of faith and mysticism or in other words mythology.

Sorry to be non-specific about some words. To clarify vedic times
means times of Mahabaharata and before. Vedic version means the
version of Vedas, Mahabharata and Puranas.

If possible, I would like to know the criterias by which we tag
something described in ancient literatures as myth. I would like to
put forward a hypothetical case:
Say our current civilization is destroyed (as is case with many
civilizations). After 200 years some other civilization is developed,
not as advanced as today. They come across many writings of our
civilization. They see a book "life history of some important person."
There it is written that such and such person flew to USA from India
in a machine or he just used his phone to call another person in US.
Obviously this is a case out of their imagination. They may tag it as
myth. But that will be mistake. Now they come across some science
technology book and even get details to construct airplane or phone.
But still they are not able to comprehend it at all due lack of many
interrelated fields and the extant of skill needed to make such
projects successful. Again they would come to conclusion that this is
all mystic.
So in my humble opinion, if these things are mentioned in literatures
like puranas, then it can be explained by two hypothesis: 1. It is all
myth, 2.It is real.
It is very difficult to verify any of these. But if the point under
question truly depends on point 2 being real then it will never be
solved correctly by point 1. For example if I do not accept the
existence of Electron and still am adamant to understand Electron
Microscope then that is not possible or I may have to make many wierd
assumptions and come to some theory of my own. So neutrally speaking
science should not be limited to just current limited understanding
and actually it was not. If you see well known scientists like Alfred
Russel wallace, Marie and Pierre Curies, etc were very much accepting
the possibility of existence of kind beyond our imaginations; they had
their researches into it.
Now neutrally analysing the information of puranas, eg. Bhagavata
Purana, the descriptions of todays society given in 12 canto very much
fits current obsertvation. Now we do not know the mechanism by which
they have reached these conclusions, but this can be taken as one
evidence indicating possibility of tri-kala-jna. There are many such
things mentioned and I am composing a small book on this issue. Even
the mysticism research cases of above mentioned scientists match very
much with their descriptions in puranas. Regarding "ciran-jivi", one
can do simple practice - make a graph of last 10 generation in one's
family agains their death age (natural death). Take 1000 such cases.
In almost all cases I have inquired it always came out to be
decreasing as it advances to modern days. This is also mentioned as
one of the symptoms of today's age.

So all these observations are making me not able to accept that
descriptions of puranas are to be tagged as myth if they are not
comprehndable by us.

Anyways, this was my humble opinion and I beg pardon if I am hurting
anyone. I am not going to discuss this point here in this thread
unless members are ready.

Thankyou,
Damodara Das
09737475085

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

All views can be discussed as long as it is within the subject of the thread. I donot understand what Damodarara Das needs to covey any way. This what Bhagavata says

Bhāgavata Skandha 03.12.37

ṛgyajuḥsāmātharvākhyān vedān pūrvādibhir mukhaiḥ
śāstram ijyāṁ stutistomaṁ prāyaścittaṁ vyadhāt kramāt
āyurvedaṁ dhanurvedaṁ gāndharvaṁ vedam ātman
sthāpatyaṁ cāsṛjad vedaṁ kramāt pūrvādibhir mukhaiḥ
 itihāsapurāṇāni pañcamaṁ vedam īśvaraḥ
sarvebhya eva vaktrebhyaḥ sasṛje sarvadarśanaḥ

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Damodara Dasa <damoda...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hare Krishna.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

May I clarify a few things here:

 

The word 'myth' has two kinds of usages. 1. In general English, there is a usage of the word in the sense of 'not a fact'. 2. In academic studies, the word is not used in that sense. Here, it is used in the sense of ' a narrative of  the past as believed by a social group handed down to that group from very ancient times, considered sacred by that group, part of religion of that group usually narrating  things such as creation of the universe, creation of several other entities according to that social group '.

 

In the academic sense, myth does not mean 'non-factual'. Myth too in this sense is factual only. But mythical factuality ('puraaNic factuality' to use an Indian term) is different from historical factuality.

 

To consider historical factuality as the only factuality and to use the word 'myth' in the sense of 'non-fact' in academic discourses is a symptom of academic immaturity.

 

So let us not struggle to get 'historical' status for all our respected narratives of the past by getting trapped into the propaganda of obsolete enlightenment age academics.

 

One Vēda Vyāsa composing all the extant works considered to be those of Vyāsa and the idea of multiple Vyāsas as listed in the Purāṇas are all facts only , but mythical ('purāṇic' ) facts. To prove them to be 'historical facts' is an unnecessary exercise. They being mythical facts does not reduce their status as facts at all.

 

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

This is cut and paste from internet. I hope this information might be relevant

Mythology can refer either to the collected myths of a group of people—their body of stories which they tell to explain nature, history, and customs—or to the study of such myths.

Hindu mythology is a large body of traditional narratives related to Hinduism as contained in Sanskrit literature (such as the epics like Mahabharata and Ramayana, the Puranas, and the Vedas), Ancient Tamil literature (such as the Sangam literature and Periya Puranam), several other works, most notably the Bhagavata Purana, claiming the status of a Fifth Veda and other religious regional literature of South Asia.

A myth is a story that may or may not be true. The definition of the word myth is still subject to debate. Myths may be very old, or new (for example: urban myths). There may not be records or other proof that they happened, but at least some parts of myths may be true. We know about them from older people telling them to younger people. Some myths may have started as 'true' stories but as people told and re-told them, they may have changed some parts, so they are less 'true'. They may have changed them by mistake, or to make them more interesting

The present Manvantara is Vaivaswatha Manu; it is the seventh in due order; and the son of Satyavati, the best of the knowers of Dharma, is the Veda Vyâsa of the 28th Dvâpara Yuga of this seventh Manvantara. In the next Dvâpara, Yuga Asvatthama, the son of Drona will be the Veda Vyâsa. Twenty-seven Veda Vyâsas had expired and they duly compiled each their own Purâna Samhitas in their own Dvâpara Yugas.

1. In the first Dvâpara, Brahmâ Himself divided the Vedas;
2. In the second Dvâpara, the first Prajapati Vyâsa did the same;
3. So S’akra, (Indra) in the third,
4. Brihaspati, in the fourth,
5. Surya in the fifth;
6. Yama, in the sixth,
7. Indra, in the seventh,
8. Vasistha, in the eighth;
9. Sarasvata Risi in the ninth,
10. Tridhama, in the tenth;
11. Trivrisa, in the eleventh,
12. Bharadvâja, in the twelfth;
13. Antariksa, in the thirteenth;
14. Dharma, in the fourteenth;
15. Evaruni in the fifteenth;
16. Dhananjaya, in the sixteenth;
17. Medhatithi in the seventeenth;
18. Vrati, in the eighteenth;
19. Atri, in the nineteenth;
20. Gautama in the twentieth,
21. Uttama, whose soul was fixed on Hari, in the twenty-first,
22. Vâjasravâ Vena, in the twenty second;
23. His family descendant Soma, In the twenty-third;
24. Trinavindu, in the twenty-fourth;
25. Bhârgava, in the twenty-fifth;
26. Sakti, in the twenty-sixth,
27. Jâtûkarnya in the twenty-seventh
28. and Krisna Dvaipâyana became the twenty-eighth Veda Vyâsa in the Dvâpara Yugas.

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Namaste,

Quote

Balarama is said to have traveled to south India (Tirupati, Kancji, Srirangam, Kerala, Kanyakumari) before reaching Kurukshetra to witness the fight between Bhima and Duryodhana. In MB Balarama travels only for 42 days, where as in Bh he is said to travel for one year.  I find this to be  a-historical even though I am not a westerner, but a believing Vaishnava.

Unquote

It appears to me that Balarama made two pilgrimages. One regular pilgrimage, which was well-planned and that took one year, when he covered the length of the country from the North to the South and back. The second was made in haste when Balarama found the war to be inevitable and he did not want to participate or nor to watch  the war between his relatives. At that time he just went to the Prabhas kshetra and returned in 42 days, halting at a good number of  place on the bank of Saraswati , the river of many holy saras.

Regards,