MAHĀBHĀRATA MANTHAN

MAHĀBHĀRATA MANTHAN

Volume : I

Editors Neera Misra Rajesh Lal

B.R. Publishing Corporation Delhi-110 052

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Draupadi Dream Trust Patron, Advisors and Trustees express their gratefulness, and convey their deep gratitude to Honorable Minister of Culture, Dr. Mahesh Sharma, for gracing the inauguration ceremony of the seminar on ‘ Manthan: A Critical Revisit to the Tangible & Intangible Heritage’ , held in July 2017 at New Delhi and blessing our efforts to create better understanding and appreciation of our ancient history and cultural legacy of the Mahabharata period. We also convey our deep gratitude to Shri Ram Bahadur Rai, President IGNCA, Prof B.B. Lal, Eminent Archaeologist, Dr Lokesh , President ICCR, Dr B.R. Mani, Director-General National Museum, Dr Sachidananda Joshi, Member Secretary IGNCA and Prof Sushmita Pande, Chairperson National Monuments Authority for gracing the Inaugural ceremony and sharing their valuable views. We convey our very special gratitude to Dr Bibek Debroy, Member NITI Aayog, for gracing the Valedictory Session, for sharing his decades of in-depth study on the subject and giving a heart rending and inspiring address on why the Mahabharata must be taught to students, and also read in all homes. We are very grateful to Shri Pranav Khullar, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Culture, for gracing the Valedictory Session and enlightening us with his deep interest and knowledge of the Mahabharata, which he acquired through inspiration from his mother. We also thank the Culture Ministry for financially supporting the Mahabharata Manthan programs of International Conference, Exhibition and Cultural programs. We express our gratefulness to Indira Gandhi National Centre for Art (IGNCA) for associating with the programs and their Officials and staff for extending full cooperation and support for the same. We acknowledge with thanks the part association and support of Indian Council for Historical Research. We are also extremely grateful to the Indian Council of Cultural Relations (ICCR), for their very generous support for International Speakers’ travel expenses. The venue of the vi Mahābhārata Manthan conference was the IGNCA Lecture Room, and we convey our deep thanks for their generous support for this. We express our deep gratitude to Indira Gandhi National Centre for Art (IGNCA) for facilitating a direct webcast of the Conference proceedings. Special thanks are due to ASI’s Central Library and Sarita ji and Satpal ji, photo section’s Shri Sachdeva ji and Library of International Centre for tolerating our persistence and extending generous cooperation, in our search for books and research for Exhibition. We are also grateful to Creasouls and its Directors Aryan Adityo and Mohit Kapoor for helping us pen and put together an inspiring audio-visual Invitation. We thank our speakers presenting such well researched papers, and for also for bearing with our constant persuasions for sending their articles, and doing their best to give us their papers timely and in proper format. We thank Delhi Heritage Institute, and especially Dr Ashwini Asthana for being part of the organizing team and also assigning six students as interns to not just learn but also contribute to awareness of the value of our cultural and historical legacies from the Mahabharata. The hard work and support from the faculty and students of DHI was of much value in success of the program. We also thank Dr Ankit Aggarwal, Asst Prof. Ancient History, Delhi University, and his students for associating and contributing to the programs smooth organization and success. We also thank Mrs Himani Joshi for her personal association along with student interns for making the Exhibition and Conference a great success. We also thank her for wonderfully compering the Inauguration and Valedictory Sessions. Most sincerely we thank Shri Praveen Mittal and Neeraj Mittal of BR Corporation Ltd and his team for agreeing to print this volume in the quickest possible time. We thank each and every one who helped in so many different ways to put together a program to celebrate and showcase the historicity and significance of the Mahabharata through our ‘Mahabharata Manthan’ at New Delhi. It is not possible to name each one but we know their love and contribution was so essential in a venture of this magnitude by a small charitable Trust, challenged by so many limitations. So, thank you all and may we keep getting this warmth and cooperation, and together work for a vibrant cultural environment that will enhance the value of every Indian. PREFACE

Address by Dr. Bibek Debroy, Chairman PM’s Economic Advisory Committee, Member Niti Aayog Respected Prof B.B. Lal, Mr. Joshi, Dr. Mani, Mr. Khullar, Vinita ji and Neera Misra, the Draupadī behind all this, and ladies and gentlemen. It is impossible to refuse Neera Misra, so obviously I agreed without realizing that she was going to inflict this burden of being the Chief Guest on me. I realized that only after turning up here. Then I hadn’t realized that I was supposed to give a respectable Valedictory kind of an address, particularly about a conference where, following the tradition set by Prof. B.B. Lal, I too endorse his suggestion that these papers should indeed be published. It is Mahābhārata Manthan . Let me congratulate the Draupadī Trust, IGNCA and Neera Misra for having thought about this particular Manthan . Manthan reminds me, as it does to all of you, the -Manthan . As a result of Samudra-Manthan, there were many treasures that came out of the oceans but there was also ‘ halā hal ’ and there is a little bit of halā hal here also and that is, the next time the Manthan happens, and it is something that all of us collectively need to work towards, I would be delighted if I see that the hall is full. I will be delighted not only the hall is full but if the hall has many more young people and that is not just Neera Misra’s job, as it also our job. You presented me the ‘ ś ankh’ and I have to do something …. “Pāñ chajanyam Hṛ iṣ ikeṣo Devadattam Dhanañjayaḥ Proundram Dadmou Mahaś ankham Bhī ma Karma Vrikodharaḥ ” viii Mahābhārata Manthan

I cannot blow on Pañchajana, I cannot blow on Ananta Vijaya , I cannot blow on Devdatta. The best that I can do “Nakulaḥ Sahadevaś́cha Sughoś a Maṇi Puśpakou” . So I can put in my bit of ‘ subhā ś a maṇipuṣpatākā’ because the Pañ chjaṅ ka , if not the Pañ chajana , at least the Devdatta has to be with you. Mr. Joshi, I have had the Mahābhārata in my house for several several years and actually I have not fought with anyone in the house or the relatives. I intended to fight the people more of outside. I am inclined to think that it is a good idea to have the Mahābhārata in your house because all of us should read the Mahābhārata. Why should we read the Mahābhārata , apart from the fact that it is a part of a legacy, part of a culture, why should we read the Mahābhārata . I want to cite four or five reasons with examples about why we should read the Mahābhārata. First of all, the Mahābhārata and the Rāmāyaṇa ; they are not myths. They are ‘itihā sa’ . ‘Itihā sa ’ is – ‘this is indeed what happened’. They are History. Obviously they are not history in the way we exactly have the text today. Over a period of time, particularly in a process where there is oral transmission there will be embellishment but that doesn’t contradict a core element of history of truth. When we read the Mahābhārata I always feel, and I will give an example which shows that there is a core element of truth. Take the example of Kripi, Kripa’s sister and Ashwatthama’s mother. The description says that Kripi’s teeth jutted out and her hair was thin. This is a completely irrelevant piece of detail to everything that is going on. Whether Kripi’s teeth jutted out and whether her hair was thin has no bearing on the story whatever. So if we read something like this you cannot help but avoid. You also cannot help but have the feeling that someone real was being described. On history, Prof Lal has broadly listed out the three different methods. The astronomical, the archaeological and the text in terms of the genealogy backed up with the what is given up with the Purā ṇ as. Personally, I am rather skeptical of any astronomical dating and that is because here is a text which by the dimensions of the text itself went through several versions and we know, or we don’t know, we speculate that between the original data of composition and the final date when it forms some kind of finality as a text. Perhaps one thousand years had elapsed. If one thousand years had elapsed then obviously the position of the celestial body should have also moved and therefore inherently in the text, as it stands today, there are inconsistencies. It is my submission that we ignore the astronomical one, as Prof Lal himself interprets the genealogical and the archaeological are not that far apart. And I think that we can be in consensus. So, the first reason I think we should read the Mahābhārata text because it is ‘ Itihā sa’ . The second reason why we should read the Mahābhārata text is because it is beautiful poetry or at least part of it is beautiful poetry, and for those who have read the Mahābhārata and the Valmiki Rāmāyaṇ̣a in , you will find an interesting contrast between the two poets. Valmiki is lyrical, Valmiki describes the nature. Most of the beauty of Valmiki is in the description of nature. Vedvyasa, as a poet, is much more straightforward, a matter of fact. Rarely will you find in the Mahābhārata description of nature so also did this happened, that happened, that’s about...However there are parts which have beautiful poetry Preface ix and I believe it is possible to do an exercise which is extremely difficult but an exercise that no scholars has yet attempted. I will explain what I mean. Let me first recite a ś loka . It is from the Mahābhārata. I will ask you where it is from but please don’t answer it because that question meant to be a rhetorical – “Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glā nir bhavati Parā ntapa Abhyuthā namadharmasya tadā tmanam srijā myaham” I state again the ś loka “Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glā nir bhavati Parā ntapa Abhyuthā namadharmasya tadā tmanam srijā myaham” Had I asked you, I am prepared to take a bet that most of you would have said that it is from the Bhagavad Gītā. It is not. The Bhagavad Gītā sloka is…. “Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glā nir bhavati bhā rata Abhyuthā namadharmasya tadā tmanam srijamyaham” I didn’t say that “Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glā nir bhavati Parā ntapa” What is the difference? Sanskrit poetry was very tight. It had to conform to a ‘ chhanda’ which for the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata mostly was ‘ anuṣ ṭ up’ but whatever it was, it had to conform to a ‘ chhanda’ . The meter, the moment it is “Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati Parā ntapa”, which is from the Mahābhārata but not from the Bhagwat Gī tā, it is something else. The ‘ chhanda’ breaks down so clearly. What happened? Was it a lesser, an inferior and a subsequent poet who could not adhere to the requirements of what ‘ chhanda’ required. And if you read it, you get the feeling you can identify where the inferior poet is. For example, I will stick my neck out and say that the entire ‘ Dā na Parvan’ is clearly the work of an inferior poet. , I don’t think the ‘ chhanda’ of the Mahābhārata has been analysed that much. Most of it is ‘ anuṣ ṭ up’. ‘ Anuṣ ṭup’, as most of you know, has four ‘ pada s’, four ‘quatrains’, with eight syllables in each. Dharmaś ā stra, kurukṣ etra, Sama-veda, Yudh-Sabha If you are composing in an ‘ anuṣ ṭ up’ because the structure is eight – eight, it is easier if you have words which have four ‘ akṣ ara s’. If I am going to use ‘ akṣ ara s’ with three words, and then again three words with three ‘ akṣ ara s’, it is not impotent but would be difficult. So, you will find that most things in ‘ anuṣ ṭ up’ tend to have words with four ‘ akṣ ara s,’ the things we started with, e.g., Vakra-Tunḍ a Mahā -Kāya Sū rya-Koṭi Samaprabha | Nirvighnam Kuru Me Sarva-Kāryeṣ u Sarvadā || Now if we read the Mahābhārata, or if you read the Bhagavad Gī tā as a subset of the Mahābhārata, you will rarely find the word “Bhīma” used. You will find the word ‘ Vrikodara’. You will rarely find the used except Arjunuvā cha , instead it will be Dhanañjaya. Now x Mahābhārata Manthan a question for you, Draupadī ji. We often say I am not driving the point too hard, we often say women were discriminated against. They don’t figure prominently. Think of a name. All the women with the exception of Satyavatī , have three ‘ aksharas’ It is not very easy to compose ‘anuṣ ṭ up’ with the names of the women …Even for Draupadī, Yogaseni conforms to anuṣ ṭ up rather than Draupadī. Now I am not driving the point to her but I just saying that things like this exploration of chhanda seems to be a very interesting exercise to be done. Either in terms of a identify different composers or in terms of these kinds of explorations. The third reason I think all of us should read the Mahābhārata is because of the geography. There is a wealth of information that is geographical in nature in the Mahābhārata. And I am delighted that you used the word Kampilya and I will be delighted if we change the name of Barmula to Barahamula, as it should be. There is a tremendous amount of geographical material in it which has not been explored because the normal tendency is to call the Mahābhārata , a myth. Fourth reason: it is about Dharma and Mr. Khullar has been extremely reluctant like you to translate the word dharma into English because in different contexts it means completely different things. At one level it is what today we will call the government and governance at one level because it is the rāja dharm a. What a king should do? What should be rāja dharm a? What was governance likes in those days. Most people will say, let us look at Kautilya, let us look at the Arthaś ā stra , but in lot of aspects, the Mahābhārata is extremely rich in rāja dharma particularly at the session when Bhīṣma is laying down on the bed of arrows and he is instructing Yudhiṣṭhira in the Ś ā nti Parva and the Anuś ā san Parva . Let me give you two examples. One of the important role for the kings apart from external relations and defense was ensuring justice delivery. Speed of these disputes resolution is extremely pertinent even today with 35 million cases stuck in various Indian courts, civil cases. Bhīṣma tells Yudhiṣṭhira that there are the seventeen most important types of civil cases and you must address them in order of priority. Something like these is also there in the Dharmaś ā stra but it is also there in the Mahābhārata and guess what was number one in that list: In that day and age, whatever Prof Lal and all of you collectively decide, that age was breach of contract on the civil law side. On the criminal law side, you are having arguments like the following – if a rich person commits a crime you should never imprison that person because the imprisonment of a rich person happens at the cost of public exchequer. You should impose a monetary penalty on a rich person for a crime. It is only the poor person who cannot pay who should be imprisoned. You may agree or disagree with this proposition but as a proposition that is based on rationality, it is immaculate. And if I just take this logic to any other room, not here where this Mahābhārata Manthan is going on, and I ask people who said this, I am inclined to think people will say, oh, it must have been the Law and Economist guys from Chicago or the World Bank, but no, it is Bhīṣma telling Yudhiṣṭhira. The next reason we should read the Mahābhārata is again, as Mr. Khullar said, it is about Dharma in the sense of Mokśa Dharma . It is a synthesis, but particularly a very well-done synthesis particularly of three of the six Shada Darś ana s – Sā nkhya, Yoga and Vidhantya . The other three creep in a little bit and the Shaukhya and the Yoga of the Mahābhārata as a synthesis, is not quite the same as the Sā nkhya of the Preface xi

Sā nkha text, nor is the Yoga same as the Yoga text to the so it’s a beautiful synthesis of Mokśa Dharma . Dharma also means to some extent – Varṇ ā ś Dharm a, but the underline message of the Mahābhārata is that transcending all over all this, Dharma is what you decide. There is no absolute notion of dharma again let me give you two examples to illustrate what I mean:- Example no. 1- everyone here knows that Bhīṣma had a vow of brahmacharya, and to cut a long story short, the princess of Kasi, Amba, whom he had originally abducted, says please marry me otherwise I will immolate myself in the fire, and you have to decide which is more important for you, protecting your vow of brahmacharya or protecting the life of a lady. And Bhīṣma says, no, my vow of brahmacharya is inviolate, and we know Amba self-immolated herself, became Shikhandi. But it is generally not known that Arjuna also had a temporary vow of a brahmacharya for one year. While Bhīṣma’s and Devabrata’s was permanent, Arjuna’s was temporary for one year. At that time the princess of the Nāgas, Ulupi felt in love with Arjuna, and told Arjuna that if you do not marry me, I will kill myself, and you have to take decision about which dharma is more important for you: protecting the vow of brahmacharya or protecting the life of a woman. Again, both Bhīṣma and Arjuna were Kṣ triaya s and what does Arjuna decide? Arjuna decided to marry Ulupi. There are countless examples of these conflict of dharma and that is the reason we identify with the Mahābhārata event today. The context may be different, the background may be different, the setting may be different but the dilemmas and the conflicts we face all the time. Bertand Russell was a great philosopher. I don’t know how many people here know that he also wrote short stories. They were terrible short stories as fiction but they reflected the dilemma of the time, his moral philosophical dilemmas. And there is story he wrote in 1972 called the Boston Lady . What is the story about? Remember 1972? Nuclear holocaust threatening the world, the world will be destroyed, etc., etc. In the story, the Americans decide that they will put a whole lot of people on a plane and make it hover around 35 thousand feet above the earth so that when the universe or world is destroyed, the people who are populating this plane will ensure the propagation of human species. Unfortunately the plane crashes. Everyone except one lady from Boston dies, and this lady is expecting and she gives birth to a male child. Now her moral dilemma, because as far she is concerned, the world has got destroyed. Her moral dilemma - do I have intercourse with my own son, incest, to ensure the propagation of human species. She decides to have incest, but unfortunately the world has not been destroyed. Soon a ship comes along, rescues them, she goes back to Boston and is castigated and shunned by everyone, so what does the poor Boston lady do? She commits suicide. This kind of problem would never arise for anyone who read the Mahābhārata, because the conflict of dharma and bearing the consequences for your karma is inevitable. There is a dictum: always speak the truth, always. A sage named Kaushik, again from the Mahābhārata, who was meditating in a forest at a place where there was a fork on the road. Sage Kaushik had a vow of always speaking the truth. He saw some passers-by who were being chased by bandits. Soon the bandits arrived and asked sage Kaushik which way did the passers- by go. The sage who always spoke the truth told the bandits the path that the passers-by had xii Mahābhārata Manthan taken. The bandits caught up with the passers-by and killed them. Because he always told the truth and caused great damage, the sage went to hell. Let me narrate one more and then I will stop. This is about ‘ sadā chā r’, meaning good behavior. ‘ Sadā chā r’ should never be confused with dharma because ‘ sadā chā r’ is very context specific. There was a sage, a famous sage Vishwamitra and all of us know his name. had not rained down for 12 years so there was drought, there was famine, there was no food to be had, and sage Vishwamitra was hungry. He could not find any food, he was starving, he could not feed himself. He could not feed his wife and children, so he wandered around searching for food, soon he came upon, a village of ‘ swāpakas’ . Swāpakas are not the same as ‘ chanḍ ā la s’ but let me use the word chanḍā la. He came upon this village of chanḍā la s and suddenly there he saw a chanḍ ā la s house. There was a court yard, there was a rope strung across that court yard and on that rope was the dead body, the carcass of a dog. Swapakas ate dogs so half of the body of the dog had been eaten and the remaining half was there hanging. So, Vishwamitra waited for the chanḍ ā la to go to sleep and when the chanḍ ā la goes to sleep, I will steal this and take it and feed my wife and children. Chanḍ ā la goes to sleep, Vishwamitra steps into the courtyard to steal this. There are other dogs which are alive in other houses and they begin to bark and the chanḍ ā la wakes up and says, who are you? Vishwamitra says I am the sage Vishwamitra. The chanḍ ā las bows down and says welcome what can I do for you and Vishwamitra explains, I want to take this away, I am hungry. Now for about ten chapters there is a dialogue between Vishwamitra and the chanḍā la , where the chanḍā la keeps saying you are a Brāhmaṇ a, you should not eat meat. If you eat meat you should eat the meat of a dog which is a polluted creature. If you eat the meat of dog you should certainly not eat the meat of the hind quarters which is even more polluted than the fore quarters. And initially Vishwamitra says all this dharma is fine but first let me be alive, let me remain alive, then we will talk about dharma. Eventually he says my dear chanḍ ā la, who am I? Am I this physical body or am I the ā tmā n and who is eating the flesh? Is it physical body or is it the ā tmā n ? If the physical body is eating the flesh, then how is the ātmā n tainted. The chanḍ ā la says, dear sage, I have no answer to this, please take it away. The reason you should all the read the Mahābhārata is again because of something Mr. Khullar said in passing. I think that all of us are searching for a question, or answer to a question. Who am I? Where have I come from, where am I going to go. Many of us spend our entire life without asking the question, but for those of us who asked this question, the Mahābhārata is a text. It will not give clear answers because it is not meant to. And it is not meant to because the answer will be different from you and me. The question itself will be different for you and me. Each one of us will find in the Mahābhārata , our own questions and our answers because without using the word Dharma in a very narrow sense, the Mahābhārata is a text that is permeated with dharma. Finally, I thank you once again for having invited me, congratulations, wish you all success for future manthans with a ‘ nī la- kaṅ ṭ ha’ who swallows up the ‘ halā hal ’ I mentioned. Contents

Acknowledgements v Preface vii List of Plates xvii Introduction xix List of Contributors xxiii Volume : I 1. When Should Historical Period be Deemed to have Begun in India? 1 — B.B. Lal 2. Mahābhārata Manthan: A Critical Revisit to Tangible and Intangible Heritage 9 — Alexis Pinchard 3. Cities in Pañcāla Times: An Archaeological Perspective 31 — Bhuvan Vikrama 4. Comments on the Mahābhārata’s Significance for Indian Civilization: With Reference to the first 44 Sections of the Sabhā Parva 41 — Come Carpentier de Gourdon 5. Proving Historicity of Kṛṣṇa 51 — D.K. Hari and D.K. Hema Hari xiv Mahābhārata Manthan

6. Astronomy Observations of the Mahābhārata 77 — Nilesh Nilkanth Oak & Aparna Dhir 7. In Defence of the Theory of Mahābhārata Related Events Taking Place Around 3100 BCE 91 — B.R. Mani 8. Mahābhārata: Paradigm Shift and Ancient Indian Knowledge 97 — Heramb Chaturvedi 9. The Mahābhārata CE: From Criticism to Commentaries 107 — Jhanavi Bidhur 10. Revising the Critical Edition of the Mahabharata: An Approach through the attempt to strip Draupadī 119 — Pradip Bhattacharya 11. Āpaddharma in Mahā bhā rata 141 — Shashi Tiwari 12. Reflections of Mahābhārata in 145 — Virendra Bangroo 13. Himalaya Mahābhārata Culture: Pilgrimage, Text, Divination and Identity 153 — Frederick M. Smith 14. Draupadī : The Lost Sarasvatī Regained Vāk 163 — Indrajit Bandyopadhyay 15. Forest Outburst: Drupadātmajā in Bhāravi’s Kirātārjunīya and Vyāsa’s Mahābhārata 205 — Jana Bandyopadhyay Plates I-XVI Volume : II 16. The Geographical Data in the Mahābhārata 213 — Jijith Nadumuri Ravi 17. The Date of Mahābhārata War Historical, Puranic and Astronomical Evidence 257 — Mohan Gupta Contents xv

18. Knowledge of the Past: Challenges of Justification, Interpretation and Preservation: Case of Dvārakā 273 — Nalini Rao 19. Revisiting the Mahābhārata Heritage in Assam 285 — Pradip Jyoti Mahanta 20. Mahābhārata: The Search for Karṇa’s Real Father 291 — Satya Chaitanya 21 . Summary of the “ Mahābhārata and Archaeological Evidence ” by Dr. Gouri Lad 299 — Vasant Shinde and Pratik Chakravari 22. Mahābhārata as “Itihāsa ” and its Contribution to the History of Ideas 307 — Susmita Pande 23. Why Harivaṁśa Calls itself the Khila of Mahābhārata ? – A Critique of the BORI Critical Edition of Harivaṁśa 319 — A. Purushothaman and A. Harindranath 24. Indraprastha: Yet Another Bit of Indic Civilization Elided and Excluded by Mainstream Historians 341 — Yvette Ram Rani Rosser 25. The Rationale for Kṛṣṇa Rājya 349 — Prafull Goradia 26. Use of Astronomical References to Determine the Time of Mahābhārata 355 — Ashok K. Bhatnagar 27. Mahābhārata: Text –Authenticity to Explore History of Bhārata and Identify Heritage Monuments 369 — B.V.K. Sastry 28. The Mahā Misperception on The Mahābhārata 411 — Neera Misra 29. Evaluating Traditional Past: Cultural Truths and Historical Facts Locating the Mahābhārata in History 417 — Abhay Kumar Singh 30 The Historicity of the Mahābhārata 425 — Keonraad Elst

List of Plates

Pl. 1.1. Hastinā pura: The person points out the erosion-line left by the heavy flood in the Gaṅ gā . Pl.1.2. Hastinā pura: Layers of sand and clay left behind by the flood that destroyed the PGW settlement at the site. Pl. 1.3. A dish of Painted Grey Ware. Pl. 1.4. Sherds of Painted Grey Ware from various Mahā bhā rata sites. Pl. 1.5. (Late) Painted Grey Ware from Kauś āmbī . Pl. 4.1. An imaginative reconstitution of the Sabhā Parva Pl. 4.2. Kailash Peak and Mansarovar lake Pl. 4.3. Are these Kinnauri women of today descendants of Kinnaris of ancient India? Pl. 4.4. Sculptures of from Khajuraho Pl. 4.5. Yaunas (Ionians) depicted in the apadānā , Persepolis (VIth Cent. BCE) Pl. 4.6. Narada leaving his celestial palace. Pahari miniature, 18 th C. Pl. 4.7. Narada in modern iconography Pl. 4.8. Photo taken from the International Space Station: a 3000-mile wide Indrasabhā? Pl. 4.9. Photo provided by Commander Graham Bethune (US Navy, 1989) Pl. 4.10. Another photo of the same craft, also taken from some 5 miles away. xviii Mahābhārata Manthan

Pl. 4.11. A depiction of the rājasūya Pl. 4.12. The Triumph of Bacchus (Bhaga) in India. roman sarcophagus, IIIrd C. A.D. Lyons, France Pl. 4.13. Horses of the Akhal Teke breed (of the colours of quails and partridges and of a parrot’s breast) Pl. 4.14. Tokharian mummy of the Tarim oasis in Eastern Turkestan (Xinjian) (1500 BCE). Were they the guardians of the Harivarsa of met by Arjuna on his northward digvijaya ? Pl. 4.15. The Golden Man, a ruler of (Issyk Kul, Kazakhstan, 3 rd C. BCE) Pl. 4.16. Yudhiṣṭhira’s rājasūya (19 th C. painting) Pl. 12.1a. Avantiswamin Temple, Kashmir Pl. 12.1b. King Avantivarman, coronation scene, Avantiswamin Temple Pl. 12.2. Piṅḍīs in Kameshwar Temple 1 Pl. 12.3a. Kirmachi Temple, Udhampur Pl. 12.3b. Kirmachi Temple, Udhampur Pl. 12.4a. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4b. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4c. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4d. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4e. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4f. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4g. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4h. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4i. Equestarian Stone Statives. Pl. 12.4j. Equestarian Stone Statives. INTRODUCTION

We are pleased to present this book containing papers that were part of our International Conference titled ‘ Mahābhārata Manthan: A Critical Revisit to Tangible & Intangible Heritage’, a component of our Mahābhārata Manthan series of programs which also included an Exhibition on the Geography, Cities and Arts, and Cultural performances, all linked to Mahābhārata . The papers in this collection were presented between 19 th – 21 st July 2017 at New Delhi and reflect the themes of the conference, which mainly focused on aspects of the Epic’s Historiography & Historicity, critical analysis of the ‘ Critical Edition of Mahābhārata’ , (painstakingly edited and released by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) and also covered significant matters of geographical dimensions, archaeology, astronomical dating, intangible heritage & traditions, socio-culture and philosophical perspectives. The papers published herein reflect these multiple dimensions about the Mahābhārata and also places its importance in the historical and geographical context. Between the two famous ‘Epics’ of India, the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata , the latter has always been the center of ‘critical’ analysis and comments for many reasons. Over and above the ‘Critical Edition’, umpteen subjective commentaries have been written on this longest poetic narration of the ‘ itihāsa’ of the ‘Dwāpar’ era saga. At the seminar too, several critical aspects of the Mahābhārata were discussed amongst the scholars and the general intelligentsia. We consider here some main points that often lead to heated ‘criticism and contention’. Foremost issue relates to the acceptability of Mahābhārata as a text of the ‘history’ of ancient Bhārata of the Dwāpar era. This is because most fail to appreciate that just as we now divide our history as ancient, mediaeval and modern, ancient scholars used the nomenclature of Sat Yuga, Treta Yuga and Dwāpar Yuga to differentiate between the ‘ itihāsa’ of bygone days under various political, social and spiritual circumstances. Bhārata had ‘ itihāsa’ , that is, xx Mahābhārata Manthan

‘as it happened’, rather than ‘History’, which is derived from ‘ his-story’ or story of, or under a ruler’. The difference in concepts and methodologies of ancient Bhārata documentations, and the modern western ways of documentation have created this situation of ‘skepticism in some quarters of the academia’. Though Mahābhārata has been a subject of study in all times and ages, including since India’s independence, with many national and international conferences held on the topic, yet the recent ‘ manthan’ was different because for the first time we took up Mahābhārata as history, and also questioned the validity of all that was in or missing in the Critical Edition of BORI. The conference organized by our Trust, therefore, was to bring together the historians, archaeologists, philosophy experts and even independent scholars who have been doing remarkable work in the study of this ‘ etihāsic’ text of ancient India. For almost a thousand years, historical and political disturbances had greatly disturbed the formal education system in India. The position of traditional teachers and documenters was in jeopardy, and the upheavals actually scattered them apart, wherein they concentrated more in saving the books of knowledge. Considering the long eight to ten centuries of turmoil’s they faced, it is really a credit to their perseverance and intelligence that they still managed to save many important texts. Thus, it is these texts that help us to connect to our roots, and our historical journey. The research for understanding the chronology of ancient Bhārata’s history has been an important subject, and some earnest efforts were made even during British rule, especially the initiatives of Alexander Cunningham. It continued during post-independence India, with archaeologists and modern ‘historians’ giving it their own interpretations as per their understanding and methodology, and perhaps, their ideology. Though the Mahābhārata book clearly states that it is an ‘ itihāsa’ , [the book Jaya refers, jayonāmetihāso’yaṃ śrotavyo vijigīṣuṇā (quoted by Jijith N.Ravi in ‘The Geographical Data in Mahābhārata’, Mahābhārata Manthan Conference, 2017), and the Mahābhārata says that it is atrāpyudāharanti mama itihasa puṝatanam (Sabha Parva, quoted by Prof Sushmita Pande Footnote 38 of her article in this book), meaning that it is typical or exemplary history], yet the current dispensation of our ‘modern secular historians’ vehemently deny it the status of ‘history’. One of the oft repeated arguments for this is their belief that there have been too many interpolations in the original book about the Kurukshetra War, narrated in the ‘ Jaya’ which consists of only 8,800 verses, with the later versions about this War in the ‘ Bhārata’ increasing to 24,000 verses, and the ‘ ’Mahābhārata’ to 1,00,000 verses. Hence they feel it cannot be taken as ‘history’ as understood in modern terminology. We feel this argument is not sustainable to deny the history documented in this book, which is actually the History of Histories. What is the proof that additions to the original version was not an expansion of the span of events that were later thought to be of importance in knowing the actual history of that period in proper context? History is always getting new dimensions as and when more information comes to light or when scholars suggest additions of more relevant information or facts to give wider perspective. So additions to text should not be a disqualification as history. Rather it should be a matter of further study to know what was added, why, and do they fit into the overall ‘historical’ narration, and its objective? These doubts about historicity of Mahābhārata also arise as some Introduction xxi scholars find the ‘so called inconsistencies’ in its structure and architecture of the voluminous narration. Several scholars have worked intensely on this issue and are of the view that the Mahābhārata is a well-knit, structured methodical text, well synergized in narration. According to Herodotus, considered as the father of the modern discipline of history, history, like literature and anthropology originated from ‘mythology’. Thus, all have the same origin, and in order to know anything about ancient times of any country or place, we have to study their written, oral, or variously documented traditional material. How we sieve or we understand that documentation depends on how much we know about and understand the methodology that was prevalent in ancient times. If History is defined as ‘ the branch of knowledge dealing with past events’ or as ‘a continuous, systematic narrative of past events as relating to a particular people, country, period, person, etc., usually written as a chronological account, chronicle’, doesn’t the Mahābhārata or for that matter our other texts like the Rāmāyaṇa , , Brāhmaṇas, etc., fit into this definition? Isn’t it quite ironical that many scholars quote Pargiter for ancient lineage of Kings, but ignore that Pargiter got his information from referencing the Puranas like the Purana , Bhagwat Purana , etc. Even Reports of Alexander Cunningham quote from Puranas, and yet Puranas are not considered history! The biggest or ‘ Mahā’ argument erupts as soon as we say that the Mahābhārata is a historical text. And this happens because according to these skeptics, the western method of History writing is the ‘only’ and therefore, the ‘correct’ methodology. Majority of the modern- day historians ingrained with this thought will not budge an inch and would denounce people who wish to claim a certain literary work as history of an era. Concepts, methodologies and structuring of past and present facts depend on systems adopted during that particular period of time, as per convenience and requirements for doing the same. The ancient era scholars studied and learnt from those around them or those who lived before them, and developed a system to record dynasties or events around them. There was never any inclination for fictionalizing an event in those times and dissemination was through oral transmission. Thus knowledge was percolated and transmitted down the centuries through oral tradition, which then got documented in manuscripts. Why doubt this system? A dialogue has to begin to make the Mahābhārata , Rāmāyaṇa , the Purāṇas, etc.,as integral historical texts for formal study of ancient Indian history. With respect to Purāṇas, it is a known fact that information was passed through oral traditions, but definitely at some point in time these were written down, and that is why we have these texts with us. Even an archaeological search begins with references from ancient texts, but it is not always possible to prove everything archaeologically because of the deep and prolonged upheavals and damages to our lands, some natural calamities, and much political destruction. But an effort can be made to take a more serious look to understand the construct of our remotest past events and personalities, and sieving through our ancient texts can help in this matter. Therefore, as a first step, the Trust conducted a seminar to examine the ‘Historicity of the Mahābhārata’, and learned historians shared their knowledge on this important subject. xxii Mahābhārata Manthan

Besides, connected with this, is another matter of heated debate, that is, the date of the Kurukshetra War, for which academic papers on archeological and astronomical dating were also presented. The traditional date of the Mahābhārata War is given as being more than 5,000 years BCE. Astronomical dating of the War, based on the celestial positions regarding several critical events related to the war and leading personalities, is also giving dates ranging from the traditional date, like Prof Narhari Achar’s 3067 BCE or somewhat closer to the so far deduced Archaeological dating, like Ashok Bhatnagar’s 1794 BC. On the other hand, archaeologists have done their own researches and dating through scientific dating of the various materials, layers excavated at sites connected to Mahābhārata . Their dates hover around 1000 to 1400 BCE. Both the archaeological and astronomical dating is scientific, so how do we assess the correct date? Do archaeologists need more explorations and excavations and finer advanced technology? Or does astronomical dating require more accuracy in calculations, along with better understanding and critical analysis of the celestial data. After all, scientific work is a continuous journey of new research and findings. The papers answer some questions and also raise some, which need further ‘ manthan’ . A very vocal and heated session was on the validity of the ‘Critical Edition’ diluting, or omitting some significant parts from the original versions. Even certain additions like the ‘ chīrharaṇ’ of Draupadi have been questioned by some scholars, as we see in one of the papers presented at this conference. Several scholars felt that the Critical Edition itself needs a critical revisit to understand the validity of the ‘refurbished’ and shortened version, which is not acceptable to many scholars today. There were also some very interesting papers on the personality of Draupadi and some incidents related to her. The lively audio-visual show on the Cultural Heritage of Art, Folk and Classical traditions of Storytelling , that still carry forward the tales of Mahābhārata and engross the society, was well presented. Some of the scholars covered the traditions of Mahābhārata in different parts of India, like , North-East, Kashmir etc., making this Mahābhārata Manthan truly representative of the ‘ Mahā ’ or greater Bhārata. All this made this Mahābhārata Manthan a very wholesome deliberation to understand the above multifarious dimensions related to one of the most significant books of knowledge. The high standard of scholarship is well evident in this bouquet on Mahābhārata that emerged from the composition of the galaxy of eminent scholars, and will spread its fragrance to all lovers of ancient India. – Neera Misra LIST OF CONTRIBUTERS

S.No. NAME Emails 1. A.A. Purushothaman - [email protected] and A. Harindranath 2. Abhay Kumar Singh - [email protected] 3. Alexis Pinchard - [email protected] 4. Ashok K Bhatnagar - [email protected] 5. B.B. Lal - [email protected] 6. B.R. Mani - [email protected] 7. Bhuvan Vikram - [email protected] 8. B.V.K. Shastry - [email protected] 9. Come Carpentier - [email protected] 10. D.K. Hari and D. Hema Hari - [email protected] 11. Fredrick Smith - [email protected] 12. Heramb Chaturvedi - [email protected] 13. Indrajit Bandyopadhyay - [email protected] 14. Jahnavi Bidnur - [email protected] 15. Jana Bandyopadhyay - [email protected] 16. Jijith Nadumuri Ravi - [email protected] xxiv Mahābhārata Manthan

17. Keonraad Elst - [email protected] 18. Mohan Gupta - [email protected] 19. Nalini Rao - [email protected] 20. Neera Misra - [email protected] 21. Nilesh Oak and Aparna Dhir - [email protected] [email protected] 22. Pradeep Bhattacharya - [email protected] 23. Pradip Jyoti Mahanta - [email protected]. 24. Praful Goradia and Jagjeevan Iyer - [email protected] 25. Satya Chaitanya - [email protected] 26. Shashi Tiwari - [email protected] 27. Susmita Pande - [email protected] 28. Vasant Shinde - [email protected] 29. Virendra Bangroo - [email protected] 30. Yvette Claire Rosser (Ram Rani) - [email protected]