When was Bhagavatam written by Vyasadeva?

[Guest guest]

> > By logic it seems that afterwards. Otherwise how could Vyasa include in

> > the Bhagavatam the conversation between Pariksit and Sukadeva? And death

> > of Maharaja Pariksit? In fact, he included also description of the

> > discussion in Naimsaranya, which took place after Pariksit's death.

> >

> > > Related question: When did Narada meet Vyasadeva and instructed him to

> > > write Srimad-Bhagavatam? Was that in Kali Yuga?

> >

> > From the discussion between Narada and Vyasa seems clear that at that

> > time Mahabharata was already written (SB.1.5.3). Mahabharata describes

> > (at least Subramaniam's version) Krsna's disappearance. So the

> > discussion between Narada and Vyasa must have taken place after Krsna's

> > disappearance, that means when Kali-yuga already begun (if we take

> > Krsna's disappearance for the beginning of Kali-yuga).

>

> This kind of logic may not conclusive. Because Vyasadeva is a trikala

> darshi. He can see the past, present & future. So he can very well write

> about events which will happen in the future. For eg. he wrote about

> Chanakya & Buddha in SB and about Jesus & Mohammed in the Bhavishya Purana

> doesn't mean that he wrote after these personalities appeared.

 

As bhakta Didzis wrote, Buddha and Canakya are mentioned in future tense. I

don't have Mahabharata in Sanskrit, neither I know Sanskrit, but

translations use past tense (as Bhagavatam does, except when it speaks about

future, like Lord Buddha). Perhaps that is not "conclusive," but it might be

an indication.

 

Otherwise, Srila Prabhupada writes in his purport to SB.1.7.11:

 

> Srila Vyasadeva knew that the child, after his birth, would not stay at

> home. Therefore he (Vyasadeva) impressed upon him the synopsis of the

> Bhagavatam so that the child could be made attached to the transcendental

> activities of the Lord. After his birth, the child was still more educated

> in the subject of the Bhagavatam by recitation of the actual poems.

 

Perhaps another piece from SB.1.7.8 will be even more helpful:

 

> Amongst mundane scholars, there is some diversity of opinion as to the

> date of compilation of Srimad-Bhagavatam. It is, however, certain from the

> text of the Bhagavatam that it was compiled before the disappearance of

> King Pariksit and after the departure of Lord Krsna. When Maharaja

> Pariksit was ruling the world as the King of Bharata-varsa, he chastised

> the personality of Kali. According to revealed scriptures and astrological

> calculation, the age of Kali is in its five thousandth year. Therefore,

> Srimad-Bhagavatam was compiled not less than five thousand years ago.

> Mahabharata was compiled before Srimad-Bhagavatam, and the Puranas were

> compiled before Mahabharata. That is an estimation of the date of

> compilation of the different Vedic literatures. The synopsis of

> Srimad-Bhagavatam was given before the detailed description under

> instruction of Narada.

 

So I would propose that after Lord Krsna's diappearace Narada came to Vyasa

and instructed him to write Bhagavatam. Then Vyasa compiled synopsis, and

teached them to Sukadeva while the later was still in the womb. Actually,

maybe more then synopsis were ready at that point. I write this because once

I asked Gopiparanadhana Prabhu about this point (for translation purposes)

and he said that in another Purana it is said that Vyasa actually succeded

in bringing Sukadeva back home, after Suka left the womb and home. Vyasa did

it by reciting Bhagavatam, which attracted Sukadeva to come back. Then

Vyasadeva thought him Bhagavatam in more full version than synopsis, and

Sukadeva left again.(end of Gopiparanadhana's explanation) During his

travels, Suka met Maharaja Pariksit and recited Bhagavatam--in presence of

Narada and Vyasa. So I would suspect that Vyasa could have been writing

different parts of Bhagavatam at different times. Perhaps he compiled parts

of Bhagavatam earlier, and then, after listening to Suka's recitation and

after Pariksit's death, more descriptions were added.

 

This seems to be reasonable to me. I accept though that someone can have

other, more conclusive statements. If so, would be nice to hear about them.

 

ys.GNdd