Fwd: Mahabhaarat is an epic or historical reality !!!

[Guest guest]

, " utpal pathak "

<vedic_pathak wrote:

 

Dear Members,

 

Please go through the 2 nos. 'Audio files' of Interview of Dr.

Narahari Achar over the issue on his reseach for Mahabhaarata War

Date.

 

http://www.sanatanadharmafoundation.com/index.php?

option=com_content & task=view & id=47 & Itemid=32

 

Best Regards,

 

Utpal

 

, " utpal pathak "

<vedic_pathak@> wrote:

>

>

> Dear Members,

>

> I've come across the press release on net which gives intresting

> account. I am happy to see that serious efforts are being made by

> wellmeaning scholars to *put the record straight*.

>

> Our history books needs to be re-written and Dr. Narahari Achar

has

> really provided momentum for that.

>

> !....!....!

>

> PRESS RELEASE

>

>

> Scientists Collide with Linguists to Assert Indigenous origin of

Indian

> Civilization

>

> Comprehensive population genetics data along with archeological and

> astronomical evidence presented at June 23-25, 2006 conference in

> Dartmouth, MA, overwhelmingly concluded that Indian civilization

and its

> human population is indigenous.

>

> In fact, the original people and culture within the Indian

Subcontinent

> may even be a likely pool for the genetic, linguistic, and cultural

> origin of the most rest of the world, particularly Europe and Asia.

>

> Leading evidences come from population genetics, which were

presented by

> two leading researchers in the field, Dr. V. K. Kashyap, National

> Institute of Biologicals, India, and Dr. Peter Underhill of

Stanford

> University in California. Their results generally contradict the

notion

> Aryan invasion/migration theory for the origin of Indian

civilization.

>

> Underhill concluded " the spatial frequency distributions of both L1

> frequency and variance levels show a spreading pattern emanating

from

> India " , referring to a Y chromosome marker. He, however, put

several

> caveats before interpreting genetic data, including " Y-ancestry

may not

> always reflect the ancestry of the rest of the genome "

>

> Dr. Kashyap, on the other hand, with the most comprehensive set of

> genetic data was quite emphatic in his assertion that there is " no

clear

> genetic evidence for an intrusion of Indo-Aryan people into India,

[and]

> establishment of caste system and gene flow. "

>

> Michael Witzel, a Harvard linguist, who is known to lead the idea

of

> Aryan invasion/migration/influx theory in more recent times,

continued

> to question genetic evidence on the basis that it does not provide

the

> time resolution to explain events that may have been involved in

Aryan

> presence in India.

>

> Dr. Kashyap's reply was that even though the time resolution needs

> further work, the fact that there are clear and distinct

differences in

> the gene pools of Indian population and those of Central Asian and

> European groups, the evidence nevertheless negates any Aryan

invasion or

> migration into Indian Subcontinent.

>

> Witzel though refused to present his own data and evidence for his

> theories despite being invited to do so was nevertheless present

in the

> conference and raised many questions. Some of his commentaries

> questioning the credibility of scholars evoked sharp responses from

> other participants.

>

> Rig Veda has been dated to 1,500 BC by those who use linguistics to

> claim its origin Aryans coming out of Central Asia and Europe.

> Archaeologist B.B. Lal and scientist and historian N.S. Rajaram

> disagreed with the position of linguists, in particular Witzel who

> claimed literary and linguistic evidence for the non-Indian origin

of

> the Vedic civilization.

>

> Dr. Narahari Achar, a physicist from University of Memphis clearly

> showed with astronomical analysis that the Mahabharata war in

3,067 BC,

> thus poking a major hole in the outside Aryan origin of Vedic

people.

>

> Interestingly, Witzel stated, for the first time to many in the

> audience, that he and his colleagues no longer to Aryan

> invasion theory.

>

> Dr. Bal Ram Singh, Director, Center for Indic Studies at UMass

> Dartmouth, which organized the conference was appalled at the

level of

> visceral feelings Witzel holds against some of the scholars in the

> field, but felt satisfied with the overall outcome of the

conference.

>

> " I am glad to see people who have been scholarly shooting at each

other

> for about a decade are finally in one room, this is a progress " ,

said

> Singh.

>

> The conference was able to bring together in one room for the

first time

> experts from genetics, archeology, physics, linguistics,

anthropology,

> history, and philosophy. A proceedings of the conference is

expected to

> come out soon, detailing various arguments on the origin of Indian

> civilization.

>

> The conference was sponsored by the Center for Indic Studies at

UMass

> Dartmouth (www.umassd.edu/indic <http://www.umassd.edu/indic> )

with

> co-sponsorship from Educator's Society for the Heritage of India

> (www.eshiusa.org <http://www.eshiusa.org/> ).

>

> Bal Ram Singh, Ph.D. Director, Center for Indic Studies University

of

> Massachusetts Dartmouth 285 Old Westport Road Dartmouth, MA 02747

>

> Phone: 508-999-8588 Fax: 508-999-8451 Email: bsingh@

> <bsingh@>

>

> Internet address: http://www.umassd.edu/indic

> <http://www.umassd.edu/indic>

>

> !.....!....!

>

>

> , " vvootla " <vvootla@> wrote:

> >

> > Namaste Ashwin ji,

> >

> > >>> But the Mahabharat is a story full of immaginations. Most of

the

> > characters are immaginary

> >

> > Can you elaborate with quoting a few samples of

those 'imaginations'

> > and why you think that they are absolutely 'imaginations' and not

> > 'reality'? However, if you are not sure and the above was just a

> > statement intended to share 'what you like to believe' then it

is okay

> > and we respect that right of yours.

> >

> > Regards,

> > -Prasad

> >

> > , Ashwin Rawal ashwinrawal@

wrote:

> > >

> > > No my dear. My statement is not contradictory. I have said

that Shri

> > Krishna is a reality and Ved Vyasji was also in the same time.

This is

> > what I have read. But the Mahabharat is a story full of

immaginations.

> > Most of the characters are immaginary.

> > >

> > > Dr.Ashwin Rawal

> > >

> > > --- On Thu, 25/12/08, utpal pathak vedic_pathak@ wrote:

> > >

> > > utpal pathak vedic_pathak@

> > > Re: Mahabhaarat is an epic or

historical

> > reality !!!

> > >

> > > Thursday, 25 December, 2008, 7:26 AM

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Namaste Ahwin Bhai,

> > >

> > > >Shri Krishna was a historical reality

> > >

> > > >Vyasji has given immaginary characters and incidents but his

> > > >intention was to spread knowledge of Vedas/Upanishadas thru

Gita

> > >

> > > The above two statements gives contradictory views.

> > >

> > > However, the point is to find out the truth or atleast go as

near as

> > > we can get collectively.

> > >

> > > Best Regards,

> > >

> > > Utpal

> > >

> > > , Ashwin Rawal

<ashwinrawal@

> ...>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Utpalji,

> > > > So far my limited knowledge is concerned, Shri Krishna was a

> > > historical reality. He was born and the time given in Notable

> > > Horoscope is also correct. Ved Vyasji was also alive in the

same

> > > period when Shri Krishna was alive. Ved Vyasji tried to spread

> > > knowledge of Vedas and Upanishadas to common men and he wrote

lots

> > > of Puranas and long poem of Mahabharat. Mahabharat was a

reality but

> > > was not in the same form as narrated by Vyasji. Vyasji has

given

> > > immaginary characters and incidents but his intention was to

spread

> > > knowledge of Vedas/Upanishadas thru Gita. There was a

discussion

> > > between Krishna and Arjuna in a normal form and not in

Sanskrit. He

> > > advised Arjuna to start war after giving him the theory of

Karma.

> > > Vyasji just gave a poetic form in sanskrit.

> > > >

> > > > Dr.Ashwin Rawal

> > > >

> > > > --- On Tue, 23/12/08, utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@ ...> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@ ...>

> > > > Mahabhaarat is an epic or historical

> > > reality !!!

> > > >

> > > > Tuesday, 23 December, 2008, 12:17 AM

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Narasimha Garu & Members,

> > > >

> > > > There is a long pending question with me and that is

Historical

> > > > reality or otherwise of our many revered personalities/

events.

> > > >

> > > > Take for instance, 'Mahabhaarat' & 'Shri Krishna'.

> > > >

> > > > I would try to give some view points gathered from all these

years

> > > > from various sources and my own thinking as well-

> > > >

> > > > 1) Mahatma Gandhi didn't belive that Mahabhaarat was a

reality.he

> > > > thought that it was 'epic'-creation of a poet. he seems to be

> > > unable

> > > > to belive logically the creation of 100 sons etc...

> > > >

> > > > 2) How can parents name their children

as 'DURYodhan', 'Du:Shasan'

> > > > etc.. i am not sure about the meaning of the names but it

implies

> > > > something perverted. knwoledgable person in sanskrit can

shed some

> > > > light on this.

> > > >

> > > > 3) Mahabhaarat was a Grand Poem created by super-intelligent

> > > author,

> > > > Maharshi Vyaas and hence Gita was also his own creation and

> > > krsihna

> > > > was just a 'imaginary' central character of his grand work.

> > > >

> > > > !.....!..... !

> > > >

> > > > 1) Dr. Raman, in Notable Horoscopes has strongly written

that Shri

> > > > Krishna was a historically reality. His reasoning was that an

> > > > *Imaginery creation* of some poet can never Inspire & attract

> > > > millions of people for thousans of years.

> > > >

> > > > 2) If Maharshi Vyaas has written imaginery story of

Mahabhaarat to

> > > > satisfy his poetic genious then how come he himself features

in

> > > the

> > > > story? if let's consider even that as a possibility but then

WHY

> > > > he'll write another book just on Shri Krishna i.e.

Bhaagavata. why

> > > > he'll himself Worship his own 'Kaalpanik Paatra'.

> > > >

> > > > 3) If Shri Krishna was never born, then how come so many

Saints of

> > > > yesteryears, saw his form.

> > > > One can argue that becuase of their intense worship of that

> > > > perticular Form, they could see the same form of the supreme

> > > > reality...the supreme power can take any form for the Bhakta.

> > > > The solid counter argument is that, Paramhamsa Yogananda and

> > > > Maharshi Aurobindo, it seems, never were a Devotee of that

form of

> > > > Shri Krishna, then how come in their case, without devotion &

> > > desire

> > > > they got to see the form of Shri Krushna?

> > > >

> > > > !....!....!

> > > >

> > > > Any thoughts about this? How to conclusively establish the

Truth

> > > in

> > > > this case?

> > > >

> > > > Warm Regards,

> > > >

> > > > Utpal

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Bring your gang together. Do your thing. Find your favourite

> > > group at http://in.promos. / groups/

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now, on

> > http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-

08.html/

> > >

> >

>

 

--- End forwarded message ---