History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.747

v4.c63.t2.747

Another epoch for the Mahābhārata war and the beginning of Kaliyuga is indicated by some passages of historic importance found in some of the Purāṇas. The Vāyupurāṇa (99. 4-15) and the Matsyapurāṇa (273. 36) say that from the birth of Parīkṣit to the coronation of Mahāpadma (Nanda) a period of 1050 years elapsed, while the Bhāgavata XII. 2. 26 assigns 1015 years for the same. There is some mistake in the Purāṇa texts here. The Matsya (in chap. 271. 17-30) enumerates the kings of the Bārhadratha dynasty of Magadha descended from Sahadeva, son of Jarāsandha, and states that the dynasty will rule (i. e. ruled) for a thousand years. Then chap. 272 (verses 1-5) speaks of five kings, who will be followed by the Śiśunāka dynasty, that together reigned for 360 years and the last king in which was Mahānandi (verses 6-13) whose son from a śūdra wife was Mahāpadma (272. 18). So if the years of these three dynasties are added we get the period of about 1500 years. This is supported by the Bhāgavatapurāṇa (IX. 22. 48 and XII. 1-2) and Vāyupurāṇa (99. 308-321), which latter says that 32 kings of the Bārhadratha dynasty will rule for 1000, then five Vitihotra kings for 138 years (Pradyota and others) and then the Śaiśunāka (Śiśunāga in the Bhāgavata and in the Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa III. 74. 134-135) dynasty for 362 (in all exactly 1500 years). The same periods are given by the Viṣṇupurāṇa (IV. 23 and 24) and by the Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa III. 74. 121-135. Śrīdhara in his comment on Bhāgavata XII. 2. 26 states that the interval between Parīkṣit and Nanda is 1498 as the Bhāgavata holds that the Śaiśunāga dynasty ruled for 360 years (XII. 1. 4-6). Therefore the proper reading in the Vāyupurāṇa or Matsyapurāṇa or the Bhāgavata should be 'pañcaśatottaram' instead of ‘pañcāśaduttaram’ or ‘pañcadaśottaram.’ Taking the interval between Parīkṣit and Nanda to be 1500 years and holding as most modern scholars do that the Nandas flourished in the 4th century B. C., Parīkṣit, the grandson of Arjuna, the Mahābhārata war and the beginning of Kaliyuga would have to be placed in the 19th century B.C. Therefore there are so far three main different epochs for the Mahābhārata war viz. 3101 B. C., 2448 B. C. and about 1900 B. C. All the three are well attested by evidence dating at least from about the 5th century A. D. One cannot dogmatically say that a certain tradition alone out of these three is the only correct one. All that one can say is that one prefers a particular tradition to the other two. Since the epoch of 1900 B. C. is supported by the Purāṇas in great detail by citing the names of the several kings and their regnal years I personally regard the epoch of 1900 B. C. for the Mahābhārata war as more probable than the other two. It is best to acknowledge one’s inability to assign a certain date to the Mahābhārata war rather than twist plain words or ignore altogether inconvenient passages or put on them fanciful or far-fetched interpretations. The first desideratum is to prepare critical editions of the important purāṇas from the best mss. material. Even then it is doubtful whether unanimity among scholars can be secured. A scholarly beginning was made by Pargiter in his book ‘The Purāṇa texts of the dynasties of the Kali Age’ (1913). He compares the material available in the printed editions of several Purāṇas and Mss. on the subject of royal dynasties. One cannot or may not agree with many of the assumptions and inferences that he makes or draws, yet one cannot withhold admiration for his industry and method. For example, I cannot agree with him when he takes ‘bhaviṣye kathitān’ of the Matsyapurāṇa or ‘bhaviṣye pathitān’ of Vāyu (99. 267) as referring to the Bhaviṣyapurāṇa. In many passages of the Purāṇas we have references to ‘bhaviṣyajña’ (Brahmāṇḍa III. 74. 105), which simply means ‘those who are conversant with sections on the future’ contained in ancient works like the Mahābhārata.