The War of Mahabharata--A nuclear war?

I have heard a lot of people talk that the war of Kuru Kshetra mentioned in the Mahabharata was the First World War. Historians believing civilization developed some 5000 years ago may discard this view but I believe. Based on my knowledge on the epic, discussion with my parents and evidences shown in some videos, I have discovered some logical reasons to believe it was the first World War.

1. Involvement

The Indian sub-continent, then known as the Jambudweep(Jambudvipa)  had been divided into many kingdoms. One of them was Hastinapur, capital city of Kuru kingdom,where the story of the epic is centered.

There were also several other kingdoms which participated in the war on the calling from Pandavas, and their friend Lord Krishna. To support the army of Kauravas(100 Princes of Hastinapur), many other kingdoms participated in the war.

The approximate number of soldiers involved has also been mentioned in the epic. Kauravas had gathered about 11 lakh soldiers while Pandavas had arranged 7 lakh soldiers. At the end of the war, some 200-500 soldiers were left alive.

2. Weapons

Anyone who has read Mahabharata comes across with bows and arrows as the weapons. The description of the weapons seem contemporary to the date during which the epic had been written down because we do not know of the arrows that send out fire or track targets or kill thousands of people at once.

Bows and arrows might have been the most convincing weapons for description at that time. If Guru Vyas had said about sophisticated nuclear weapons, who would have believed him? But he does mention the Brahmashtra, the weapon of mass destruction. Only some authorized people had license to use them, among which is Guru Drona's son, Ashwathama. Even Karna talks about using the weapon to kill the Pandavas but does not use it in his life time. Krishna also could have used the weapon had he not taken a vow not to use weapons in the war against anyone. Among the Pandavas, Arjuna was the one who used it to destroy thousands of soldiers after his son had been killed.

This weapon of mass destruction was special. Anyone who had it would be among the most powerful. According to other Sanskrit texts like the Puranas and the Ramyana, Guru Vashistha was the first to produce it in war against Guru Vishwamitra, who later gained one after a lot of  penances (studies and meditations). Parshu Ram, the teacher of Karna also possessed one, which he used against evil-doing Kshatriyas. The limited number of users signifies its strength and sophistication. The death toll presented above corresponds to the use of weapons of mass-destruction.

3. End of Civilization

The War of the Mahabharata is said to be the marking of end of Dwapar Yug. In fact, it wiped out civilization from the Indian sub-continent. The Kuru Kshetra and the land around it became infertile. The area is now in the borders between Pakistan and Afghanistan and it is among the most barren parts of the sub-continent. The amount of radioactive materials have been estimated to be high in the area, which is not a surprise, owing to the use of nuclear weapons in the war that occurred some eight to ten thousand years ago. Cities, and even countries may have been destroyed. Along with them, the weapons must have been destroyed and their formula, hidden.

Women, children and senescent were the only people who survived the direct deaths in the war. Their conditions must have been worse increasing the number of deaths and migration to other places. They seem to have migrated eastwards and southwards because they were the regions that survived the effect of nuclear weapons. Thus the areas around Hastinapur were also deserted, forcing the Pandavas to leave the kingdoms towards the end of their lives. Those who survived must have passed the stories generation-after-generation but must have lived nomadic lives until the discovery of fertile lands between the Indus and the Ganga.

This somewhat corresponds to one of Albert Einstein's famous sayings, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."     

Ahilya's Story--A History of Male Domination

A story is told by Viswamitra as he leads Ram and Lakshman to the ashram of Gautam-a sage, Royal teacher of King Janak and  ‘most honoured by the Gods who dwell above the sky.’ The story is famous as the story of Indra and Ahilya.

I don’t want to get into the details of the story which has been retold for generations via the Valmiki Ramayan and many others who had read or heard the Ramayan and many know(actually they think they know!) that Ahilya, being driven by lust kept immoral relationship with Indra-king of Gods and cursed by her husband into becoming a stone until Ram noticed, came and touched her. Have we been diverted from the truth? Yes, we have been diverted from the truth.

1. What Valmiki Ramayan Says

The Ramayan describes her as counter-part of Gautam until this incident and even lists her as Pancha Kanya (also known as Five Satis-Devotees of their husbands) along with Sita, Tara, Mandodari and Draupadi. (It is strange that all these women suffered male domination!) The arrival of Indra is described as in the lines below:

‘It chanced the saint had gone away,
When Town-destroying Indra came,
And saw the beauty of the dame.’

Based on these lines, I don’t see Ahilya as the culprit because she did not even have a hint that Indra was coming. I find the culprit in Indra(Why is he being culprit in my every post?). Ramayan of other writers of have given in details, the preparation made by Indra and cause of Gautam’s absence which I don’t think should be detailed. I am concerned with everything that happened after the sage's departure.

2. What I have to Say

What was her reaction after seeing her husband coming back so soon and knowing that he was Indra instead? This question is important if we regard Ahilya as a noble woman. She was wife of one of the most heeded scholars of that age and happy with her conjugal life. Then could she have submitted herself to Indra at once to fulfill fer lust? That’s not possible at all. ‘But touched by love’s unholy fire, She yielded to the God’s desire.’ Such defaming lines have been used for Ahilya in Valmiki Ramayan but don’t the two word’s “God’s desire” not explain that Ahilya was under the authority of Indra. Who is the culprit-- Indra, the mightier who suppressed a lady, or Ahilya-- the inferior? The answer should have been Indra, but our blind-folded eyes see guilt on Ahilya. Shame on us!

Had this incident been a matter of love affair or adultery, I would not have to speak against Gautam, what he did to his wife might have been pardonable but this is a matter of crime. Crime on Ahilya by a male dominant society! Indra tricks Gautam into going out of the house at night, comes in his guise and meets Ahilya whom he tells who he is. She is then seduced by the king of Swarga Just as in modern times, this was a crime  then but the victim was much victimized than the culprit. (Such trend still exists, must be the remnants of the past!)

After returning from the river, feeling that the daylight was far off, Gautam sees Indra rushing in a hurry. Ramayan says he was cursed but I don’t believe it. Had he been cursed, how could he forever become the King of Gods! He then curses the lady to remain as dead as stone and goes away saying he cannot accept her. (Life OK’s Mahadev showed that the curse on Indra was lifted by Parvati on the request of young Ganesh. How could anyone, that too a woman, lift the punishment for such a crime on mere request of a child? Was she afraid of Indra? Had she not lifted the curse and punished Indra even more, there would have been an inspiration for a secured society for women at present. Alas! That did not happen, not even on a contemporary show.)

Being a wise sage, why could Gautam not accept his wife or revolting against Indra? This idea haunts me whenever I read, watch or hear the story and I imagine him doing so. But what I imagine had not occurred at all! Gautam was a learned-man(educated man) and though people say such men are wise, I don’t think so. They are actually the ones who live for the prevalent traditions of the society. Gautam is the best example of Rousseau’s citizen. Yes, he was scared of the society. What would others say if he accepted a woman who had “crossed her limits”? He knew the question would arise and instead of answering, he abandoned his wife at the state of distress. This led the society to believe her as the culprit and apparently, Indra benefited. As a king, no one would raise questions on him and what would have happened if he was questioned? All the blame would go to the dame who had no one to support. What became of her life? Everyone knows--as dead as stone and the one who regained a little consciousness when Ram kicked her. (Ramayan says that Ram touched Ahilya on her head to bring her back to consciousness. It is to be noted that very few people visited that lonely cottage after Gautam left. Vishwamitra, Ram and Lakshman had reached near the cottage in the evening and Ram had been curious of Ahilya. How Ahilya survived that long might be a different question, but Ram kicked her during her unconsciousness. And it might have been other body parts as well, not only the head!)

I often think, “Had Gautam defended his wife and made Indra confess his sin, there would have been a more secure society for women.” His action might have affected him then but would have created ideal society for women. 

Conclusion

The present society-it lives in duality. Sometimes it says Ahilya a scarlet woman and sometimes respects her as devotee to husband(who left her at time of distress!) This duality, which still exists, would have been ended a long time ago had Gautam raised his voice against the crimes of the SHAMELESS Indra.[i]

---

[i] The texts in Italics have been derived from The RÁMÁYAN of VÁLMÍKI Translated into English Verse, Ralph T. H. Griffith, 1870-1874.

A Note on Marriage Anniversary of Uma-Shankar

Had Lord Shiva and Lady Parvati lived till date, they would have celebrated their __th marriage anniversary this Akshaya Tritiya![1] Hindus worship them as God and Goddess. They believe that their miraculous bonding formed the Earth and protected Her from the influence of Asuras(infamous as 'demons').

I take this marriage as a historically significant event. Among all the 33 crores[2] Lords(a.k.a. Gods), the marriages of only two are remembered-- one of Shiva and the other of Ram. Why? I asked this question time and again to myself and I have come to an interesting conclusion based on what I have read and have listened to from our “Holy Books”.

The marriage between Lord Shiva and Lady Parvati was not a minor event- not at all. This marriage carried a sense of revolution against the then social conditions and traditions. Of course, the parents of Parvati- Himalaya and Menaka had no objections on the marriage. They had probably feared the result of refusal to Lord Shiva[3]. Whatever it was, love or force or fear, the marriage was a great ceremony. It was an event that could pave path for development of new culture, new traditions. It was a ceremony that united people of two races- the indigenous Dravidians and the immigrant Aryans!

Nothing but his existence is known about Lord Shiva. His family name as well as clan has remained anonymous. Yet he was a great warrior of the Himalayas. He had a huge army of Bhootas, Pretas and Yoginis. Though the names might suggest that these were ghosts and demons, in reality they were clans of nomadic indigenous people. As they had accepted Shiva as Lord, I believe the Lord himself belonged to one of such tribes.

Immigrants have always troubled indigenous people. Aborigines of Australia and Red Indians of North America are the commonest examples of indigenous communities dissolved by the influence of immigrants. Similar might have the situations then. The immigrants who called themselves Arya or Noble must have tried to suppress the indigenous tribes. Their true colors are shown where Indra describes himself victorious over the people of the Ancient Indus Civilization. He had been there long after the people had died of drought and famine but he called it his mass killing[4]. The statement had an effect upon the innocent people and Indra became their Lord.

Lord Shiva with his huge army, however was able to dominate the Aryas to some extent. He must have defeated Indra and gained the dignity of being Lord of the Lords[5]. As a result, the Aryans had to do something to gain him into confidence. To let Shiva marry Parvati was the best way to get his support and also expand their culture. The denial was never made, the reason to which, I have given already.

The marriage ceremony of Uma-Shankar was grand. People from all over the places of Jambudweep participated. The Aryans went to the bridal side while the Asuras, Shiva’s Army along with many of the sages came from groom’s side. The Chandra Shekhara guise of Lord Shiva was the talk of the people. He had officially accepted to be one of the Aryans. As of Lady Parvati, there was no match to her beauty. Her love and devotion had finally met a happy end. I am not sure if their union gave rise to the Earth, but what I am sure is that their union was an example that set the message of co-existence.[i]

---

[1] I am not sure of the actual date! The accuracy in the number of years has not been provided to me!!

[2] There are 33 classes of Lords in reality. Many Hindus believe it to be 33 crores(1 crore= 10 millions) because of the word “Koti” in Sanskrit which has two diverse meanings.

[3] Lord Shiva had previously loved and married Sati, the daughter of Dakshya. Because Dakshya refused to accept Shiva as son-in-law(he had declared the marriage as elopement), Sati died and Lord Shiva had nearly destroyed a race.

[4] Based on the article on Indus Valley Civilization in Wikipedia.

[5] Except Lord Shiva, none of the Hindu Gods are nomadic or dark-complexioned. It is not by chance; Lord Shiva is the only Dravidian originated Hindu God.

---

[i] At the End: It has been a common practice to write Lord in front of Shiva’s name. If it is so, the name of Parvati should be prefixed by Lady. Although many people would prefer writing Goddess before the name of Parvati, I have omitted the use.

As to the matter related to Ram's marriage, it is remembered as marriage of Aryan Prince to a Dravidian Princess.

Goma's Birth and Curse on Her

The nineteenth chapter of Shree Swasthani Vrat Katha (derived from Magha Mahatmya of Skanda Puran) deals with the birth of Goma and the curse given to her. In both cases, there are plenty of myths.

First, let us look at the birth of Goma. Her parents Shivabhatta and Sati are poor Brahmans and devotees of LordGanesh. They worship Him every Tuesday in the hope of getting wealth as boon. Happy with their devotion, Lord Ganesh apparates and says, “Next Tuesday, when you come over here for worship, you shall find something. Take it home and keep it on a plate covering with another plate. After 4 days, that shall turn to gold.” And then he disapparates. Next Tuesday, they find a laddoo and keep it as instructed. What a wonderful surprise! They find a piece of gold in its place and soon become rich. They even donate the riches to the poor and their popularity also increases. But they do not have a child. So they worship Ganesh again. He appears and says, “Next Tuesday, when you come to worship, you shall see a cow. She shall look at you and after a while she shall defecate. At that moment, before the dung hits the ground, catch it and take it home. Keep it on a plate covering with a plate. Then you may find a daughter. You shall not get a son though, because you had not kept that in your previous life.” Then he disappears. They do as instructed, and a daughter is born out of cow-dung and that is the reason why her name becomes Goma.  

This is what the story says and its too mythical. The same thing could have been recorded, which I believe is much close to truth, as:

The Brahmans Shivabhatta and his wife went to worship Lord Ganesh every Tuesday. As they were poor, they were in want of riches. One day, they found a big piece of gold mistaking it for a laddoo, took it home. When they found out that it was gold, they became happy and started trading on gold which gave them riches and money enough to live securely and also to donate to the poor. Being poor was one small problem but having riches without heir or protector was a greater one. One day, as they were worshipping Ganesh, they happened to see a newly born, abandoned girl beside a heap of cow-dung. They adopted the child and named her Goma.

Please take a look at the original text and my suggestion. The original one looks like a story made up by Shivabhatta and his wife to explain their sudden prosperity and begetting of a daughter. And our Guru Ved Vyas kept it in Puran without even double checking the probability of the story. Still, some Pundits say he was a historian and Purans speak history. Shameful, it is that we have been misled by our greatest teacher! What would intellectuals say if we believe in stories in which a girl is born out of cow-dung—fools? Also, the statement of not getting a son because of the Karma of previous life--who has ever seen the previous lives and proved that? Does it not imply gender discrimination?

Now, let’s look at the circumstances at which Goma is cursed. As popularity of Shivabhatta increased, Indra, along with his brothers (Gods/Devas) goes to Lord Shiva’s abode Kailash and says, “O Lord! Shivabhatta and his wife worshipped your son Ganesh and gained enormous wealth which they have also been donating to the poor. This has brought a threat on to Amaravati (Heaven’s capital). They also gained a daughter from your son’s blessings. So, please do something O Lord! And help us protect Amaravati.” Lord Shiva immediately agrees and goes to Shivabhatta’s house in the guise of a sage and asks alms with a five-year-old Goma. As she is busy in her chores, she keeps him waiting for sometime but does give the alms. The sage then asks rice grains to be used for daily Pooja (worship) to which she refuses. Then all of suuden, enraged sage curses,”May your parents’ wealth diminish, may you be married to a 70-year-old, may you suffer a lot and may your parents die soon.” And then he goes away giving tears to the little girl.

Why such harsh curse for such a small innocent child? The question is not asked by me alone but also by her mother Sati and many people who have read it. And I have some possible reasons: Insecurity of Indra (seen in many stories where he cannot rule well but still wants the post of “Dev Raj”), and the jealousy of Shiva with Ganesh. Questions arise- Was Lord Shiva  jealous of Ganesh? Does the provocation by Indra mentioning the name of his son as the God worshipped by the Brahmans and the action taken by him not suggest jealousy? And the curse- of course, it was planned. Otherwise the sage may have cursed the little girl only saying she did sin by making him wait, he would not have cursed her parents.

    
Why should we blindly believe that God loves us? If poor becoming rich brings their reign in difficulty, how are they different from present day leaders? To hide the inefficiency of the rule of Devas, myths were made. Because we are led to believe that they were true, we blindly say, “Yeah, that was what had happened.” It’s high time we change the way we think.

Was Valmiki the Original Writer of the Ramayana?

What a funny and stupid title? Who does not know that Ramayan was written by Valmiki? This is not a matter for discussion! These might be your immediate reactions. But I have found something what is worth discussion.

These stanzas are from "The Ramayan of Valmiki, translated into English verse" by Ralph T.H. Griffith published around 1870s.

"Praise to Válmíki, bird of charming song
Who mounts on Poesy’s sublimest spray,
And sweetly sings with accent clear and strong
  Ráma, aye Ráma, in his deathless lay.

Where breathes the man can listen to the strain
  That flows in music from Válmíki’s tongue,
Nor feel his feet the path of bliss attain
  When Ráma’s glory by the saint is sung!

The stream Rámáyan leaves its sacred fount
  The whole wide world from sin and stain to free.

 The Prince of Hermits is the parent mount,
  The lordly Ráma is the darling sea.

Glory to him whose fame is ever bright!
  Glory to him, Prachetas’ holy son!
Whose pure lips quaff with ever new delight
  The nectar-sea of deeds by Ráma done.

Hail, arch-ascetic, pious, good, and kind!
  Hail, Saint Válmíki, lord of every lore!
Hail, holy Hermit, calm and pure of mind!
  Hail, First of Bards, Válmíki, hail once more!"

These stanzas are present in "Invocation". I would have thought that the translator had written these if he had not added the following footnote:

"The MSS.(manuscripts written in the original language) vary very considerably in these stanzas of invocation: many lines are generally prefixed in which not only the poet, but those who play the chief parts in the poem are panegyrized. It is self-apparent that they are not by the author of the Rámáyan himself."

But I have never read the Sanskrit version(I am not a Sanskrit scholar so I don't think I would have ever understood). I haven't even read other translated versions. So, I would be grateful if someone joined the discussion and solved my doubts.

Since I believe that no author praises himself, I think Griffith presents his findings during the translation. Even if Valmiki is the writer, the writing of the events of Rama's life are believed to be after 16 years(Is this TRUE?) of his enthronement(after returning from the forest) that too, when Narad Muni asks him to write the story in slokas invented by Valmiki. As Valmiki hears the complete story from Brahma( some say Brahma gave him yogic powers and through which he was able to see all the events as a seer which I believe is false), it is apparent that he associated the story with myth. What I believe is that Valmiki sang the Ramayan which he taught to Luv and Kusa and was later written by someone else.