________________
IV - THE BHAGAVATA RELIGION AND THE GITĀ 771
Western imaginative people-have raised a doubt that Śrī Krsna, the Yādavas, the Pāndavas, or the Bhārati war, were not historical facts at all, but are mere imaginary personages or stories; and in the opinion of some other persons, the Mahābhārata is nothing but a tremendous metaphysical allegory dealing with the Absolute Self. But, any impartial man will have to come to the conclusion that all such doubts are without any basis, if he considers the evidence of ancient works There is no doubt that there is historical authority at the root of these stories. In short, in my opinion, there were not four or five Sri Krsnas, but there was only one historical personage of that name. Now, in considering the date of this Sri Krsna, Rao Bahadur Chintamanrao Vaidya has expressed an opinion that Sri Krsna, the Yādavas, the Pandavas, and the Bhārati war, were all synchronous, that is to say, they all existed at the commencement of the Kaliyuga; that according to the method of calculation of time mentioned in the Purānas, a period of five thousand years or more has elapsed since then; and that, this is the true date of Sri Krsna. * But if one considers the generations of various kings from the Pāndavas upto the Sālivähana era, which have been described in the Purānas, this date is inconsistent with that calculation. Therefore, on the authority of the statement in the Bhāgavata, or in the Visnu-Purāna, that "there are 1115 (or 1015) years from the birth of the king Pariksita upto the coronation of Nanda” (Bhāg 12 2 26; and Visnu. 4 24. 32 ), historical scholars have now come to the conclusion that the Pāndavas and the Bhārati war must nave been at least 1400 years before the Christian era. Necessarily, this will also be the date of Sri Krsna; and if this date is accepted, it follows that Sri Krsna promulgated the Bhāgavata religion at least 1400 years before Christ, and about 800 years before Buddha. Some persons have Suka era, as also in the Būlacarita (3. 2) written by Bhāsa. I, therefore, consider the opinion of Chintamanrao Vaidya more to the point than that of Dr. Bhandarkar.
* This opinion of R10 Bahadur Chinatamanrao Vaidya has ben expressed in his English criticism on the Mahābhārata; and be also made the same statement in the lecture delivered by him on on the same subject in Poona in 1914 on the occasion of the anniversary of the Deccan College.
