________________
164
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[JUNE, 1911.
Here is the answer to the question. Nilakantha, the great authority on the Mahabharata, says about this phrase in his commentary:
सच राज्यप्राप्स्यनन्तरं षट्त्रिंशत्तमे वर्षे.
and we have already seen that Yudhishthira did not assume the reins of sovereignty until 15 years after the Great Battle.
Hence we see that first the Great Battle took place; next, 15 years after it, Yudhishthira becam king, the blind king having retired to the forest to lead the life of an ascetic; and in the 36th year of Yudhiebthira's accession, the nirvana of Krishna took place.
Now, Bharatayuddha era, as the name itself explains, must naturally be reckoned from the date of the Great Battle, while the Yudhishthira era must evidently be reckoned from Yudhishthara's ascending the throne of the kingdom. Vâyu, Visbņu, Matsya and other purânas are unanimous in declaring that Kaliyuga begins on the very day of Krishna's decease. Therefore it is obvious that the Yudhishthira era must have been older than Kaliyuga by 35 years; and that the Great Battle must be assigned a date 15 years before the Yudhishthira era, or in other words half-a-century before Kaliyuga. In the instance cited above, since the year A.D. 1901-2 is dated 5002 Kali, it cannot be 5002 but 5037 Yudhishthira. Similarly, the same year must be 5052 Bharatayuddha era and not 5002.
Yet there is one apparent objection to this. It is an objection to the old view as well. Let us consider what it is. Kalbana, in his Rajatarangini, says:
शतेषु पद्म सार्थेषु त्र्यधिकेषु च भूतले ।
कलेर्गतेषु वर्षाणामभूवन् कुरुपाण्डवाः ॥५२॥ [ तरङ्ग : २. ]
Translation. When three years and six centuries and a-half of the Kaliyuga had elapsed, the Kurus and the Pandavas flourished (on the earth).
This is consistent neither with the old view nor with the one expounded above by me. The fallacy of Kalhana's calculation will be evident on a little consideration. He says that 2330 years have elapsed between Gonanda III and himself, and 1266 years between Gonanda II and Gonanda III. Therefore (2330+1266=) 3596 years must have elapsed between Gonanda II and himself, who lived in 1070 Saka. This assigns a date (3596-1070) 2526 years before the Saka era to Gonanda II. But from older authorities, Kalhana learns the fact that king Gonanda II was too young at the time of the Great Battle to take part in it. According to the old view, the Battle of Mahabharata took place 8179 years before Saka era (i.e., at the beginning of the Kaliyuga), while Kalhana's calculation makes the time of Gonauda II (a contemporary of Pandavas) to be 2526 years before Saka era. So to get over this difficulty, Kalhana brings down the Pandavas to 635 (=3179-2526) Kali. This is the explanation of Kalhana's calculation. The author's real mistake lies in the statement that 1266 years have elapsed between Gonanda II and Gonanda III. For he says in his own book:
पञ्चत्रिंशन्महीपाला मना विस्मृति सागरे !
[1.83].
Translation. Thirty-five kings were drowned in the ocean of forgetfulness.
Such mistakes in his chronology led him to his wrong conclusion. As the inaccuracy of Kalhana's chronology is discussed at length by Dr. M. A. Stein in the introduction to his English translation of the work Rijatarangini and also by Pandit Ananda Koul in his paper" on the History of Kashmir, I have here but briefly shown the unreliable nature of Kalhana's statement.
a Vayn (Siva), IT, xxxvii, 422-23; Vishnu, IV, xxiv, 31-39.; Matsya, oolzzi, 51-52; Bhagavata, XII, ii, 89. * Vide Rajaturangint, Taranga I, sloka 53-54.
Ibid, bloka 52.
Journal of A, S. B., Vol. VI, pp. 195-219 [N.S.].
