Best Explanation of our Historical Chronology, Thank you Mrugendra Ji for your great insight which clears all the droughts created by our current education system. I wish you and Rajiv Malhotra Ji will have a talk some time.
Despite clearing some doubts which is great..he has very confused narrative as he is not properly and deeply grounded into the subject matter and keeps narrating often very wrong information and keep giving often different statements or keeps changing stands . you can ck it across 7 different videos on Puranic kalagarna or traditional Chronological framework across like Srijan talk / here at Indic studies / and at saMskRti sUkta..I will post links you can go thru all and decide . #1. #SrijanTalks Tracing The Timeline Of Ancient Bharat: Mahabharat War To Guptas | Mrugendra Vinod | Shaka Epoch Premiered Aug 9, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/wQHMMCEJ0Jo/v-deo.html #2. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 1 | Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/UgIHR9r9dF4/v-deo.html #3. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 4| •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/cy0Z8wn0RmM/v-deo.html 4. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 2 | •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/QmhP6Papr78/v-deo.html 5. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 3| •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/yb7cGJQhXtQ/v-deo.html 6.महाभारत कब हुआ? - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks •Apr 5, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/IKXV-IyLhZk/v-deo.html &the present one 7. भारतीय इतिहास के मानक आधार - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks •Mar 29, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/ZiUMLN4_Tf8/v-deo.html
In other videos he keeps making statement like People take Xandramese As Sandrakottus, ck #eg1 below, which is not correct . They are always taken as two successive king who controlled North India or exercised Suzerainty over north India , one During Alexander's time in 326 BCE and another a little over a decade later , when Selucus invaded India and was Defeated by this Sadrakottus and entered into treaty with him .. # Now surprisingly , Here in the present video , he makes Sandrakottus as the son Xandramese , A Totally different but totally false take from other places . #in #eg1 he had once separated the two by once 60 years and at other time in same video as seperated by 100 years , Funny how he manages to pull out such miracles . Nowhere found in any greek or Indic sources any where we find Anything like that , & he keeps mixing up this erroneous View/statement with tit-bits of info from the Indic and Greek sources and making a hoch-poch. Its like Cherry picking for the occasion and force fitting things as required . ...But he takes some info without digesting and connecting things properly he vomit out things undigested and half baked...He make Hoch Poch of Info Bytes like a novice again and again is clear from sum total of his all presentations eg from other Videos ... These are very serious errors for any serious researcher . He keeps making wrong facts statements again n again..Apart from major Flaw in his whole thesis..which can be easily shown ...Here i am not saying i agree with colonial sheet anchor and its concocted chronology. #Here i am not bothered about small mistakes which can happen while presenting Like . @ a very minor one like .. 1.saying Jones in 1790 came up with The sheet Anchor , while its in 1793 its 10 anniversary Lecture . .OR. 2. #more #eg1 :He keeps saying PPL confuse Xandramese as Sandrakottus >>>> No this is not the case at all This confusion is there only in speakers Mind .they are said as two consecutive Kings who held sovereignty in Gangatic India . one during the time of Alexanders retreat and other when a decade or so later Selucus came back again to conquer Indus valley. Whose ambassador was Megasthenes in court of Sandrakottus , who would be our ChandraGupta I - Vijayaditya the founder of Imperial Gupta rule as per our Puranic /Indic records . : Our men above makes them separated by two or three generations ie places Megasthenes more than 60 years after alaxander, them more than two generations apart in gupta courts : while also making start of gupta period -216BCE he put this Gupta period ie 100 years later than the Sandrakottus and Megasthenes period , as Megasthenes was send by one of the earlier Commander of Alexander army .. How he manages to pull such miracles and Non-sense as separating contemporary people once 60 years later and then again 100 years later in the same video ..!! #eg2 : why i call him half baked and undigested info pick and force fitted force haphazardly... He takes some half info and says he is not concerned with kings involved !!!! like Pulkeshi II Aihole inscription placing them in bce period while he was contemporary of Harshavardhan and Hyuan Siang/Zuan in 7 circa ce/ ad without any sense .. On what logic Does he separate contemporary kings by 650 years just to fullfil his fancy of making MBT or MB War in 3762 BCE etc etc .. @// So sorry that the post script of this video kind of makes all the talk irrelevant.// ....EXACTLY ... this speaker goes so confidently with his half baked and undigested Info picks from here and their and make so many of Baseless and unsubstantiated claims ...most of the time since he has not gone deeply into subject and at many points totally going against Established Indic Traditional time line about our Itihaas true Sheet-Anchor of 3102 Bce as the epoch of kali yuga ,,..held universally all across India without exception....When you have to disagree with strong held tradition U cant do with your conjectural force fitting approach
Although He is taking in right direction in traditonal side and away from the present prison house of William jones.. All concoction and fiction . created when we were still trapped in the prison . house of Willian Jones Sheet anchor of 326 bce of alexander as contemporary of Sandrakotuus as being Maurya Chandragupta But his study is not that good , although taking us in traditonal side and away from the present prison house of William jones , he makes very serious mistakes by some cherry picking and not understanding all the nuances and its implications..
Sandrakottus is Chandragupta Gupta founder Of Imperial Gupta dynasty and father of so called Indian Napolean ie Samudragupta and grandfather of Chandragupta II vikramaditya
@@saiecorp5646 #So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings of Greek sources: Greek Sandrakottus is Chandragupta I of gupta dynasty as per Indic Traditional Chronology #So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings : #3 Cosecutive kings of greek accounts True Identity Xandramese =. Chandranmaasa Sandrakottus =. Chandragupt 1 vijayaditya Sandracyptus =. Samudragupt Ashokaditya 1 # the time of chankaya and Mauryas was far far away from the time of Alexander and porus ..they were not contemporary#But at present we conti with Present chronological with its Historic vision.But it run counter to the Indic and traditional chronology coming from India's own sources and we can also include outside foreign sources if interpreted correctly . It was the present Indological timelines and historic narrative was distorted in last over 200 years by misinterpretation by western Euro colonial missionary Indologist in 19 th century starting from William Jones -Max muller-J F Fleet etc who distorted _concocted_misinterpreted .. Coming to the point here time frame of Chankaya and Mauryas is far removed from times of Alexander and porus ..so its present misinterpretation to assume the PArvatak as Porus . Puranic timeline or Indic chronology places the Mauryas in 1500 BCE period while we have Chandragupta I of Gupta dynasty founder coming in 320 BCE period as per Indic sources . It was wilful concoction and distortion of Jones in 10 anniversary lecture of Asiatic society in 1783 which was Kind of Eureka moment from where he wilfully reduced Indic chronology by 1200-1300 years . Like we have only Sandrakottus in greek accounts which cud be any of the founder . but placing Maurya chandra in place of Gupta founder he was able to cut 1300 of our historic period. Its obvious from his stated objective to reduce Puranic chronology to fit biblical timeline of world creation in 4004 BCE . we don't have in Indic accounts Chanakaya and Mauryas any mention of Alexander and greeks any where .similarly in greek accounts we have only Sandrakottus and no where any mention of Chanakaya and Maurya . its only since Jones we have misplaced we have got prison house of this sheet anchor of Alexander being contemporary to Maurya Chandragupta.Similarly based on broken greek accounts westeners have distorted the defeat of Alexander leading to revolt in his army and forced retreat not thru the territory which was under his control but thru south along indus and then along sea and land route back broken. Any military analist wud have advise retreat shud have been thru the way he came and not thru unconquered territory where he wud have to continuously fight to penetrate . It was false western narrative .2 # the traditional account as per Puranic and other Indic sources .Puranas give timeline from MahaBharta to rise of Guptas in 4 th Circa BCE. They do the it triple way leaving no doubt to timeline .1.the flow of dynasties with total kings and total time they had .2. Time interval between different Kings or Dynasties . eg Time interval from Parikshit 3102 bce to Mahapadma nanda is 1500 years ie 1634 bce . 100 years for Nanda range so rise of Mauryas is 1534 bCE .3. Passage of time in Cycle of Saptarishi (which is fact mentioned by Megasthenes* ) .this is 2700 cycle with 100 years passage of Saptrishi in all 27 nakshtras . from 3177 - 3077 was the period of transit in Maga wher all the events of Mahabharata happened including . coronation of parikshit and begining of Kali yuga in 3102 bce . which is the Real sheet Anchor point in Indic Puranic traditional chronology. The begning and the conti recounding cud have been going from 6777 bce *. according to puranas this cycle of transit into Maga Nakshtra returned from 477-377 bce and the last Andhra dynasty or Satvahanas finished before 377 bce with a interval of 6-7 decades in which many dynasties Including one CHANDRAHMAS whoes father was barber was leading ruler in gangatic region. We have one previous king from sandrakotuus known inn greek accounts as Xandramese who is as per distorted chronology made out as Dhanananda. EVEN if sandrakottus ie greek for Chandragupta can be mistaken for Maurya but we cant derive Any Nanda including dhanananda as Xandramese but it fits exactly to Chandrahmaas . In fact when describing the Ganga ppl or GANGADIRAI whoes king/Kings is Xandramese who is the son of barbar .he fit very accurately with puranic accounts .. but no where in any Indic source do we Find Nandas as barbers .. now day tv serial distort further like recent one on Chanragupta maurya on sony tv. Also we have succeding king to sandrakottus as SAndracyptus which again does not match Binbdusara but go well with Samudragupta .**Megasthenes - mention no of 153-154 kings before Alexander or sandakottus in dealing with Indian kinglist from Manu as provided by Puranic pundits of the times of Magasthenes to him. Just as the Gupta power was estb and main puranic narration ends with the statement "" ..Now the Kings of Guptg line would enjoy Kashi , saket, prayag and magahda ...""The Megasthenes record the begining of this chronology is year 6700 BCE ie 6400+ years from present times of Megasthenes . This is clear reference of Puranic Saptarishi cycle system . The cycle who's recounting started in 6777 BCE in which Saptarishis were in Maga in 3177-3077 BCE again when the Andhras eneded in 477-377 bce period I first came to know 3 consecutive kings who held suzurnity one after other in north India ,from Kota's work while generally only first two are talked and misinterpreted by William Jones and his followers ie ..#3 Cosecutive kings Jones interpretation Kota's pointer Xandramese =. Dhanananda =. Chandrashri satkarni Sandrakottus =. Chandragupt Maurya =. Chandragupta 1 vijayaditya Sandracyptus =. Ignored ----- =. Samudragupt In above we only have one fit with Jones chronology but not other 2 . While basing on Puranic / Traditional Indic Chronology we all 3 correct fit .Here Kota takes the first ie Xandramese as Chandrashri Satkarni, the last Andhra ruler before Guptas , this which Kota takes as Xandrames, as phonitically it Chandrashri too can be taken as Xandrameses But after deeper and insightful study of Indic / Puranic literature, I go with the deeper insight provided by Sethna works that This Xandramese is nagavamshi Chandrahmas of Puranas who came in between end of Andhras and before the rise of Guptas as Purana show us..and this I have detailed in earlier posts ..pls ck that . #So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings : #3 Cosecutive kings of greek accounts True Identity Xandramese =. Chandranmaasa Sandrakottus =. Chandragupt 1 vijayaditya Sandracyptus =. Samudragupt Ashokaditya #Read the works of Kota Venkatchalam who in 1950-60's worked and presented all research on the chronology, all English works are available on internet fully downloadable ..but I disagree with him on certain ,only on some nuances ..which have been worked out very well by K D Sethna ..read "" Ancient India in new Light' ....Pub by Aditya prakashan / voice of India books..also in 80' many conferences held by Shkti group of Chennai brought them out as books and the the Bhartiya Itihaas Sankalan yojna with who I have been associated has brought out many works on history and chronology... Also can see some popular blogs on history like contrivers in History , about Sheet Anchor History or did Megasthenes visited Chandrgupta Mauryas etc for some popular info ..
@@saiecorp5646 A TRIPLE FIT of Greek Accounts With Puranic Data - Correct Identity of these 3 consecutive kings #Greek Sandrakottus is Chandragupta I of gupta dynasty as per Indic Traditional Chronology. #This is not only one Reference but mention is made of one king before and one after him in Greek sources who successively held the Suzeranity and which can be correctly identified from Puranic sources correctly , Providing us with a triple FIT ..and leaving no scope of doubt about its authenticity at all. #So What the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings of Greek sources as per Puranic Information. #So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings : AS PER PURANIC DATA _A TRIPLE FIT #Cosecutive is as follows.. #True Identity as per Puranic data : 3 kings of greek accounts ---- True Identity as per Puranic data : Xandramese =. Chandranmasa Sandrakottus = . Chandragupta 1 vijayaditya Sandracyptus =. Samudragupta Ashokaditya
Know more about myth of Aryan Invasion Theory, Arya and Dravid, Lost Sarasvati River and astronomical evidence of our ancient existence at Priyam Bharatam - ua-cam.com/video/qmSASyGYaqQ/v-deo.html
A TRIPLE FIT of Greek Accounts With Puranic Data - Correct Identity of these 3 consecutive kings #Greek Sandrakottus is Chandragupta I of gupta dynasty as per Indic Traditional Chronology. #This is not only one Reference but mention is made of one king before and one after him in Greek sources who successively held the Suzeranity and which can be correctly identified from Puranic sources correctly , Providing us with a triple FIT ..and leaving no scope of doubt about its authenticity at all. #So What the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings of Greek sources as per Puranic Information. #So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings : AS PER PURANIC DATA _A TRIPLE FIT #Consecutive is as follows.. #True Identity as per Puranic data : 3 kings of greek accounts ---- True Identity as per Puranic data : Xandramese =. Chandranmasa Sandrakottus = . Chandragupta 1 vijayaditya Sandracyptus =. Samudragupta Ashokaditya
Itihasa and Puranas are not history in the sense we see chronological history. If we see it that way, their is not benefit and we are getting stuck in their framework. It's history plus daivikas history plus stories for Dharma, artha, Kama, Moksha. So understand it that way.
Thanks to your effort and approach sir but let us know the difference between Aryavart and bharat . Which one is older? And start there from to trace the time line,. Truly the west made our history a waste!
@Centre for Indic Studies. First of all Let Me congratulate you and Mrugendu ji for his efforts to bring out the problems of Sheet anchor and chronology. 1.The wrong Sheet Anchor of William Jones . 2.the problem of Saka . Because of the forgetting the older Saka and and mixing it with newer SAka era of 78 AD CE and problems and CONFUSION of dating arising from it. 3.Reference to Sarasvati which bring about paradigm shift in Indology. I has specially likes his presentations on Sarasvati etc BUT must now i am forced to show my disappointment on his present series of presentations. Please don't take my coming vey severe Criticism otherwise... BUT i am highly disappointed by many aspects of the speaker here and many other such videos on India's Traditional Puranic Chronological framework and how he deals with them . I don't not expect Scholars of the caliber of Shri Mrugendra ji would make such repeated mistakes or give wrong /false statement , unknowingly though , or keep shifting stands thru all different presentations on same theme within a Year... The lack of proper grounding and depth of proper study is revealed on his Part on this subject matter . Despite bring about the problems and approach to solution which is great..he has very confused narrative as he is not properly and deeply grounded into the subject matter and keeps narrating often very wrong information and keep giving often different statements or keeps changing stands . you can ck it across 7 different videos on Puranic kalagarna or traditional Chronological framework across like Srijan talk / here at Indic studies / and at saMskRti sUkta..I will post links you can go thru all and decide . In fact on Srijan Talks making great effort to take a line, then he makes the whole talk irrelevant by giving a Authors PostScript Dumping all whatever Position he has taken ..causing confusion in the mind of many ck below... #At srijan Talk on the same he has already backtracked by giving a post script totally contradicting himself... ck here... ua-cam.com/video/wQHMMCEJ0Jo/v-deo.html #SrijanTalks[The post script at the end of the video has been added by the speaker, Mrugendra Vicnod***]. #1. #SrijanTalks Tracing The Timeline Of Ancient Bharat: Mahabharat War To Guptas | Mrugendra Vinod | Shaka Epoch Premiered Aug 9, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/wQHMMCEJ0Jo/v-deo.html&t=1s SrijanTalks[The post script at the end of the video has been added by the speaker, Mrugendra Vicnod]. #2. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 1 | Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/UgIHR9r9dF4/v-deo.html #3. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 4| •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/cy0Z8wn0RmM/v-deo.html #4. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 2 | •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/QmhP6Papr78/v-deo.html #5. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 3| •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/yb7cGJQhXtQ/v-deo.html #6.महाभारत कब हुआ? - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks •Apr 5, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/IKXV-IyLhZk/v-deo.html &the present one #7. भारतीय इतिहास के मानक आधार - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks •Mar 29, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/ZiUMLN4_Tf8/v-deo.html **** @// So sorry that the post script of this video kind of makes all the talk irrelevant.// ....EXACTLY ... this speaker goes so confidently with his half baked and undigested Info picks from here and their and make so many of Baseless and unsubstantiated claims ...most of the time since he has not gone deeply into subject and at many points totally going against Established Indic Traditional time line about our Itihaas true Sheet-Anchor of 3102 Bce as the epoch of kali yuga ,,..held universally all across India without exception....When you have to disagree with strong held tradition U cant do with your conjectural force fitting approach
Despite clearing some doubts which is great..he has very confused narrative as he is not properly and deeply grounded into the subject matter and keeps narrating often very wrong information and keep giving often different statements or keeps changing stands . you can ck it across 7 different videos on Puranic kalagarna or traditional Chronological framework across like Srijan talk / here at Indic studies / and at saMskRti sUkta..I will post links you can go thru all and decide . #1. #SrijanTalks Tracing The Timeline Of Ancient Bharat: Mahabharat War To Guptas | Mrugendra Vinod | Shaka Epoch Premiered Aug 9, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/wQHMMCEJ0Jo/v-deo.html #2. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 1 | Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/UgIHR9r9dF4/v-deo.html #3. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 4| •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/cy0Z8wn0RmM/v-deo.html 4. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 2 | •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/QmhP6Papr78/v-deo.html 5. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 3| •Dec 2, 2018 ua-cam.com/video/yb7cGJQhXtQ/v-deo.html 6.महाभारत कब हुआ? - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks •Apr 5, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/IKXV-IyLhZk/v-deo.html &the present one 7. भारतीय इतिहास के मानक आधार - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks •Mar 29, 2019 ua-cam.com/video/ZiUMLN4_Tf8/v-deo.html
@Centre for Indic Studies. In other videos he keeps making statement like People take Xandramese As Sandrakottus, ck #eg1 below, which is not correct . They are always taken as two successive king who controlled North India or exercised Suzerainty over north India , one During Alexander's time in 326 BCE and another a little over a decade later , when Selucus invaded India and was Defeated by this Sadrakottus and entered into treaty with him .. # Now surprisingly , Here in the present video , he makes Sandrakottus as the son Xandramese , A Totally different but totally false take from other places . #in #eg1 he had once separated the two by once 60 years and at other time in same video as seperated by 100 years , Funny how he manages to pull out such miracles . Nowhere found in any greek or Indic sources any where we find Anything like that , & he keeps mixing up this erroneous View/statement with tit-bits of info from the Indic and Greek sources and making a hoch-poch. Its like Cherry picking for the occasion and force fitting things as required . ...But he takes some info without digesting and connecting things properly he vomit out things undigested and half baked...He make Hoch Poch of Info Bytes like a novice again and again is clear from sum total of his all presentations eg from other Videos ... These are very serious errors for any serious researcher . He keeps making wrong facts statements again n again..Apart from major Flaw in his whole thesis..which can be easily shown ...Here i am not saying i agree with colonial sheet anchor and its concocted chronology. #Here i am not bothered about small mistakes which can happen while presenting Like . @ a very minor one like .. 1.saying Jones in 1790 came up with The sheet Anchor , while its in 1793 its 10 anniversary Lecture . .OR. 2. #more #eg1 :He keeps saying PPL confuse Xandramese as Sandrakottus >>>> No this is not the case at all This confusion is there only in speakers Mind .they are said as two consecutive Kings who held sovereignty in Gangatic India . one during the time of Alexanders retreat and other when a decade or so later Selucus came back again to conquer Indus valley. Whose ambassador was Megasthenes in court of Sandrakottus , who would be our ChandraGupta I - Vijayaditya the founder of Imperial Gupta rule as per our Puranic /Indic records . : Our men above makes them separated by two or three generations ie places Megasthenes more than 60 years after alaxander, them more than two generations apart in gupta courts : while also making start of gupta period -216BCE he put this Gupta period ie 100 years later than the Sandrakottus and Megasthenes period , as Megasthenes was send by one of the earlier Commander of Alexander army .. How he manages to pull such miracles and Non-sense as separating contemporary people once 60 years later and then again 100 years later in the same video ..!! #eg2 : why i call him half baked and undigested info pick and force fitted force haphazardly... He takes some half info and says he is not concerned with kings involved !!!! like Pulkeshi II Aihole inscription placing them in bce period while he was contemporary of Harshavardhan and Hyuan Siang/Zuan in 7 circa ce/ ad without any sense .. On what logic Does he separate contemporary kings by 650 years just to fullfil his fancy of making MBT or MB War in 3762 BCE etc etc .. @// So sorry that the post script of this video kind of makes all the talk irrelevant.// ....EXACTLY ... this speaker goes so confidently with his half baked and undigested Info picks from here and their and make so many of Baseless and unsubstantiated claims ...most of the time since he has not gone deeply into subject and at many points totally going against Established Indic Traditional time line about our Itihaas true Sheet-Anchor of 3102 Bce as the epoch of kali yuga ,,..held universally all across India without exception....When you have to disagree with strong held tradition U cant do with your conjectural force fitting approach
Nilesh Oakji has clearified about time of Mahabharata in his book and in srijan talks.That date is more reliable as none has been able to prove him wrong.
साधुवाद श्रीमान,
आपका व्याख्यान पुरातन इतिहास के प्रति गहन उत्कंठा उत्पन्न कर रहा हैं
Best Explanation of our Historical Chronology, Thank you Mrugendra Ji for your great insight which clears all the droughts created by our current education system. I wish you and Rajiv Malhotra Ji will have a talk some time.
Despite clearing some doubts which is great..he has very confused narrative as he is not properly and deeply grounded into the subject matter and keeps narrating often very wrong information and keep giving often different statements or keeps changing stands . you can ck it across 7 different videos on Puranic kalagarna or traditional Chronological framework across like Srijan talk / here at Indic studies / and at saMskRti sUkta..I will post links you can go thru all and decide .
#1. #SrijanTalks
Tracing The Timeline Of Ancient Bharat: Mahabharat War To Guptas | Mrugendra Vinod | Shaka Epoch
Premiered Aug 9, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/wQHMMCEJ0Jo/v-deo.html
#2. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 1 |
Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/UgIHR9r9dF4/v-deo.html
#3. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 4|
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/cy0Z8wn0RmM/v-deo.html
4. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 2 |
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/QmhP6Papr78/v-deo.html
5. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 3|
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/yb7cGJQhXtQ/v-deo.html
6.महाभारत कब हुआ? - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks
•Apr 5, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/IKXV-IyLhZk/v-deo.html
&the present one
7. भारतीय इतिहास के मानक आधार - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks
•Mar 29, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/ZiUMLN4_Tf8/v-deo.html
In other videos he keeps making statement like People take Xandramese As Sandrakottus, ck #eg1 below, which is not correct . They are always taken as two successive king who controlled North India or exercised Suzerainty over north India , one During Alexander's time in 326 BCE and another a little over a decade later , when Selucus invaded India and was Defeated by this Sadrakottus and entered into treaty with him ..
# Now surprisingly , Here in the present video , he makes Sandrakottus as the son Xandramese , A Totally different but totally false take from other places . #in #eg1 he had once separated the two by once 60 years and at other time in same video as seperated by 100 years , Funny how he manages to pull out such miracles . Nowhere found in any greek or Indic sources any where we find Anything like that , & he keeps mixing up this erroneous View/statement with tit-bits of info from the Indic and Greek sources and making a hoch-poch. Its like Cherry picking for the occasion and force fitting things as required .
...But he takes some info without digesting and connecting things properly he vomit out things undigested and half baked...He make Hoch Poch of Info Bytes like a novice again and again is clear from sum total of his all presentations eg from other Videos ...
These are very serious errors for any serious researcher . He keeps making wrong facts statements again n again..Apart from major Flaw in his whole thesis..which can be easily shown ...Here i am not saying i agree with colonial sheet anchor and its concocted chronology.
#Here i am not bothered about small mistakes which can happen while presenting Like .
@ a very minor one like ..
1.saying Jones in 1790 came up with The sheet Anchor , while its in 1793 its 10 anniversary Lecture . .OR.
2.
#more
#eg1
:He keeps saying PPL confuse Xandramese as Sandrakottus >>>> No this is not the case at all This confusion is there only in speakers Mind .they are said as two consecutive Kings who held sovereignty in Gangatic India . one during the time of Alexanders retreat and other when a decade or so later Selucus came back again to conquer Indus valley. Whose ambassador was Megasthenes in court of Sandrakottus , who would be our ChandraGupta I - Vijayaditya the founder of Imperial Gupta rule as per our Puranic /Indic records .
: Our men above makes them separated by two or three generations ie places Megasthenes more than 60 years after alaxander, them more than two generations apart in gupta courts : while also making start of gupta period -216BCE he put this Gupta period ie 100 years later than the Sandrakottus and Megasthenes period , as Megasthenes was send by one of the earlier Commander of Alexander army ..
How he manages to pull such miracles and Non-sense as separating contemporary people once 60 years later and then again 100 years later in the same video ..!!
#eg2
: why i call him half baked and undigested info pick and force fitted force haphazardly...
He takes some half info and says he is not concerned with kings involved !!!! like Pulkeshi II Aihole inscription placing them in bce period while he was contemporary of Harshavardhan and Hyuan Siang/Zuan in 7 circa ce/ ad without any sense ..
On what logic Does he separate contemporary kings by 650 years just to fullfil his fancy of making MBT or MB War in 3762 BCE
etc etc ..
@// So sorry that the post script of this video kind of makes all the talk irrelevant.// ....EXACTLY ...
this speaker goes so confidently with his half baked and undigested Info picks from here and their and make so many of Baseless and unsubstantiated claims ...most of the time since he has not gone deeply into subject and at many points totally going against Established Indic Traditional time line about our Itihaas true Sheet-Anchor of 3102 Bce as the epoch of kali yuga ,,..held universally all across India without exception....When you have to disagree with strong held tradition U cant do with your conjectural force fitting approach
प्रणाम आचार्य 🙏🏽
भारत के इतिहास और वेदों पर आपका शोध कार्य अभूतपूर्व है।
कृपया ऐसे ही और संवादों द्वारा हमारा ज्ञानवर्धन करते रहिए।
Government must change ncert pollute....
We want more videos from Mrugendra ji !!
Two more talks of Mrugendra ji are coming up. Stay tuned...
धन्यवाद महोदय। आपने हमारी हमसे पहचान करवा दी। धन्यवाद। अहम्ब्रह्मास्मि।
Very important talk..👌
वन्दे मातरम्
श्री मृगेंद्र जी आपको मेरे प्रणाम।
आपसे मुझे एक समस्या है कि आप कृपा करके परम् पूज्य ऋषि-मुनियों के नाम पूरे आदर के साथ लें।
Aap apne lectures ko hindi me jitna ho sake leke aayiye,
Ohhh...we must share this truth
Well done sir .
Welcome in Hindi language
Very informative talk 👍🙏🏻
He’s one of the best.
अपने इतिहास से तुलात्मक अध्ययन किया
उसी के आधार पर उन्होने विश्लेषण किया ।
Although He is taking in right direction in traditonal side and away from the present prison house of William jones..
All concoction and fiction . created when we were still trapped in the prison . house of Willian Jones Sheet anchor of 326 bce of alexander as contemporary of Sandrakotuus as being Maurya Chandragupta
But his study is not that good , although taking us in traditonal side and away from the present prison house of William jones , he makes very serious mistakes by some cherry picking and not understanding all the nuances and its implications..
Excellent.
Aap aapne mul visay se hi bhatak gaye
Ham chahenge bahut gahrai me n jaye kyuki ham samanya log hain
Visay ko aur ache se sapas karen
Sir does this also mean that the rock edicts found are not of Ashoka in real??
Thanks
Pls add English translation
nayi education policy 2020 me ye badal ana chahiye.
🙏😊
Is desh kai इतिहास को दुबारा लिखा जाए
Vo vyas aur shunya vali bat samjh nahi aayi plzz kuch aur sapast karen sir
फिर sandrokotes जिसे कहां गया है, वह अगर चंद्रगुप्त मौर्य नही है तो फिर कौनसा राजा है?
Sandrakottus is Chandragupta Gupta founder Of Imperial Gupta dynasty and father of so called Indian Napolean ie Samudragupta and grandfather of Chandragupta II vikramaditya
@@sachin737 ok, thanx.
@@saiecorp5646 #So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings of Greek sources:
Greek Sandrakottus is Chandragupta I of gupta dynasty as per Indic Traditional Chronology
#So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings :
#3 Cosecutive
kings of greek accounts True Identity
Xandramese =. Chandranmaasa
Sandrakottus =. Chandragupt 1 vijayaditya
Sandracyptus =. Samudragupt Ashokaditya
1 # the time of chankaya and Mauryas was far far away from the time of Alexander and porus ..they were not contemporary#But at present we conti with Present chronological with its Historic vision.But it run counter to the Indic and traditional chronology coming from India's own sources and we can also include outside foreign sources if interpreted correctly . It was the present Indological timelines and historic narrative was distorted in last over 200 years by misinterpretation by western Euro colonial missionary Indologist in 19 th century starting from William Jones -Max muller-J F Fleet etc who distorted _concocted_misinterpreted .. Coming to the point here time frame of Chankaya and Mauryas is far removed from times of Alexander and porus ..so its present misinterpretation to assume the PArvatak as Porus . Puranic timeline or Indic chronology places the Mauryas in 1500 BCE period while we have Chandragupta I of Gupta dynasty founder coming in 320 BCE period as per Indic sources . It was wilful concoction and distortion of Jones in 10 anniversary lecture of Asiatic society in 1783 which was Kind of Eureka moment from where he wilfully reduced Indic chronology by 1200-1300 years . Like we have only Sandrakottus in greek accounts which cud be any of the founder . but placing Maurya chandra in place of Gupta founder he was able to cut 1300 of our historic period. Its obvious from his stated objective to reduce Puranic chronology to fit biblical timeline of world creation in 4004 BCE . we don't have in Indic accounts Chanakaya and Mauryas any mention of Alexander and greeks any where .similarly in greek accounts we have only Sandrakottus and no where any mention of Chanakaya and Maurya . its only since Jones we have misplaced we have got prison house of this sheet anchor of Alexander being contemporary to Maurya Chandragupta.Similarly based on broken greek accounts westeners have distorted the defeat of Alexander leading to revolt in his army and forced retreat not thru the territory which was under his control but thru south along indus and then along sea and land route back broken. Any military analist wud have advise retreat shud have been thru the way he came and not thru unconquered territory where he wud have to continuously fight to penetrate . It was false western narrative .2 # the traditional account as per Puranic and other Indic sources .Puranas give timeline from MahaBharta to rise of Guptas in 4 th Circa BCE. They do the it triple way leaving no doubt to timeline .1.the flow of dynasties with total kings and total time they had .2. Time interval between different Kings or Dynasties . eg Time interval from Parikshit 3102 bce to Mahapadma nanda is 1500 years ie 1634 bce . 100 years for Nanda range so rise of Mauryas is 1534 bCE .3. Passage of time in Cycle of Saptarishi (which is fact mentioned by Megasthenes* ) .this is 2700 cycle with 100 years passage of Saptrishi in all 27 nakshtras . from 3177 - 3077 was the period of transit in Maga wher all the events of Mahabharata happened including . coronation of parikshit and begining of Kali yuga in 3102 bce . which is the Real sheet Anchor point in Indic Puranic traditional chronology. The begning and the conti recounding cud have been going from 6777 bce *. according to puranas this cycle of transit into Maga Nakshtra returned from 477-377 bce and the last Andhra dynasty or Satvahanas finished before 377 bce with a interval of 6-7 decades in which many dynasties Including one CHANDRAHMAS whoes father was barber was leading ruler in gangatic region. We have one previous king from sandrakotuus known inn greek accounts as Xandramese who is as per distorted chronology made out as Dhanananda. EVEN if sandrakottus ie greek for Chandragupta can be mistaken for Maurya but we cant derive Any Nanda including dhanananda as Xandramese but it fits exactly to Chandrahmaas . In fact when describing the Ganga ppl or GANGADIRAI whoes king/Kings is Xandramese who is the son of barbar .he fit very accurately with puranic accounts .. but no where in any Indic source do we Find Nandas as barbers .. now day tv serial distort further like recent one on Chanragupta maurya on sony tv. Also we have succeding king to sandrakottus as SAndracyptus which again does not match Binbdusara but go well with Samudragupta .**Megasthenes - mention no of 153-154 kings before Alexander or sandakottus in dealing with Indian kinglist from Manu as provided by Puranic pundits of the times of Magasthenes to him. Just as the Gupta power was estb and main puranic narration ends with the statement "" ..Now the Kings of Guptg line would enjoy Kashi , saket, prayag and magahda ...""The Megasthenes record the begining of this chronology is year 6700 BCE ie 6400+ years from present times of Megasthenes . This is clear reference of Puranic Saptarishi cycle system . The cycle who's recounting started in 6777 BCE in which Saptarishis were in Maga in 3177-3077 BCE again when the Andhras eneded in 477-377 bce period
I first came to know 3 consecutive kings who held suzurnity one after other in north India ,from Kota's work while generally only first two are talked and misinterpreted by William Jones and his followers ie ..#3 Cosecutive kings Jones interpretation Kota's pointer Xandramese =. Dhanananda =. Chandrashri satkarni Sandrakottus =. Chandragupt Maurya =. Chandragupta 1 vijayaditya Sandracyptus =. Ignored ----- =. Samudragupt In above we only have one fit with Jones chronology but not other 2 . While basing on Puranic / Traditional Indic Chronology we all 3 correct fit .Here Kota takes the first ie Xandramese as Chandrashri Satkarni, the last Andhra ruler before Guptas , this which Kota takes as Xandrames, as phonitically it Chandrashri too can be taken as Xandrameses But after deeper and insightful study of Indic / Puranic literature, I go with the deeper insight provided by Sethna works that This Xandramese is nagavamshi Chandrahmas of Puranas who came in between end of Andhras and before the rise of Guptas as Purana show us..and this I have detailed in earlier posts ..pls ck that .
#So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings :
#3 Cosecutive
kings of greek accounts True Identity
Xandramese =. Chandranmaasa
Sandrakottus =. Chandragupt 1 vijayaditya
Sandracyptus =. Samudragupt Ashokaditya
#Read the works of Kota Venkatchalam who in 1950-60's worked and presented all research on the chronology, all English works are available on internet fully downloadable ..but I disagree with him on certain ,only on some nuances ..which have been worked out very well by K D Sethna ..read "" Ancient India in new Light' ....Pub by Aditya prakashan / voice of India books..also in 80' many conferences held by Shkti group of Chennai brought them out as books and the the Bhartiya Itihaas Sankalan yojna with who I have been associated has brought out many works on history and chronology...
Also can see some popular blogs on history like contrivers in History , about Sheet Anchor History or did Megasthenes visited Chandrgupta Mauryas etc for some popular info ..
@@sachin737 great work. Kudos to your research.
@@saiecorp5646 A TRIPLE FIT of Greek Accounts With Puranic Data - Correct Identity of these 3 consecutive kings
#Greek Sandrakottus is Chandragupta I of gupta dynasty as per Indic Traditional Chronology.
#This is not only one Reference but mention is made of one king before and one after him in Greek sources who successively held the Suzeranity and which can be correctly identified from Puranic sources correctly , Providing us with a triple FIT ..and leaving no scope of doubt about its authenticity at all.
#So What the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings of Greek sources as per Puranic Information.
#So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings : AS PER PURANIC DATA _A TRIPLE FIT
#Cosecutive is as follows..
#True Identity as per Puranic data : 3 kings of greek accounts ---- True Identity as per Puranic data :
Xandramese =. Chandranmasa
Sandrakottus = . Chandragupta 1 vijayaditya
Sandracyptus =. Samudragupta Ashokaditya
Know more about myth of Aryan Invasion Theory, Arya and Dravid, Lost Sarasvati River and astronomical evidence of our ancient existence at Priyam Bharatam - ua-cam.com/video/qmSASyGYaqQ/v-deo.html
A TRIPLE FIT of Greek Accounts With Puranic Data - Correct Identity of these 3 consecutive kings
#Greek Sandrakottus is Chandragupta I of gupta dynasty as per Indic Traditional Chronology.
#This is not only one Reference but mention is made of one king before and one after him in Greek sources who successively held the Suzeranity and which can be correctly identified from Puranic sources correctly , Providing us with a triple FIT ..and leaving no scope of doubt about its authenticity at all.
#So What the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings of Greek sources as per Puranic Information.
#So the correct identity of these 3 consecutive kings : AS PER PURANIC DATA _A TRIPLE FIT
#Consecutive is as follows..
#True Identity as per Puranic data : 3 kings of greek accounts ---- True Identity as per Puranic data :
Xandramese =. Chandranmasa
Sandrakottus = . Chandragupta 1 vijayaditya
Sandracyptus =. Samudragupta Ashokaditya
Itihasa and Puranas are not history in the sense we see chronological history. If we see it that way, their is not benefit and we are getting stuck in their framework. It's history plus daivikas history plus stories for Dharma, artha, Kama, Moksha. So understand it that way.
चोटी धारी लोगों के लिए है कयोकि झुठ तो आखिर उनहोंने ही बोलना है
Thanks to your effort and approach sir but let us know the difference between Aryavart and bharat . Which one is older? And start there from to trace the time line,. Truly the west made our history a waste!
@Centre for Indic Studies.
First of all Let Me congratulate you and Mrugendu ji for his efforts to bring out the problems of Sheet anchor and chronology.
1.The wrong Sheet Anchor of William Jones .
2.the problem of Saka . Because of the forgetting the older Saka and and mixing it with newer SAka era of 78 AD CE and problems and CONFUSION of dating arising from it.
3.Reference to Sarasvati which bring about paradigm shift in Indology.
I has specially likes his presentations on Sarasvati etc BUT must now i am forced to show my disappointment on his present series of presentations. Please don't take my coming vey severe Criticism otherwise...
BUT i am highly disappointed by many aspects of the speaker here and many other such videos on India's Traditional Puranic Chronological framework and how he deals with them . I don't not expect Scholars of the caliber of Shri Mrugendra ji would make such repeated mistakes or give wrong /false statement , unknowingly though , or keep shifting stands thru all different presentations on same theme within a Year... The lack of proper grounding and depth of proper study is revealed on his Part on this subject matter .
Despite bring about the problems and approach to solution which is great..he has very confused narrative as he is not properly and deeply grounded into the subject matter and keeps narrating often very wrong information and keep giving often different statements or keeps changing stands . you can ck it across 7 different videos on Puranic kalagarna or traditional Chronological framework across like Srijan talk / here at Indic studies / and at saMskRti sUkta..I will post links you can go thru all and decide .
In fact on Srijan Talks making great effort to take a line, then he makes the whole talk irrelevant by giving a Authors PostScript Dumping all whatever Position he has taken ..causing confusion in the mind of many ck below...
#At srijan Talk on the same he has already backtracked by giving a post script totally contradicting himself...
ck here...
ua-cam.com/video/wQHMMCEJ0Jo/v-deo.html
#SrijanTalks[The post script at the end of the video has been added by the speaker, Mrugendra Vicnod***].
#1. #SrijanTalks
Tracing The Timeline Of Ancient Bharat: Mahabharat War To Guptas | Mrugendra Vinod | Shaka Epoch
Premiered Aug 9, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/wQHMMCEJ0Jo/v-deo.html&t=1s
SrijanTalks[The post script at the end of the video has been added by the speaker, Mrugendra Vicnod].
#2. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 1 |
Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/UgIHR9r9dF4/v-deo.html
#3. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 4|
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/cy0Z8wn0RmM/v-deo.html
#4. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 2 |
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/QmhP6Papr78/v-deo.html
#5. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 3|
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/yb7cGJQhXtQ/v-deo.html
#6.महाभारत कब हुआ? - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks
•Apr 5, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/IKXV-IyLhZk/v-deo.html
&the present one
#7. भारतीय इतिहास के मानक आधार - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks
•Mar 29, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/ZiUMLN4_Tf8/v-deo.html
**** @// So sorry that the post script of this video kind of makes all the talk irrelevant.//
....EXACTLY ...
this speaker goes so confidently with his half baked and undigested Info picks from here and their and make so many of Baseless and unsubstantiated claims ...most of the time since he has not gone deeply into subject and at many points totally going against Established Indic Traditional time line about our Itihaas true Sheet-Anchor of 3102 Bce as the epoch of kali yuga ,,..held universally all across India without exception....When you have to disagree with strong held tradition U cant do with your conjectural force fitting approach
Despite clearing some doubts which is great..he has very confused narrative as he is not properly and deeply grounded into the subject matter and keeps narrating often very wrong information and keep giving often different statements or keeps changing stands . you can ck it across 7 different videos on Puranic kalagarna or traditional Chronological framework across like Srijan talk / here at Indic studies / and at saMskRti sUkta..I will post links you can go thru all and decide .
#1. #SrijanTalks
Tracing The Timeline Of Ancient Bharat: Mahabharat War To Guptas | Mrugendra Vinod | Shaka Epoch
Premiered Aug 9, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/wQHMMCEJ0Jo/v-deo.html
#2. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 1 |
Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/UgIHR9r9dF4/v-deo.html
#3. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 4|
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/cy0Z8wn0RmM/v-deo.html
4. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 2 |
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/QmhP6Papr78/v-deo.html
5. भारतीय प्राचीन इतिहास का प्रामाणिक कालक्रम। भाग 3|
•Dec 2, 2018
ua-cam.com/video/yb7cGJQhXtQ/v-deo.html
6.महाभारत कब हुआ? - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks
•Apr 5, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/IKXV-IyLhZk/v-deo.html
&the present one
7. भारतीय इतिहास के मानक आधार - Mrugendra Vinod - #IndicTalks
•Mar 29, 2019
ua-cam.com/video/ZiUMLN4_Tf8/v-deo.html
@Centre for Indic Studies.
In other videos he keeps making statement like People take Xandramese As Sandrakottus, ck #eg1 below, which is not correct . They are always taken as two successive king who controlled North India or exercised Suzerainty over north India , one During Alexander's time in 326 BCE and another a little over a decade later , when Selucus invaded India and was Defeated by this Sadrakottus and entered into treaty with him ..
# Now surprisingly , Here in the present video , he makes Sandrakottus as the son Xandramese , A Totally different but totally false take from other places . #in #eg1 he had once separated the two by once 60 years and at other time in same video as seperated by 100 years , Funny how he manages to pull out such miracles . Nowhere found in any greek or Indic sources any where we find Anything like that , & he keeps mixing up this erroneous View/statement with tit-bits of info from the Indic and Greek sources and making a hoch-poch. Its like Cherry picking for the occasion and force fitting things as required .
...But he takes some info without digesting and connecting things properly he vomit out things undigested and half baked...He make Hoch Poch of Info Bytes like a novice again and again is clear from sum total of his all presentations eg from other Videos ...
These are very serious errors for any serious researcher . He keeps making wrong facts statements again n again..Apart from major Flaw in his whole thesis..which can be easily shown ...Here i am not saying i agree with colonial sheet anchor and its concocted chronology.
#Here i am not bothered about small mistakes which can happen while presenting Like .
@ a very minor one like ..
1.saying Jones in 1790 came up with The sheet Anchor , while its in 1793 its 10 anniversary Lecture . .OR.
2.
#more
#eg1
:He keeps saying PPL confuse Xandramese as Sandrakottus >>>> No this is not the case at all This confusion is there only in speakers Mind .they are said as two consecutive Kings who held sovereignty in Gangatic India . one during the time of Alexanders retreat and other when a decade or so later Selucus came back again to conquer Indus valley. Whose ambassador was Megasthenes in court of Sandrakottus , who would be our ChandraGupta I - Vijayaditya the founder of Imperial Gupta rule as per our Puranic /Indic records .
: Our men above makes them separated by two or three generations ie places Megasthenes more than 60 years after alaxander, them more than two generations apart in gupta courts : while also making start of gupta period -216BCE he put this Gupta period ie 100 years later than the Sandrakottus and Megasthenes period , as Megasthenes was send by one of the earlier Commander of Alexander army ..
How he manages to pull such miracles and Non-sense as separating contemporary people once 60 years later and then again 100 years later in the same video ..!!
#eg2
: why i call him half baked and undigested info pick and force fitted force haphazardly...
He takes some half info and says he is not concerned with kings involved !!!! like Pulkeshi II Aihole inscription placing them in bce period while he was contemporary of Harshavardhan and Hyuan Siang/Zuan in 7 circa ce/ ad without any sense ..
On what logic Does he separate contemporary kings by 650 years just to fullfil his fancy of making MBT or MB War in 3762 BCE
etc etc ..
@// So sorry that the post script of this video kind of makes all the talk irrelevant.// ....EXACTLY ...
this speaker goes so confidently with his half baked and undigested Info picks from here and their and make so many of Baseless and unsubstantiated claims ...most of the time since he has not gone deeply into subject and at many points totally going against Established Indic Traditional time line about our Itihaas true Sheet-Anchor of 3102 Bce as the epoch of kali yuga ,,..held universally all across India without exception....When you have to disagree with strong held tradition U cant do with your conjectural force fitting approach
Wah re jahil
Nilesh Oakji has clearified about time of Mahabharata in his book and in srijan talks.That date is more reliable as none has been able to prove him wrong.
Ye kya bole rahe hai kuchh samajh nhi Aaya phaltu me bak bak Kar Raha hai
वन्दे मातरम्
भाई साहब ऐसा मत कहें
श्री मृगेंद्र जी एक काबिल व्यक्ति हैं।
आप ध्यान से सुनने का प्रयास करें तब सब कुछ समझ में आ जायेगा।