... on Mahabharata

Video commented on:

Myths of Mankind: The Mahabharata (Ancient History Documentary) TheAncientWorlds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVxNvquJLBM

fly4life

Christians should read this, they will see a lot of similarities. hmmmm.

sumit dalal

Not actually surprising. India had contact with christian world since second centruy AD. India have churches before split of christianity into various factions. Even Portugals were surprised at it.

rohadt Anyad

+sumit dalal christianity had hindu influence, not the other way around.

[I took it from this that the man was a Hindoo, but I may have been wrong. Check what he says further down.]

sumit dalal

did i say anything about who influnced who

I dont think so.

Moreover it is difficult to determine.

rohadt Anyad

+sumit dalal not difficult to determine. the mahabharata is much older. when you said that india had contact with the christian world from 2nd century ad, you are saying that christianity influenced hinduism, as the christian mythology was mostly established by then. but you date is wrong, christianity (jews that started christianity) had contact with hindu mythology after 4th century bc.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I do see a similarity between the family situation of Draupati and the Samaritan woman at the well of Sichar.

I hope Draupati was saved when Christ died on the Cross. But for the Samaritan woman we are sure.

I do see a similarity between NoD East of Eden and iNDia. And the dynasty of Nod, in Genesis ends with two brothers. In Mahabharata we see two sets of cousins. I do see a similarity when it is said of Kauravas their origin was demonic and of Pandavas their origin was divine and the story of Genesis chapter 6.

I will not say the origin of Pandavas was divine, but I hope it was not quite as evil as that of their cousins.

I do see a similarity between the situation described in Mahabharata and the words "all flesh was corrupt" (Moses did not give details).

If Krishna really posed as a god, he maybe damned. But it is also possible he was regarded as a god later and his exact words were forgotten. Added to by false Hindoo philosophy. Anyway, the end of that story was not really the battle where Arjuna won. It was the Flood. The real winners were not the men who went with Krishna but those that went with Noah. But perhaps the wife of Cham was a daughter or granddauther of Krishna and that is why a Chamite people remembered the story when they forgot the true God and when they forgot the Flood.

That is what I, as a Christian, can guess (because I do not know) about the similarities between Mahabharata and the Christian story.

One more thing. Maha Bharata seems to have meant then (if my guess is right) the Great Empire of Nod. It was not the Cainite society, but the Sethite one, set apart from Nod, who survived the Flood.

+rohadt Anyad "christianity (jews that started christianity) had contact with hindu mythology after 4th century bc."

With Persia, yes. With India possibly no.

Indeed, Alexander the Great was very little concerned with India. When he came to the frontier river, perhaps Ganges, he thought he saw "the Pillars of Hercules" (straits of Gibraltar) on the other side. A factually wrong but in the end [i e with right facts supplanting the wrong ones] correct argument the world is round. BUT also a proof he got very little information about India. 

rohadt Anyad

+Hans-Georg Lundahl alexander brought back hindus with him to babylon. there was a flow of cultural information between greece and persia, hence the jews had opportunity for contact to hindu mythology. 

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Where do you know that from?

[resuming the comment:]

I see another similarity. Or two. The Pandawas are sons of a man who had two wives.

If I was right previously, the son of Lamech who is their father imitated his father in having two wives. If I was wrong, Pandu is Lamech and Tubal-Cain and Jabel and Jubal three of the five Pandawas. Supposing of course I was right in supposin Mahabharata is about pre-flood.

Perhaps I was wrong. But suppose, just for fun, I could have been right.

Bharata was ancestor of the Pandawas. He was an Emperor and he attained Nirwana.

Henoch was a son of Cain, gave his name to a City.

ANOTHER Henoch was in the Sethite line. He did not "attain Nirvana", but he pleased The Lord and was taken up from Earth.

Bharata can be a confusion of the two Henochs. The Greeks remembered the Flood, but Deucalion is not just Noah. Deucalian and Pyrrha are both Noah and his wife (and their sons and their wives not mentioned by the Greeks, AND the old couple Abraham and Sarah visited as childless by Three Angels who were God, AND Lot and his wife and two daughters saved by Two of the Angels and afterwards Lot's wife was gone and his daughters believed they had to commit incest to repeople the earth. So, if Deucalion and Pyrrha are a confusion of three couples in the real History, Bharata can be a confusion of two men who had the same name.

The second Henoch is probably one of the two who will come back from Heaven (along with Elias who was also taken up).

IF I should be right, when he comes he will tell. If it matters at all.

fly4life

+Hans-Georg Lundahl Come back from heaven? Jesus said "Heaven is within" so I guess coming back would mean snapping out of the bullshit trance a person had just sent themselves. "Christians" dont read these scriptures because if they did they would not always point up toward "heaven".

rohadt Anyad

+Hans-Georg Lundahl now you are just losing you mind. what flood are you talking aBOUT? what real history? noah is just a story. so is moses, the exodus, the wandering in the desert and the conquering of canaan. there is no real history in there. 

Hans-Georg Lundahl

fly 4 life: Jesus said "Heaven is within"

Bible: "The Kingdom of Heaven is among you".

[to Anyad]

If the Flood were just a story how come even Mahabharata and Puranas mention Krishna as prophecying at least a local flooding after his death?

ALL cultures over the world, not just Jews and Christians, but Greeks, but Norse, but Peruvians, and a few more remember the Flood.

Hindoos remember some pre-flood conditions in Mahabharata PLUS a very minimised prophecy about the Flood.

If Krishna was a man of God and not a fraud, he did not say "leave that city, it will be flooded" but rather "leave here and go to Noah who is building an Arc" [unless this was of an earlier and smaller flood, though greater than those we see today]

However, Hindoo culture, Egyptian culture and I think Chinese and Japanse culture too have tried hard to forget facts about the flood and nearly succeeded. Krishna's prophecy about a city being flooded after his death remains to Hindoos. Atlantis story remained in Egypt - whether it was a smaller flood before Noah's one or a part of that flood. Some Chinese characters recall Genesis too.

And the Shinto story if it lacks the flood starts out very late. I think Emperor Jimmu may have been Aeneas, who lived more than one thousand years after the Flood.

rohadt Anyad

+Hans-Georg Lundahl you are just a moron. there were floods. many in fact. the nile and the euphrates flooded yearly. the ganges and the indus flooded periodically. predicting a flood was not really a prophecy. but there was no worldwide flood. there was noah. there was no arc. the whole world did not get destroyed. you actually believe there was a noah's flood 4000 years ago? are you completely insane?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

No, I am not insane enough to deny the witness both of True Religion and of Universal (or near such) Human Tradition. But it seems Hindoos have made themselves so.

Why?

Well, the Mahabharata is not just about a war, but about the Bharata Varsa, the World Wide Empire which was threatened by that war, in the Hindoo way of looking at it.

In God's view, the Bharata varsa (as you might call it) of the Cainite dynasty of Nod, East of Eden, was very much at least part of the reason He sent the waters.

After the Flood, an idiot tried to remake the Bharata varsa. Or several together in fact. When they came from the East to Sumer (probably they had seen India not yet habitable) they started building a very great Tower. One of the purposes was to remake the Bharata varsa. God punished the Tower by linguistic imposed fractioning of Humanity, so as to spare us a quick rebuilding of Bharata varsa. THIS some people wanted to forget, all while remembering the Bharata varsa before the Flood. That is my little guess of the background for Mahabharata.

Now, on the one hand they had to acknowledge there was a new era. To us it came with the Flood. To them it came with the death of Krishna and Arjuna a little before the flood. They could not deny all flooding by the ocean, they probably saw ruins of a city which had been there before the Flood. So they said that Krishna had predicted a local flooding of that city. Still way beyond a flood by a river flowing over. They forgot about the flood, they forgot about the Tower of Babel, they started off as if pre-Flood heros were direct ancestors of for example the Kuru. In patrilinear fashion.

Usually a community knows its beginning, but this once they wanted very badly to seem to continue something more ancient.

[resuming comment:]

Jews have been in India since the days of King Solomon? (23:20 or just before)

Well, in that case the gentle Pandavas may more reflect King David continually on the run from his father in law Saul than actual pre-Flood Cainites. This is however not necessary.

But it might mean that:

• The versification of slokas was an imitation of Psalms by David
• That the ancestor Bharata - the cherished one - is named after a translation of the Hebrew name David - the beloved one.

And if Mahabharata preached pantheism, that was an error.

If any man before the flood said what Krishna is said to have said in Bhagavadgita, he was a bad man and not a god.

Of Jesus Christ one can say either He was God or a Bad Man. If Krishna made the claims given in Bhagavadgita, as "victory and defeat are the same" or "a wise man and a heap of dung are the same" [actually the words were rather gold=heap of dung, wise man=cow, not necessarily that the two pairs equal, which is a bit better], he was a liar or a victim of demonic lies.

Of Jesus we can know He was God, because He foretold His Resurrection and then rose from the Dead. We can know He ascended to Heaven insofar as we can know the Eleven Disciples saw Him lifted up, after the Resurrection, into the clouds before vanishing, with their eyes and not "eyes of the mind or dreams". Of Krishna we know no such thing at all. His pretended ascent into heavenly palaces and welcomed by gods already there is the vision of a poet. Just like the Conference on Mount Olympus is in the beginning of the Odyssey the vision of Homer. Neither is knowledge. Christianity is knowledge. The Gospel is knowledge.

The Eternal Word is not the Vedas and not the Quran.

It is the God who became - and remains - Man, without ceasing to be God. The Man who died on the Cross and rose on the third day, according to what all Scripture before His time on Earth had told about Him in prophecy and parallels. The Christ who is Jesus from Nazareth.

Some people want me to accept Hinduism. I will not. They think I have done harm and if I were a Hindoo I would do no more harm. But I have not done harm to innocent people with some exceptions where I was first harmed myself by those who wanted me to quit being a Christian.

Victory of Pandavas: "Every rule is broken" .... exactly, that was the case before the Flood. Except by someone the Pandavas may have ignored and his descendants in India wanted to forget: Noah.

[Vyasa's words to the child about the one woman saved recall that the Cainites did not have descendants after the Flood, except insofar as some of Noah's daughters in law could have Cainite origin. - Sorry, this was added before seeing the article on Parikshit, after only relying on the info from video.]

rohadt Anyad

+Hans-Georg Lundahl are you insane or are you a poe? i mean there is no other possibility. you are either mentally ill, or pretending to be one.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

You are very obviously an Oriental.

Instead of arguing the issue you resort to namecalling.

But perhaps I am a Poet - with a T at the end.

The Mahabharata poet wanted to know what happened eternally to the people he had been describing. And he invented it.

I am inventing what happened between the events recorded truthfully in the Bible and in more detail but less truthfully in Mahabharata. He was recording traditions about the battles, but he was inventing what happened to the last Pandava after the victory.

A beautiful story, but not what really happens to a righteous soul after leaving earthly life. Precisely as Krishna ascending to be welcomed by the gods is not what would have happened to a soul who while living had said the Bhagavadgita to Arjuna.

However, it may be the Mahabharata poet's invention, he was less guilty since not inciting to such a battle and the original charioteer of Arjuna may have been less guilty by not saying it.

rohadt Anyad

+Hans-Georg Lundahl i am not oriental you ignorant dumbfuck, and there is no arguing the issue, you are retarded. i am still thinking you are a poe, i don't think it is possible for any human to be actually as stupid as you are.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

rohadt Anyad is not an Oriental name?

It is not from any Oriental language like Sanskrit or Hindi or Urdu or Bengali or even Pashtoon or Farsi?

Or you are perhaps of such heritage but yourself educated in the "melting pot"?

rohadt Anyad

+Hans-Georg Lundahl no it is not. i am not of such heritage, nor am i educated in the "melting pot". you are taking the bible as true, which is complete nonsense. it is made up nonsense, just like the crap you are inventing. you don't even know when the bible was written, what is its origin and what is the origin of the hebrews.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

YOU do not know that.

YOU presume on a consensus among modern academia which has no basis at all except atheist prejudice.

However, you have not explained your name. rohadt Anyad does strike me as the Aryan branch of Indo-European languages (without getting into the debate whether there was a Proto-lang from which all branches descend or not). So, you are not of such heritage, you are not educated in US, kindly, where are your roots? Then?

Or did you just invent it for a screen name?

Does the Bible adress Mahabharata issues?

See Yudhistira
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yudhisthira

While climbing the peaks, Draupadi and four of the Pandavas fell to their deaths, dragged down by the weight of their guilt for their sins. Yudhisthira was the only one to reach the mountain peak, because he was unblemished by sin or untruth.

On reaching the top, Indra asked him to abandon the dog before entering the Heaven. But Yudhisthira refused to do so, citing the dog's unflinching loyalty as a reason. It turned out that the dog was Dharma.

Apocalypse 22:15 Without are dogs, and sorcerers, and unchaste, and murderers, and servers of idols, and every one that loveth and maketh a lie.

Yudhisthira was carried away on Indra's chariot. On reaching heaven he did not find either his virtuous brothers or his wife Draupadi there. Instead he saw Duryodhana and his allies. The Gods told him that his brothers were in Naraka (hell), atoning for their sins.

Yudhisthira loyally went to Naraka to meet his brothers, but the sight of gore and blood horrified him. Though initially he was tempted to flee, after hearing the voices of his beloved brothers and Draupadi calling out to him, asking him to stay with them in their misery, he remained. Yudhisthira ordered the divine charioteer to return. He preferred to live in hell with good people than in a heaven with his enemies. Eventually this turned out to be another illusion to test him and also to enable him to atone for his sin of deceiving his guru during the war where he half-lied to Drona about Ashvathamma's death. Thereafter Indra and Krishna appeared before him and told him that his brothers(including Karna) were already in heaven, whilst his enemies suffered from hell's torment in due time for their earthly sins.

Matthew 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me.

Some debate resumed:

sumit dalal

+rohadt Anyad u have misinterpreted me.I never said Christianity influenced Hinduism. And christian mythology was established by constantine. Prior to it there were many gospels which were later declared non canon .This thing never happened in India therefore we have so many versions of our mythology. I know India had contact with Mesopatamia since Harrapan times. knowledge might have been exchanged in ancient times long before present form of hinduism came into form. Therefore i said it is difficult to determine.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Christian community of canonic Gospels never accepted the Gnostic Gospel "of St Thomas". The Gnostics accepting it never accepted all of New Testament canonic books, nor Old Testament books.

Neither community essentially changed whether at Constantine or at other times.

And since I believe action of Mahabharata was - insofar as it happened - pre-Flood and redaction of it post-Flood and post-Babel (Hindus may have had a good excuse to want to forget the Flood if the version they knew was the Babylonian one, in which one god sends it and another one saves from it), there were many more centuries between Mahabharata action and historic Vyasa than between Trojan War and Homer, at least as many as between Trojan War and Tragedians, and the distance between Trojan War and Homer was in its turn several times greater than between the Life of Christ and the Canonic Gospels.

The learned men are playing around with redaction histories of the Gospels a bit like I am doing with that of Mahabharata.