SARASWATI RIVER ASI AND MICHAEL Danilo book the LOST RIVER
With an increasing number of independent astronomical deductions
based on literary sources yielding a *pre-3000 BCE* period for *Ṛgveda *and
given “recent excavations in the Ghaggar Basin (or Rigvedic Saraswati)
sites, including Bhirrana, Girawad, Farmana, and Rakhigarhi, have pushed
the date for the beginning of the Harappan Civilization back to 5500 BCE,” the
hypothesis about the reality of the mighty Sarasvati river seen in the *Ṛgveda
*by many scholars is better placed and more scientifically corroborated
today than it ever has been in the last few centuries. While a *pre-3000
BCE *epoch for *Ṛgveda*, arrived at from sources independent of
Sarasvati-related evidence, should clearly add to the copious amounts of
published scholarship making the *pre-2700 BCE argument *for Vedic age
based on literary analysis of Sarasvati river in *Ṛgveda*, we found only
one *published *source making a similar argument, but with very little
supporting
data, for the epoch of *Mahabharata *based on literary evidence of the
river Sarasvati in *Mahabharata *in combination with the estimated age of
the loss of the Sarasvati. In addition to this paucity of scholarship of
Sarasvati in the context of *Mahabharata *vis-a-vis Sarasvati in the
context of *Ṛgveda*, there are even arguments of the opposite kind—an
inversion of sorts— where, based on very limited instantiation—of only
those verses where river Sarasvati has been described to be invisible or
having dried up—the epoch of *Mahabharata *has been placed after 1900 BCE
It is the void in literature pertaining to Sarasvati in *Mahabharata
*identified
above, along with the argument made on basis of limited instantiation (also
specified above), that we seek to address through this paper where we first
document, as comprehensively as we can, Sarasvati as found in the
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) critical edition of *Mahabharata
*before analysing it in its context in order to explore the possibility of
a *terminus ante quem *pertaining to the epoch of *Mahabharata*.
“The “loss of the Sarasvati” being now dated to about 1900 BCE, the Vedic
age should be earlier, not later. ...an “unbroken” Sarasvatī points to 2700
BCE or earlier.” Slide 37 Danino (2016) The Sarasvati River.
NB: West calls Saraswati as imaginary without any basis; Today Haryana
claims by a small pond sited as Old Saraswati River which is not based on
truth.
KR IRS 16 8 23
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 14:42, Gopala Krishnan <[email protected]> wrote:
> I understand the river Saraswathi never got dried up *fully*. A dried
> river is not lost river. Most of the rivers in Tamilnadu are dry rivers.
> During floods/heavy rain they appear as wet river.
> I*n Rajasthan** area*, still in the river Saraswathi, there is water, I
> understand.
> I stand corrected if any of the above information are wrong
> Gopalakrishnan
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqZ5_-p0YXL5WxgpktYQZ0yeUCcBsvMNh-i2UgG_eJKAQ%40mail.gmail.com.
