Wednesday 27 April 2022

Rajvrittant - List of kings after Mahabharata war

By Sri Chiraan 2009/06/26

Bhagavat purana lists all the kings that would come to rule the land of bharat [entire jambudweepa] after King Parikshit. This is an interesting tale of kings yet to come a prediction by Vedavyasa. The names of the kings and their prospective rule, along with the number of years they ruled is amazingly accurate when compared to the actual history. However William Jones and others distorted Indian history and jumbled up the names of many kings to match with the Sumerian record. 

Most of the history we read is highly biased and interpolated to suit the erstwhile British empire designs to show the land of Bharat as land of snake charmers and naked babas.

Th actual list is:

  • 3139 The Mahabharat War
  • Start of Brihadrath dynasty of Magadh
  • Start of Yudhisthir dynasty of Hastinapur
  • 3102 Ascension of Bhagwan Krishn 

Start of kaliyug
  • 2139 End of Brihadrath dynasty
  • 2139-2001 Pradyot dynasty
  • 2001-1641 Shishunag dynasty
  • 1894-1814 Gautam Buddh
  • 1641-1541 Nandas
  • 1541-1241 Maurya dynasty
  • *1541-1507 Chandragupt Maurya
  • 1507-1479 Bindusar
  • 1479-1443 Ashokvardhan
  • 1241-784 Shung and Kanau dynasty
  • 784-328 Andhra dynasty 
  • 328-83 Gupt dynasty 
  •  328-321 Chandragupt Vijayaditya
  • *326 Alexander’s invasion
  • 321-270 Samudragupt Ashokaditya Priyadarshin, or
  • Ashok the Great
  • 102BC-15AD Vikramaditya, established Vikram era in 57 BC

(AD)

  • 25-85 Shalivahan, established Shalivahan Shak era in 78 AD
  • 85-1192 There were several kingdoms of Rajpoot kings all over India. They ruled for 1,107 years.
  • 1192-1757 In 1192, Mohammad Gori invaded Delhi (Hastinapur) the second time, defeated and killed Prithviraj Chauhan, and became the king. Since then several dynasties of Muslims ruled India for 565 years.
  • 1757-1947 In 1757 English regime was established in Bengal.
  • British ruled India for 190 years.
  • 1947 India got Independence

It can be seen that there is full 1200 years of difference between the Chanakya Maurya and Alexander .

The myth of Alexander and his Selukus having fought Maurya is evident. This is the greatest hoax of this century. A grand goof up.

To prove the same let us provide some evidence.

The famous Aihole inscription of glorious Chalukya King Pulkeshi II of the 7th century says:

It means, “3,735 (30 + 3,000 + 700 + 5) years have already elapsed in Kaliyug
after the Mahabharat war, and 556 (50 + 6 + 500) years of Shalivahan era is running (on this date of engraving this inscription)”. The inscription says that 3,735 years of Kaliyug had already elapsed. It means the 3,736th year of Kali era was running in the Shak era 556 AD which was 556 + 78 = 634 AD. Thus, deducting 634 from 3,736 comes to 3102 BC.

Thus date of both Mahabharata war and Shalivahan shaka has been established through this inscription.

Now Bhagavat clearly deleanates the list and is also supported by Vishnu purana and Bhavishya Purana.

Bhavishya Puran itself there are descriptions of Vikramaditya in more than 40 chapters between Pratisarg Parv I and IV. Pratisarg Parv IV, chapter 1 of Bhavishya Puran says that after the elapse of a full 3,000 years in kaliyug (3102 – 3000 = 102 BC), a dynamic Divine personality was born who was named Vikramaditya. Bhavishya Puran further says that the great King Vikramaditya ruled for one hundred years.

Kalidas, the greatest poet, writer and the literary figure of his time, living a pious life and sincerely devoted to his scholarly work, was one of the nine gems of King Vikram’s court. The Jyotirvidabharnam by Kalidas tells in its first chapter [astrological treatise by Kalidas]

That Vikram era started at the elapse of (agni 3, ambar 0, yug 4 and ved 4 = 3,0,4,4) 3,044 years of Kaliyug. Thus, the 3,045th year of Kaliyug was the beginning of Vikram era which is 57 BC. At the end of Jyotirvidabharnam, Mahakavi Kalidas mentions the exact date of his writing and says that

In the Kali era 3067 he had started to write this book. It means, he wrote that book when 3,067 years of Kaliyug had passed. That comes to 35 BC (3102 – 3067 = 35), which is after the beginning of Vikram era.
Thus, Vikramaditya was born in 102 BC (3102-3000), established his ‘era’ in 57 BC and left this earth planet in 15 AD.

There were nine dynasties that ruled Magadh after the Mahabharat war (3139 BC). They were: 

  • 21 kings in Brihadrath dynasty (1,000 years)
  • 5 in Pradyot (138 years)
  • 10 in Shishunag (360 years)
  • One King Mahapadm Nand along with his 8 sons (100 years)
  • 10 Maurya (137 years)
  • 10 Shung and 4 Kanva (457 years)
  • 30 kings of Andhra dynasty for 456 years (Bhagwatam 9/22/46-49, 12/1/1-28 )

Thus Alexander’s era of 320 BC does not coincide with Chanakya and Maurya.

Morover Megasthenes never mentions about any minister of Sandrokottus by name Chanakya. The most prolific and authentic historian, it is unlikely that when he has not missed to capture the essence of Magadh empire with details of gardens, and footpath, and roads, and administration has failed to mention the most revered and admired minister of Empire. It is in fact the empire of Ashoka priyadarshin[samudragupta] that megasthenes was describing and not Candragupta Maurya. As 320 Bc was Gupta period and not Maurya period.

Some names are confusing .

  • The Gupt dynasty was the ninth Magadh dynasty. There were seven kings in the Gupt dynasty:
  • (1) Chandragupt Vijayaditya (ruling period 7 years)
  • (2) Samudragupt Ashokaditya Priyadarshin or Ashok the Great (51 years)
  • (3) Chandragupt II Vikramaditya (36 years)
  • (4) Kumargupt Mahendraditya (42 years)
  • (5) Skandgupt Parakramaditya (25 years)
  • (6) Nrasinghgupt Baladitya (40 years) 
  • (7) Kumargupt II Vikramaditya (44 years) 
The total reigning period was 245 years. After the downfall of Gupt dynasty the kingship of Magadh ended, and it went under the subordination of Vikramaditya of Ujjain (Malva).

And Mauryan dynasty:

  • Chanakya, also known as Kautilya, who didn’t have a pleasant appearance but had an intelligent brain, managed to terminate the existing King Mahapadm Nand and his eight sons, and made Chandragupt the King of Magadh who was also the legitimate heir of the throne. The total period of the four dynasties including the Nand dynasty after the Mahabharat war is 1,598 years (1,000 + 138 + 360 + 100). Thus, the coronation date of Chandragupt Maurya comes to 3139 – 1598 = 1541 BC. Chandragupt Maurya ruled for 34 years (1541-1507 BC), his son Bindusar ruled 28 years (1507-1479 BC) and his grandson Ashokvardhan ruled for 36 years (1479-1443 BC).

Megasthenes mentions King of India had usurped kingdom from his master.

Chandragupta of Gupta dynasty was a general in the court of Andhra king when the king died, his son Pauloma was a infant, so Chadraguta assumed throne later killed Pauloma to become emperor.

Whereas Maurya was installed by Chanakya and was legal heir to the throne.

Megasthenes was considered as gossiper by Greeks themselves. Strabo says Megasthenes account cannot be believed as it says some Indians had feet backwards with eight toes. Sugarcane was a honey coated reed which gave honey without bees. Indians lived only for 40 years, and women gave birth to child at seven. The snakes were flying and scorpions threw venom from skies and ants were as big as camel.

All these show he was cooking up stories.

And Jones took advantage of these writings to establish Sandrokottus was Chandragupta Maurya. And Hindus were Aryans from foreign Land, and so Muslims and Christians were equally acceptable as Hindus in this land as invaders. But megasthenes never mentions Maurya or Chanakya.

Thus this history is distorted. And true history is what is given in Bhagavatam and Bhavishya Purana.

Kings of Pramar dynasty up to King Bhojraj as given in the Bhavishya Puran (Pratisarg Parv IV chapter one) states Vikramaditya, son of Gandharv Sen, reigned up to 15 AD. Vikramaditya’s son Deobhakt ruled from 15-25 AD and his grandson, Shalivahan, ruled from 25-85 AD. Shalivahan established his era in 78 AD. It is called the Shalivahan Shakera.

Krishnarpanmastu

6 comments:

  1. Anon said: May 29, 2011 at 10:48

    Pranaam Acharya

    A very interesting proposition. I have heard of a similar Yagya when Maharaja Parikshit was poisoned by Takshak. I wonder would such an event solve our problems.

    Rayaru as Prahaladaru was immersed in Hari Bhakti of the top most order and was time and again disturbed by his own father Hiranyakashyapu who also caused distress to other Hari Bhaktas. Which ultimately resulted in manifestation as Narsimha. The point is when a Jeeva is immersed in Hari Bhakti in truest sense no one can be a hinderance in any Yuga.

    Coming to Kaliyuga, It’s a very distinct Yuga. I have seen and been a part of knowingly or unknowingly many sins which Jeeva’s of other Yugas wont even want to imagine. Today even some of the Madhavas aspire for accolades and comforts associated directly or indirectly from Malettchas. In world where so called boundaries are shrinking and world order going towards Maletchha centric doctrines I wonder how many are not tainted in any manner. More so do they possess the sheer tenacity and capability which comes from Hari Preeti to single handedly counter such effects.

    Mistreatment of Cows and rampant indulgence in prohibited things is common and acceptable. One of my friends a Bramhin from a respectable family indulges in such things when I ask him to explain I can sense displeasure and eventually they ask why do you care. Maybe it’s Hari’s will maybe there is an intricate interplay of Prarabdha and Karma. I wonder in what other Yuga would he able to do these coming from such families.

    When a person harms a muka Pashu the pashu maybe suffering from Prarabdha but now the sin is transferred to the Hinsak. Who would trade such sins in other Yugas.

    It seems we are here because we deserve to be here to play our parts and strive towards Hari Preeti. Finally Sir I would like to ask can we find births atleast in better Yugas so to escape our misery and How in absence of sincere and high standard Hari Bhakti.

    Sincere Pranaams
    Hare Srinivasa.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Chiraan said: May 29, 2011 at 13:18

    In aashwamedha yagnya also yagnya is done and then kings are challenged to fight … KINGS dont fall into yagnya kund ,,
    Similarly Mletcha yagnya is yagnya taken to kill all mletchas , mletchas did not fall in kunda ,,,,,
    there is no such story in other puranas , Pradyotan were bramhins .. they resisted mletchas , but mletchas had already occupied status of prominence by then … otherwise KSHEMAK the great PANDAVA would not have left the world ….. leaving his Kingdom for mletchas …..

    Such a thought is unnecessary … because entire INDIAN race is today intermixed with mletchas , pallavas dravids in south are mletchas , pulinda and pouloma poulisha races in east are also mletchas , khas is far east is also mletcha race ……
    chipitnasika race is also mletcha race in NORTH himalayas ………
    streemukha race in northwest are derivatives of yavan …..
    dasyus in west are also mletchas from abhir race ….. south west is gourundika race ……
    There will be no population in INDIA if mletcha yagnya is conducted ……

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anon said: May 30, 2011 at 13:47

    Dear Sir

    From Maletchhas we understand that the people who did not follow Varna Ashram. Some of the races you mentioned are traditionally known to be indigenous to Indian subcontinent as compared to Yavanas who came from far away.

    For instance Dravids and Pallavas they seem to be inhabiting India since quiet long, I doubt if some of these had the technology to fair across the seas. The point is when there was Vedic rule how come they entered India and if they were always a part of India how come they were not a part of Vedic culture (no matter how low in the hierarchy). This would only allow the proponents of Arayan invasion theory to make more ground.

    Sincere Pranaams
    Hare Srinivasa.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Chiraan said: May 30, 2011 at 14:02

    after the advent of buddhism , the onslaught of meltchas ha strated , the word dravid itself is indicative of mletcha . the technology to fair across sea , this is denigrating statement , rajamhendra chola was famous for his naval force and his kingdom extended till combodia near thialand via sea . java sumatra were also his kingdom , it was after chola dynasty fell pallavas and dravids entered .

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon said: May 30, 2011 at 14:39

    Dear Sir

    I meant Maletchas like Pallavas Dravids would’nt have had the technology to fair seas in large masses to pose a threat to Vedic kings. More over I thought they (Pallavas, Dravids) were always a part of Indian subcontinent.

    Sincere Pranaams
    Hare Srinivasa.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Chiraan said: May 30, 2011 at 20:21

    Mletchas always had tamasmantrasiddhi and technology , to reach lands , they are the influx …. and have thoroughly intermixed with local population ….just like many rajpuits have embraced DIn e ilahi during 50 years of rule of AKBAR . and again their offsprings have come back to Hinduism . But that does not spare them of mletchatva …..

    ReplyDelete