Talk:Mahabharata
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mahabharata article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 90 days  |
 | Mahabharata was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | ||||||||||||||||
 | Jai Mahabharat was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 25 September 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Mahabharata. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2024
edit | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Mahabharatha was also translated to Telugu somewhere between 11 Century CE and 14 Century CE by Kavitrayam (Trinity of poets), consisting of Nannayya, Thikkana and Yerrapragada (also known as Errana) with title ఆంధ్ర మహాభారతం(read Andhra Mahabharatam). Jyothiprasad.buddha (talk) 16:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:13, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2024
edit| | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"Change astronomical dating of Mahabharata in compilation of text row that is 5561 BCE by professor Nilesh Nilkanth Oak [1] Pranav kantak (talk) 07:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 10:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2024 (2)
edit| | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
astronomical dating of 5561 BCE for Mahabharat text as researched by Nilesh Oak [1] Pranav kantak (talk) 08:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 10:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
James L. Fitzgerald (2018) analysis
editRecently Fitzgerald proposed a 5 stage development of Mahabharata, explained in Dokter-Mersch (2023): 1) Before 400 BCE, it was an oral composition called "Bharata," prior to invention of writing in India. 2) Between 400 and 50 BCE, when "although writing was invented in this period [...] the composition, preservation, and transmission of this Bharata was still oral. 3) Between 50 BCE and 50 CE, "the creation and promulgation of a written Sanskrit Mahabharata." 4) Between 50 and 150 CE "[t]he transmission [...] continued orally because, non-Sanskritic audience needed explanations in their local language to understand the text," along with a major written addition. 5) Between 150 and 350 CE, the last written addition took place.
Ref: Dokter-Mersch, Sanne, (2023). "Orality in a world of manuscripts..." in: Manuscript and Text Cultures, Vol. 2, Number 2, pp. 206.
It would be fit to incorporate this perspective in the Mahabharata's article.--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 03:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Reference 51 incorrect for historicity of the Mahabharata
editThe article says John Keay confirms the Bharata battle to around 950 BCE and then proceeds to link his book India: A History as a reference. This is incorrect. In India, a history, John Keay says there is not enough information to confirm or deny if the battle took place and we therefore cannot place it. Furthermore, he goes on to state that the key lesson is to look at economic and geographical aspects of the story more than the actual story.
I would suggest that this reference and claim be removed from that line. 80.5.143.28 (talk) 14:27, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
@80.5.143.28: Keay does not reject the historicity of the Mahabharata, as he actually writes: "Yet their core narratives seem to relate to events from a period prior to all but the Rig Veda" (Chapter 3, The Epic Age: c900-520 BC).--Carlos Eduardo Aramayo B. (talk) 14:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)