Mahabharata Manufactured After Muslim Invosion : Reference to Idgahas Proves This

How greatly the Bhagvat Gita is permeated by Buddhistic ideology and how much the Gita has borrowed from Buddhism. What is the date of the origin of the Mahayana Buddhism? What is the date of the composition of the Bhagvat Gita? (p.371). The date of the Bhagvat Gita particularly with reference to the theory as put forth by Mr. Tilak. His opinion is that the Gita is part of Mahabharata. (p.372). All that one can say is that the Mahabharata was composed between 400 BC to 400 AD. A conclusion too broad to be used for the purpose which Mr. Tilak has in view. Even this span seems to some scholars to be too narrow. It is contended that the reference to Edukas in the 190th Adhyaya of the Vana parva has been wrongly interpreted to mean Buddhist Stupas when, as a matter of fact, it refers to the Idgahas created by the Muslim invaders for Muslim converts. If this interpretation is correct, it would show that parts of the Mahabharata were written about or after the invasions of Mohd. Ghori. (p.374). In the Mahabharata, Krishna is nowhere represented as a God accepted by all (p.375). On the other hand, the Bhagvat Gita presented Krishna as God omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, pure, loving essence of goodness. (p.376). Krishna was only a tribal God. Brahmins were not friendly to Krishnaism in the beginning. (p.378). To the Brahmins religion has been a trade. Bhagvat Gita is later than Hinayan Buddhism but is also later than Mahayana Buddhism. (p.379). To sum up, my thesis is three-fold. In other words, it has three parts. First is that the Bhagvat Gita is fundamentally a counter-revolutionary treatise of the same class as Jamini’s Purva Mimansa, the official Bible of counter-revolution. In the Brahmins vs Kshatriyas, the first case reported was that of the King Vena. Vena was a Kshatriya King. His conflict with the Brahmins has been referred to in various authorities. (p.392). The second case is that of Pururavas. The third and a somewhat serious conflict was that between King Nahusha and the Brahmins. (p.393). Communal conflicts between Brahmins on the one hand and the Kshatriyas on the other. They were class wars undertaken by one community with the avowed intention of exterminating the other root and branch. Two such class wars of extermination have been recorded in the Mahabharat. (p.408). The second-class war and which was also a war of extermination was declared by the Bhargava Brahmins on the Haihaya Kshatriyas. In this the leader of Bhargava Brahmins was one Parashuram. (p.409). These instances of enemity were accompanied by challenges from one side to the other which shows how high were the tempers running on both sides. (p.413). This class war between the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas must have gone on for ages. In the light of this the attitude of Manu towards this Class War comes as very strange. There is a clear attempt on the part of Manu to close the ranks. (p.414). This sudden climb down by the Brahmins – what can be the key to this mystery? (p.415). Chapter 16 – Shudras and the Counter-Revolution: What was the position of the Shudra before Manu? Manu treats the Shudra though he was an alien non-Aryan not entitled to the social and religious privileges of the Aryan. Unfortunately, the view that the Shudra was a non-Aryan is too readily accepted by the people. But there can be no doubt that this view has not the slightest foundation in the literature of the ancient Aryans. (p.418).