Why KMG only is reliable?

Page

JagaKalia

@JagaKalia

Navigator

Posted: 11 years ago

I followed this forum from the beginning. I have noticed one thing that when a person posts citations from some source other than KMG it is considered as non reliable. Also people sometimes refer KMG to be Vyas' s MB. My question is why? Does anyone read the real epic written by Vyasa? Why the regional translations are not conisered as close to Vyasa's MB? Also KMG is an English translation. English came to India only before 200-250 years ago. But the regional translations were written somewhat 1000 years ago. So should not they be more acuurate than some recent translations ?? Plz reply .

These are just questions which were in my mind. I did not mean to offend anyone.

Quote

Frequent Posters

amritat

@amritat

Sparkler

Posted: 11 years ago

You have a valid question. 😊

But u see, there are so many different translations of Mahabharat, in which, many things actually contradict each other.

Now, if people start considering all translations, and start arguing giving contradictory citations from various translations, then this forum will become chaotic.

Hence, to keep the confusion at a minimum level, one translation has been set as the standard.

Besides, KMG is available online for free, so anyone can access it.

And English is what we communicate with here, usually. And not everyone understands every regional language.

So, an English translation will help.

I know, your question is justified, and KMG is not the ultimate Mahabharat, but sticking to it alone, makes it easier. 😊