Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 4 of 10- Āśvina month was NOT in the Vasanta season during Rāmāyaṇa time

As I described in Part 2 and Part 3 of this series of articles, Oak claims that he has sets of evidence, which he calls “Astronomy Poison Pills,” that make it impossible for the date of the Rāmāyaṇa to be later than 10000 BCE. There are four Astronomy Poison Pills for the dating of the Rāmāyaṇa according to Oak [1]:

Both epics have linchpins. The linchpins come from what I call ‘astronomy observations’ due to long term phenomenon of ‘Precession of Equinoxes’. … Ramayana does…

Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 3 of 10- The Sun was NOT near Puṣya nakṣatra during Hemanta season

As I described in Part 2 of this series of articles, Oak claims that he has sets of evidence, which he calls “Astronomy Poison Pills,” that make it impossible for the date of the Rāmāyaṇa to be later than 10000 BCE. There are four Astronomy Poison Pills for the dating of the Rāmāyaṇa according to Oak [1]:

Both epics have linchpins. The linchpins come from what I call ‘astronomy observations’ due to long term phenomenon of ‘Precession of Equinoxes’. … Ramayana does not have ‘UNIQUE’ evidence like AV observation. …

Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 2 of 10- Lord Rama was NOT born in Śarad season

In my first article in this series, I described and explained the basis of Nilesh Oak’s dating of the Ramāyaṇa. I labeled it the Vartak-Oak hypothesis. I pointed out that it is a hypothesis, and not a proven scientific fact. Vartak and Oak had not presented enough evidence to support their hypothesis, I argued. They hypothesize that the luni-solar months get shifted from the seasons due to precession. …

Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 1 of 10 — Understanding the Vartak-Oak Hypothesis

Trying to refute a thesis that has gained a high level of acceptability is a challenge in the first place. Once a thesis gains traction, many people, including educated ones buy into it though they have little knowledge about Indian texts or astronomy. Thus, many have simply accepted a date for the Rāmāyaṇa that is based on misinterpretation of evidence and denial of clear evidence in the epic itself. We are not talking of the Vedas that are difficult to comprehend, but the Rāmāyaṇa that most people are familiar with. Verse by verse translations of Rāmāyaṇa are only a click…

Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of Sushruta to earlier than 5,561 BCE

The Suśruta Saṃhitā is a well known text of Āyurveda, which describes surgical operations and instruments. The date of its writer, sage Suśruta, is not well agreed among researchers as is the case of many personalities from Indian history. Many dates have been proposed for him ranging from 1000 BCE, 800–600 BCE, 600 BCE, 600–200 BCE, 200 BCE, 1–100 CE, and 500 CE [1]. In a presentation by Nilesh Oak [2] and another presentation and article based on Oak’s work [3–4], it is claimed that the time of Suśruta was earlier than 5,561 BCE based on the information in Suśruta…

Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Refutation of the article “Ancient updates to Sūrya-siddhānta” by Nilesh N. Oak and Rupa Bhaty

In an article in IndiaFacts and two presentations [1–3], Nilesh N. Oak and Rupa Bhaty have claimed that astronomical text Sūrya Siddhānta contains information that can be dated to 12,000 BCE. Oak and Bhaty have cited three astronomical observations from Sūrya Siddhānta that can be simultaneously satisfied only in 12,000 BCE [1]:

The two necessary conditions (two pole stars and points of apoapsis/periapsis during Hemanta/Grishma, respectively) and the optional yet desired third condition of the Earth’s obliquity (equal to 24°) are all satisfied by the year 12000 BCE!

Oak and Bhaty accept that Sūrya Siddhānta was last updated in 580…

Refutation of Rupa Bhaty’s dating of ancient texts

Refutation of astronomical dating of Agastya observation to 19,000 BCE by Rupa Bhaty

In this article I will refute the claim of astronomical connection between Natarāja iconography and Agastya. This thesis has been developed by Rupa Bhaty and described in an article on IndiaFacts [1] and presentations available on Youtube [2–4]. In the article on IndiaFacts, Bhaty asserts:

“Cosmic Natarāja has to do with identification of Agastya’s location. … This astronomical event happened during 11000BCE- 13000BCE.” [1]

In a related presentation, Bhaty takes this connection to over 19,000 BCE [2]. I intend to show that Bhaty has made baseless assumptions to come up with these numbers that defy common sense. …

Refutation of Rupa Bhaty’s dating of ancient texts

Refutation of the article “Fascinating Astronomical and Eustatic Observation by King Bṛhadratha” by Rupa Bhaty

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidenceCarl Sagan

I had posted the link to my previous blog on Twitter. There was one comment that if I don’t like Bhaty’s articles, I should just ignore it. This completely misses the point why I am writing these articles. Bhaty’s articles are read by many people and Bhaty is also putting forward her views on Sattology Youtube channel. Many people might have doubts about her extravagant claims and would like to get a second opinion. My articles are written to give the second opinion, nothing more and nothing less. I am going to…

Refutation of Rupa Bhaty’s dating of ancient texts

Refutation of the article “Samvatsara in Vishuva-Vernal Equinox at Uttarā Phālgunī- Epoch 10,000 BCE-Evidence from Taittiriya Brāhmana” by Rupa Bhaty

In my previous articles I have presented a summary of my research on the origins of ancient Indian astronomy. I have also presented astronomical dating of some ancient texts. The picture that emerges from my research is that the formative period of Indian astronomy is 4th millennium BCE and some Vedas and Brāhmaṇas can be dated to 3rd millennium BCE. Contrary to this, some Indic researchers are dating many Indian texts to much older periods based on astronomical dating. Fantastic claims are being made, and since these claims are not being falsified by experts, a large number of people are…

Discovery of the Original Boundaries of Nakshatras

Part 8 of 8- Indus Valley Civilization was Vedic Civilization

In my previous articles, I have established that original boundaries of nakṣatras were different from currently accepted boundaries [1–3]. The origin of the original boundaries was at the yogatārā of Rohiṇī, which was the beginning of Rohiṇī nakṣatra or end of Kṛttikā nakṣatra. This gives us precise dates for the position of sun among the nakṣatras during equinoxes and solstices as shown in Figures 1 and 2. We can use these dates to gain significant insights into Indian history in an objective manner.

Figure 1: The position of sun during equinoxes in the Rohini system [3]

Dr. Raja Ram Mohan Roy

Vedic Scholar, Materials Scientist, Author of books on Vedic Astronomy, Jain Astronomy, and Ancient Indian History

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store