Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 8 of 10 — Bluffing and the Game of Numbers

In the previous seven articles of this series, Oak’s dating of the Rāmāyaṇa to 12209 BCE has been refuted. There are four Astronomy Poison Pills for the dating of the Rāmāyaṇa according to Oak [1]. The first Astronomy Poison Pill of “Caitra being in the Śarad season” was refuted in Part 2 [2]. I pointed out that according to the evidence in the Rāmāyaṇa, Caitra was in the Vasanta season. I refuted the second Astronomy Poison Pill — that of “Āśvina month being part of the Vasanta season” in…


Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 8 of 10 — Bluffing and the Game of Numbers, Appendix: Details of Error Elimination — Experiments

There are 71 “Error Elimination — Experiments” in the book “The Historic Rama”. Here are my comments on each one of them.

Error Elimination — Experiment 1: Caitra — month in which forests bloom (pp. 57–60)

This was refuted in Part 2 [2].

Error Elimination — Experiment 2: Setting Sun near Pushya (pp. 60–61)

This was refuted in Part 3 [3].

Error Elimination — Experiment 3: Brightly shining North Pole Star (pp. 61–63)

This was refuted in Part 5 [5].

Error Elimination — Experiment 4: Comet afflicting Moola (pp. 69–74)

This was refuted in Part 6 [6].

Error Elimination —…


Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 7 of 10 — A bridge to NOWHERE — A tale of two Laṅkās

In the previous six articles of this series, Oak’s dating of the Rāmāyaṇa to 12209 BCE has been refuted. There are four Astronomy Poison Pills for the dating of the Rāmāyaṇa according to Oak [1]. The first Astronomy Poison Pill of “Caitra being in the Śarad season” was refuted in Part 2 [2]. I pointed out that according to the evidence in the Rāmāyaṇa, Caitra was in the Vasanta season. I refuted the second Astronomy Poison Pill — that of “Āśvina month being part of…


Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 6 of 10- The Comet observed by Lakshmana CANNOT be identified

As I described in previous four articles of this series, 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 6 of 10- The Comet observed by Lakshmana CANNOT be identified; Appendix 1–30 instances of Halley’s comet in Mūla nakshatra between 17500 BCE and 10000 BCE based on Voyager 4.5 software

Table: Details of Halley’s Comet in the Mūla nakshatra between 17500 BCE and 10000 BCE using Voyager 4.5 software
  1. Jan 9, 10216 BCE

Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 6 of 10- The Comet observed by Lakshmana CANNOT be identified; Appendix 2 — 23 instances of Halley’s comet in Mūla nakshatra between 17500 BCE and 10000 BCE based on Stellarium software

Table: Details of Halley’s Comet in the Mūla nakshatra between 17500 BCE and 10000 BCE using Stellarium software
  1. 21/12/-10162

Refutation of Nilesh Oak’s dating of ancient texts

Part 5 of 10- Brahmarāśi is NOT Abhijit (Vega) star

As I described in Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4 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 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. …

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