Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 14 Sep 2012 18:14

There are some common caliculations which many people accept -
First the starting period of Kali Yuga - This is fairly well known and has long standing tradition.
Kings list of Magadha - List of the kings is avaliable and period of rule of Magadha kings is avaliable and the periods can be fairly caliculated.
Major religious orders like Shakaracharya Mats, Jain and Budda Traditions have their own cronalogies and books which has their own dating system.

The main problem comes with the dates give my our frindly German/Brit "historian" Max Muller and the dating based on world created on Oct 23rd 4004 BC idea. Because of this idea we find most of our dating and history has no basis as per the Brits.

For example what is the date of Bhagavaan Budda? The buddist traditions do not agree with the dating we are giving. No Shankaramat agrees with the date we have givne AdiShankaracharya. There is endless list of difforences from traditional historical view and dating and what we have given.

We need more that just a adhoc review of our history and dating.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 14 Sep 2012 18:27

Nilesh ji, I am not as learned as you are. So please free to dissect my posts as you see fit.

The reason why I asked this question is because of this

Satyug - 1728000 years
Treta Yug - 1296000 years
Dwapar Yug - 864000 years
Kalyug - 432000 years

Kalyug started ~5200 years ago. So Treta Yug lies in the time frame (0.87 - 2.17 million years ago). Every Indian knows Ram Avatara was in Treta Yuga.

So there is a real possibility (according to above info) that we are looking at Ramayana in that time frame. Hence I mentioned Ram Setu & vanaras as evidence to support the claim.

As for western science, since it suffers from western unoversalism i.e. if one guy was hunting boars, the rest of the world was at the same technological level. We know that while the Greeks were studying planets & stars, German were hunting wild animals. So I would not take western equal progress paradigms as serious thought.

One more thing that struck me was the biblical nature of western science. Before Darwin's theory came along, fossils of apes were considered animals that are not amongst us. After Darwin, well developed human fossils were discarded as an extinct line. Either way, the same evidence is decoded on the day's beliefs. Hence, the apprehension.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 14 Sep 2012 18:28

NileshOak ji

In Ramayana, Rama shows Sita the Arundhati star during their marriage ceremony while the real Vasistha and Arundhati were standing there. He says the life of Arundhati is symbolized in that star system above, so the future generations can know, remember and celebrate her greatness.

Few things that might trigger some thoughts in your mind
1. Saptarshis are being named so in that period - Like we name stars/planets on great scientists names in modern times.
2. The yuga systems put Rama to be around 19,600,000 years ago* (Nakul - Avatara's doesn't come in every four yugas. Rama came in a different Manvantara.)
3. The Saptarshi and Arundhati systems are not in our galaxy Milkyway.
4. We know that earth is on the rim of the Milkyway and the galaxy itslef is rotating around itself.

Given the Saptarshi and Arundhati positions, can we calculate when it would be astronomically possible for Arundhati to appear in the front relative to earth's position at that time?

* I will explain how it is possible for knowledge/consciousness to move forward thru yugas and pralaya in a separate post.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 14 Sep 2012 18:30

Nilesh Oak wrote:
brihaspati wrote: Nilesh ji,
I had speculated a long time ago that MB in its current form is perhaps a conflation of three different periods, one of which is the time span around 5700 BCE, perhaps 5600-5750 BCE. This was based on a geological consideration connecting Prabhaasa parva. I would be keenly waiting for your final conclusions!
I have elaborated this issue (conflation of various periods by various authors, etc) elsewhere (I think in OIT thread) but I don't know how to quickly search BRF and how to link.
Briefly.. I have read and re-read MBH text many times.. with different goal (astronomy observations, consistency, multiple versions of same MBH instances and many more) and have found no justification for mutiple layers.. besides what is obvious.. i.e. Vyasa- Vaishampaya- Sauti- and possibly documentation of this last effort. so max 4 editions.

No, I did not mean necessarily three different periods of writing. But one of them could be writing of more than one past period. I think I found the post you referred to. Thanks.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 14 Sep 2012 18:33

2. The yuga systems put Rama to be around 19,600,000 years ago* (Nakul - Avatara's doesn't come in every four yugas. Rama came in a different Manvantara.)

I have heard from authoritative sources that there have been 12 Ram Avatars & 16 Krishna Avatars. So i guess we are in agreement there.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 14 Sep 2012 18:55

nakul wrote: Nilesh ji, I am not as learned as you are. So please free to dissect my posts as you see fit.

My point was never allow other person to simply get away with the answer.. "Yes, I believe" or "No, I don't believe in it' whatever that 'it' is. Rather hold them to the task.

Yes, Yuga calcualtions as you showed. That is why I mentioned 864k> for Ramayana.

(864K + years of Kaliyuga) and sometime before since Ramayana occured in Treta.

This leaves us with multiple options

(1) Believe the above timeline - > 864K.

(Yuga is a subject by itself, what it is and when interpreted to mean time.. whether ordinary or daaivi years .. on and on..) . I have discussed it briefly in my book.. but only to the extent it related to Mahabharata text references. Some discussion on OIT thread as well.

(2) Explore/research to come up with evidence for above time line, i.e. ~ million years ago

(3) explore/research Ramayana to see what timeline it leads us to (This is where I am focusing right now)

(4) Do nothing.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 14 Sep 2012 19:02

brihaspati wrote:No, I did not mean necessarily three different periods of writing. But one of them could be writing of more than one past period. I think I found the post you referred to. Thanks.

When it comes to 'Upa-akhayan' aka sidebar(s), while stories of crow and sparrow are moral stories, MBH author or authors also narrate many stories that goes back to a time before the time of MBH itself. These sections definitely refers to more than one past period.
e.g. Markandeya narrating past stories.. that lead me to, based on one reference, to time of Vega becoming Pole star.. 12048 BC, but possibly the timing of story Markandeya is relating woudl have occured around 14000 BC - 13000 BC. (Envious Sisters and Fall of Vega.. chapter of my book).

There are few other interesting references Markandeya makes that I speculate refers to a time (distant memory of civilization) possibly going back to 70,000 years (yes, 70K). Unfortunately, not on my priority list of projects for now.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 14 Sep 2012 19:05

nakul wrote:Nilesh ji, I am not as learned as you are. So please free to dissect my posts as you see fit.

Karl Popper has this to say on our learning and knowledge and ignorance and I agree

While we differ in little bits of knowledge we have, when it comes to ignorance, we are all equal.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 14 Sep 2012 19:05

One is free to believe what one wants to. Without this freedom, all research will come to a standstill. However, my point was that there is ample evidence in our literature to give Ramayana a proper time frame unlike the delaying tactics we see in the west (200 BC -> 1000 BC -> 5000 BC -> 8000BC)

There are many people who believe in some of the info I posted. I am one of them. This will serve well for those looking at an Indian point of view on the subject. We have already seen allowing external powers to influence our history is not healthy.

There are still various schools of thought that say we were barbarians a million years ago. Indian history has always called us the descendants of sages & saints. This will help explain why. Western scientists who believe Darwin religiously have already "killed" the more developed human lineage & called us descendants of monkeys. To further push their point, they regard Ramayna as myth. My take shows (as does Ramayan's) that humans have co existed with apes. That puts fairly in the first time frame.

Till we get over this myth that society has always shown a positive growth trend, I guess the idea that our ancestors could be more advanced will remain anathema to western minds.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Sep 2012 19:38

Nilesh and others, Two book recommendations om process.

Good Thinking by D. Cummins: relates brain to thinking in a practical manner
Problem Solving 101 by Ken Watanabe: A very elementary level exposure to Problem Solving from children level to very advanced.

all the questions being raised are addressed in either of the two books.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 14 Sep 2012 20:14

RamaY wrote: Given the Saptarshi and Arundhati positions, can we calculate when it would be astronomically possible for Arundhati to appear in the front relative to earth's position at that time?

RamaY Garu,

That is exactly what I have calculated and the crux of my book.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 14 Sep 2012 20:23

ramana wrote:Nilesh and others, Two book recommendations om process.

Good Thinking by D. Cummins: relates brain to thinking in a practical manner
Problem Solving 101 by Ken Watanabe: A very elementary level exposure to Problem Solving from children level to very advanced.

all the questions being raised are addressed in either of the two books.

Ramana Garu,
Thanks for the suggestions.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 14 Sep 2012 20:56

RamaY garu,

is there some reference to Sri Rama being in a different Manvantara?

As far as I know, Sri Rama is considered as the 64th King is the genealogy of kings starting from Vaivasvata Manu in the Surya Vansha, and thus a part of this Manavantara.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Sep 2012 21:57

Yes he is supposed to be two Manavantaras ago.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 14 Sep 2012 22:01

Sri Rama is supposed to have been born in the 26th Mahayuga of the Vaivaswata Manvantara.

we are** in the 28th Mahayuga. Krishna and the Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa both belong to the current - 28th - Mahayuga.

**as per Bhagavatham.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 14 Sep 2012 23:52

All,
If you would also quote the references (Puranas, Valmiki Ramayana) etc when you quote 'Manavataras and what not' it would be useful. Be as specific as you can. Just Vishnu Purana or Bhagavatam is hard to chase. Appreciate your help.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 14 Sep 2012 23:56

RajeshA wrote:RamaY garu,

is there some reference to Sri Rama being in a different Manvantara?

As far as I know, Sri Rama is considered as the 64th King is the genealogy of kings starting from Vaivasvata Manu in the Surya Vansha, and thus a part of this Manavantara.

RajeshA ji,

What you said is correct. In addition , 28th descendent of Rama - Brihadbal, fought in the MBH War from the side of Kauravas. He was killed by Abhimanyu.

Having said that, the problem of 'Manus and Manvantaras' is as complicated as problem of 'Yugas'. Bhagavatam has many statements that conflict with other internal statements of Bhagavatam but also with genealogy lists from Ramayana, Mahabharata, Harivamsha, Vishnupurana..etc.

That is the reason, I requested thread participants to quote specific references.

Otherwise we are at the risk of making mistakes of the kind done with Chandragupta and Ashoka and Buddha.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Sep 2012 00:53

Ramana,
You mentioned yesterday that if was up to you you would have created simulations of saptarshi going around the North celestial pole.
Well, here they are. Notice 'North Celestial Pole (near Polaris in 2012 AD) and near no distinct star in year 5561 BC. Notice the difference in orienation of Saptarshi (pan-handle) with respect to position of North Celestial Pole. It is the position of North Celestial pole that changes and makes a complete circle in about 26000 years.
Previous videos were done in similar fashion, however the view of Arundhati/Vasistha (middle part of the handle of pan-handle) was magnfied to show relative positions of them.

I loaded them just now. No background music (yet).

Saptarshi around NCP in 2012 AD (21st Century AD). Notice that Polaris is stationary as it is the North Pole star (close to NCP) in this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOKciJy3Ung

Saptarshi around NCP - 5561 BC (Time of Mahabharata War). Notice how Polaris also moves around the point of NCP, in this video as it is no longer a pole star.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EunEO27rdI8

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 15 Sep 2012 01:01

wow Nilesh Oak ji.

simply Superb!

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Sep 2012 01:16

RamaY,
Thank you

Did you see Arundhati/Vasistha videos I posted yesterday. Page 76, post #8 (from the bottom of that page) this thread. It shows expanded view of Arudhati/Vasistha how they appear now (2012 AD) vs. how they appeared in 5561 BC.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 15 Sep 2012 01:49

Catching up sir.

OK, I was reading a Telugu book and it mentions few astronomical pointers from various books. would you be able to date them back and give us approxmate periods?

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Sep 2012 02:03

RamaY garu,

Always willling to try, and give my best, with no guarantee of success.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Sep 2012 02:01

Nilesh, We know that Veda Vyasa rearranged the Vedas into their four fold parts. So the Rig Veda we know is what he said it was. Wouldn't proving the antiquity of the Mahabharata and thus of Veda Vyasa also prove the anterior date for the Rig Veda?

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 16 Sep 2012 04:49

ramana wrote:Nilesh, We know that Veda Vyasa rearranged the Vedas into their four fold parts. So the Rig Veda we know is what he said it was. Wouldn't proving the antiquity of the Mahabharata and thus of Veda Vyasa also prove the anterior date for the Rig Veda?

Ramana,

By anterior, you mean earlier in time, right?

Veda Vyasa reorganized Veda and possibly divided them into 4 (from 3... many times references are to 3 veda.. Ramayana but also Bhgavad Gita which is MBH). I would say the 'latest' version we have of Veda is as old as Mahabhrata, since edited/organized by Vyasa.

I have made that point, under 'implications of my MBH War date'....last (12) chapter of the book.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 16 Sep 2012 06:00

Watching science channel and few things made me ecstatic for being a successor of Hindu knowledge.

1. In a program on quantum mechanics, they were explaining the infamous double-slit experiment. Then they give one scientific explanation that - the atom travels back in time based on the "observer's test case (single/double-slit) thus making a decision to be a wave or particle. Then they say, the whole universe can behave this way based on an onserver's moment of observation - linking with the theory of Advaita (will write later)

2. In sub-particle interactions, explaining the uncertainty principle, the scientist says - perhaps the nature doesn't want to reveal itself to us. When the scientists box a single atom to find its location and energy, it broke out the barrier even before they could make the measurements. In the process, sometimes the atom borrows energy from the future. Then the scientist makes this statement "at this scale, the entire universe is figment of our imagination"

3. Explaining the birth of Earth
- that earth was formed when another planet of size of mars collided with earth, causing the birth of Chandra (need to study the birth of Chandra in our books

)
- that ~4 billion years ago the day on earth was only 6 hours long. The moon is slowing down earth (chandrama manaso' jata:) ... What will be the length of the day on earth after 4 billion years, what happens to length of year and so on...
- that all the energy in the universe is created at the time of big-bang and we all consume it. The more energy we have the more complex the organism can grow. That all our energy serving is poured to us by sun. Then isn't surya our God-agent?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 16 Sep 2012 07:53

Watching "The unexplained" on TV

The instructor uses the age-regression therapy to treat a obeys man, who tried more than 20+ routines (from yoga to extreme exercise) but failed.

The therapist takes him thru various past lives of this person to make him realize that he went thru many bodies that are suitable to that life - he was huge when he was a sea-muarader, he was strong but lean when he was a soldier in a army etc..,

Then he was made to see his current life in perspective so he now knows that a lean him exists in him always and it is his past/present karma that is making him what he is.

Can this be somehow related to the by-birth based varna/primary-chakra/level-of-consciousness etc? Or thinking another way perhaps the jeeva selects the body/birth suitable for his karma for upcoming life/project by taking birth in most suitable family thus maximizing one's success of that life's objective?

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 16 Sep 2012 15:00

devesh wrote:Sri Rama is supposed to have been born in the 26th Mahayuga of the Vaivaswata Manvantara.

we are** in the 28th Mahayuga. Krishna and the Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa both belong to the current - 28th - Mahayuga.

**as per Bhagavatham.

Yep, Sri Rama was born in this Manvantara but different Mahayuga.

1 Mahayuga = 1 Krita(17,28,000) + 1 Treta(12,96,000) + 1 Dwapara(8,64,000) + 1 Kali(4,32,000) = 43,20,000 years.

Dwapara = 2*Kali; Treta = 3*Kali; Krita = 4*Kali;

1 Mahayuga = 1 Krita + 1 Treta + 1 Dwapara + 1 Kali;
=> 1 Mahayuga = 4*Kali + 3*Kali + 2*Kali + 1*Kali;
=> 1 Mahayuga = 10*Kali;
=> 1 Mahayuga = 10 * (4,32,000) = 43,20,000 yrs;

1 Manvantara = 71 Mahayugas.(There are also Sandhi periods).

1 Kalpa = 14 Manvantaras.

Every Manvantara has a Manu, Indra and a set of Saptarishis. Or in other words the positions of Manu, Indra and Saptarishis have a term(allocated time period) of 1 Manvantara. So, a single Kalpa has 14 Manus(& 14 sets of Saptarishis).

The list of 14 Manus are:
01)Svayambhuva Manu(The Dhruva/polestar episode happened in this Manvantara. Dhruva was a descendent of this Manu).
02)Svarocisha Manu
03)Uttama Manu
04)Tamasa Manu
05)Raivata Manu
06)Cakshusha Manu
07)Vaivasvata Manu (current Manu and Manvantara)
08)Savarni Manu
09)Daksha-savarni Manu
10)Brahma-savarni Manu
11)Dharma-savarni Manu
12)Rudra-savarni Manu
13)Deva-savarni Manu
14)Indra-savarni Manu
Wiki Link

1 Kalpa forms a daytime of Lord Brahma. There is an equivalent night time for Lord Brahma when there is no creation. He rests at this time. So 24 hr period of Lord Brahma is equal to 2 Kalpas.

1 Single Day of Lord Brahma = 2 Kalpas.
360 such days = 1 year for Lord Brahma.
Total lifetime of Lord Brahma is 100 such years.

A Vishnu day is equivalent to the whole life span of Brahma. The whole life span of Vishnu is equivalent to a day of 'Rudra'. The whole life span of Rudra is equivalent to a day of lord Shiva. In the whole life of lord Shiva five lakh and four thousand numbers of Rudras come and go.
A Shiva's day commences with the creation and before the end of the night the whole creation gets annihilated. Sadashiva is eternal.(According to Shiva Mahapuranam.Link ).

Presently, we live in 1st Kalpa(1st day) of 51st year of Lord Brahma(50 yrs of Lord Brahma are completed and 51st is running). The name of this Kalpa is Shwetavaraha(White Boar) Kalpa. The name comes from Varaha avatara(of Lord Vishnu) which appeared at the starting of this Kalpa. Lord Varaha slew Hiranya-aksha(uncle of Prahladdha) and saved Bhumata(Earth). Then, He settled down at Tirupati. Later(in the present Kali Yuga), Lord Venkateshwara leased Tirupati from Lord Varaha for a period of 1 Kali Yuga(present Kali Yuga).

Presently, we live in 7th Manvantara(6 Manvantaras are completed and 7th is running). The present Manu is Vaivasvata Manu(son of Vivasvan/sun->Kasyapa->Marichi->Brahma). Ikshvaku is the son of Vaivasvata Manu. The descendents of Ikshvaku established Surya Vamsha(into which Lord Rama was born) with Ayodhya as the seat. The famous Maandhata, Raghu, and Ambarisha were born in Surya Vamsha. Vaivasvata Manu had another progeny named Ila who married Buddha/Mercury(son of Chandra/Moon). They had a son named Purarava. His descendents established Chandra Vamsha(into which Pandavas and Lord Sri Krishna were born). The famous Bharata, Nahusha, Yayati, Kuru, Puru, Yadu were all born in Chandra Vamsha.

Presently, we live in 28th Mahayuga(27 are completed and 28th is running). We live in Kali Yuga which started in 3102 BCE. Krita, Treta, Dwapara of the present Mahayuga are completed.

Lord Sri Krishna appeared in the Dwapara Yuga of present 28th Mahayuga(i.e approx 5000yrs ago). Lord Sri Rama appeared in Treta Yuga of 24th Mahayuga.

So, the time lapse between Lord Sri Rama's appearance to now would be:
Dwapara Yuga(24th Mahayuga) + Kali Yuga(24th Mahayuga) + entire 25th Mahayuga + entire 26th Mahayuga + entire 27th Mahayuga + Krita Yuga(28th Mahayuga) + Treta Yuga(28th Mahayuga) + Dwapara Yuga(28th Mahayuga) + Present Kali Yuga(so far i.e. 3102BCE+2012CE=5112yrs);
=> 2*Kali + Kali + 10*Kali + 10*Kali + 10*Kali + 4*Kali + 3*Kali + 2*Kali + 5112;
=> 42*Kali + 5112;
=> 42*(4,32,000) + 5112;
=> 1,81,44,000 + 5112;
=> 1,81,49,112 yrs;

A minor Pralaya (annihilation/destruction) happens at the end of every yuga. The pralaya which happened around 3102 was Mahabharata War and dessication of river Saraswati. At the end of a Chaturyuga/Mahayuga (4 yuga cycle), there is a bigger pralaya. At the end of Kalpa, the creation ceases.

Each Mahayuga has its own Vyasa figure. Vyasa means editor/compiler. The job of Vyasa is to compile or edit the Vedas and Puranas so that they are intelligible and accessible to people of later Yugas(particularly Kali Yuga). Krishna Dwaipayana(son of Satyavati) is the Vyasa figure of the present Mahayuga. Other people have occupied that position before. For example, Krishna Dwaipayana's father Parashara was Vyasa figure for a certain Mahayuga. And Valmiki(who authored Srimadh Ramayana) was also a Vyasa figure for a certain Mahayuga.

- According to Vishnu Puranam(by Samavedam Shanmukha Sharma) and other sources.

-----
Pentiah garu, Edited it.

----
EDIT: Earlier I wrote Sri Rama was born in 26th Mahayuga(from memory). But, it seems, I was wrong. It is not 26th Mahayuga, but 24th Mahayuga. Accordingly, I am changing the calculations. Link

pentaiah · Post by **pentaiah** » 16 Sep 2012 15:21

Johnee G saar ji" wrote:The job of Vyasa is to compile or edit the Vedas and Puranas so that they are edible and accessible to people of later Yugas(particularly Kali Yuga).

I hope you mean legible

does not the meaning (at least one of them) Vyasa(m) means essay or dissertation

The job of Vyasa is also to write notations, commentary and discourse
the fact that Mahabharatam was being enunciated by Vyasa while Lord Ganesha was jotting down is a corroboration of collaboration (team work shall we say)

When I went to Chardham I saw the cave where Vyasa was seated and about 150 feet from there Lord Ganesha sat with his tala patra and Ghantam ( the sharpe pen no ink but almost like braille)
I have a photo of that place, for a brief period the Ganga goes into under ground tunnels and then the flow again emerges...
It is the last post on Indian soil and the mountains are the border between Tibet and India

****
The above computation of Manvantra etc are also discussed in Bhagavatm
Also in Vishnu Sahasranamam it says clearly

vyAsAya vishNu-rUpAya vyAsa-rUpAya vishNave
namo vai Brahma-nidhaye vAsishtAya namo namaH.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 17 Sep 2012 07:26

Ramana,

Acquired both 'Good Thinking' and 'problem solving 101'. Both of them are good, albeit beginners books on problem solving.

I would recommend - Karl Popper - 'The logic of scientific Discovery' and 'Conjectures and Refutations'. Not easy reads but definitely rewarding for the one willing to take the risk.

And while your two recommenations are practical in multiple everyday situations, Popper's are relevant in the context of hard to address problems such as OIT, timing of Ramayana, Mahabharta, ancient Indian events, etc.

Thanks again.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Sep 2012 08:57

i also have popper's work. Its not easy reading.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 17 Sep 2012 14:17

Age of Pole Star or Dhruva according to Hinduism:

At the start of the present Kalpa, in 1st Manvantara, Krita Yuga: Swayambhuva Manu had two sons, Priyavrata and Uttanapada. Uttanapada was the King. He had 2 wives Suniti and Suruchi. Uttanapada had 2 sons, Dhruva from Suniti, and Uttama from Suruchi.

Dhruva, at the age of 5, performed a Tapas for about 6 months and obtained Dhruva Mandala(Pole Star) as a boon from Lord Vishnu. Then, Dhruva returned to his Kingdom and later succeeded his father as a King, while his step-brother Uttama died in youth. Dhruva ruled for 36,000 years. Then, Dhruva attained the highest celestial Dhruva Padam(or position of Pole Star). Lord Vishnu promised that Dhruva Mandala(Pole Star) will last for a time period of a Kalpa.

So, Dhruva was born in Krita Yuga of 1st Manvantara of present Kalpa. Presently, we live in 7th Manvantara, 28th Mahayuga, Kali(5112 years have passed).

(Bhagavatam and Vishnu Purana)

1 Mahayuga = 1 Krita + 1 Treta + 1 Dwapara + 1 Kali;
=> 1 Mahayuga = 4*Kali + 3*Kali + 2*Kali + 1*Kali;
=> 1 Mahayuga = 10*Kali;
=> 1 Mahayuga = 10 * (4,32,000) = 43,20,000 yrs;

1 Manvantara = 71 Mahayugas.(There are also Sandhi periods).

1 Kalpa = 14 Manvantaras.
Or Alternatively, 1 Kalpa = 1000 Mahayugas.

Every Manvantara has a Manu, Indra and a set of Saptarishis. Or in other words the positions of Manu, Indra and Saptarishis have a term(allocated time period) of 1 Manvantara. So, a single Kalpa has 14 Manus(& 14 sets of Saptarishis).

The list of Manus from 1st Manvantara to present Manvantara(7th) is:
01)Svayambhuva Manu(The Dhruva/polestar episode happened in this Manvantara. Dhruva was a descendent of this Manu).
02)Svarocisha Manu
03)Uttama Manu
04)Tamasa Manu
05)Raivata Manu
06)Cakshusha Manu
07)Vaivasvata Manu (current Manu and Manvantara)

So, the present age of Dhruva/Pole Star would be:

Treta + Dwapara + Kali+ 70Mahayugas +2nd Manvantara + 3rd Manvantara + 4th Manvantara + 5th Manvantara + 6th Manvantara + 27Mahayugas + Krita + Treta + Dwapara + Kali(5112=3102BCE+2012CE);
=> 3*Kali + 2*Kali + Kali + 70*(10*Kali) + 71*(10*Kali) + 71*(10*Kali) + 71*(10*Kali) + 71*(10*Kali) + 71*(10*Kali) + 27*(10*Kali) + 4*Kali + 3*Kali + 2*Kali + 5112;

=> 3*Kali + 2*Kali + Kali + 700*Kali + 710*Kali + 710*Kali + 710*Kali + 710*Kali + 710*Kali + 270*Kali + 4*Kali + 3*Kali + 2*Kali + 5112;

=> (3*Kali + 2*Kali + Kali + 4*Kali + 3*Kali + 2*Kali) + (700*Kali + 710*Kali + 710*Kali + 710*Kali + 710*Kali + 710*Kali) + 270*Kali + 5112;

=> 15*Kali + 4250*Kali + 270*Kali +5112;

=> 15*Kali + 4520*Kali + 5112;
=> 4535*Kali + 5112; (1 Kali = 4,32,000yrs)
=> 1,95,91,25,112 yrs; Approx.
=> 1.95 * 10^9 yrs; or 1.95 billion yrs(195 crore yrs). Approx.

The total life-time of Pole Star or Dhruva Mandala is:
1 Kalpa = 1000 Mahayugas = 1000 * 10 * Kali;
=> life-time = 1000 * 10 * 4,32,000;
=> life-time = 4,32,00,00,000 yrs;
=> life=time = 4.32 * 10^9 yrs; or 4.32 billion yrs(432 crore yrs).

--------

Narayana Rao wrote:There are some common caliculations which many people accept -
First the starting period of Kali Yuga - This is fairly well known and has long standing tradition.
Kings list of Magadha - List of the kings is avaliable and period of rule of Magadha kings is avaliable and the periods can be fairly caliculated.
Major religious orders like Shakaracharya Mats, Jain and Budda Traditions have their own cronalogies and books which has their own dating system.

The main problem comes with the dates give my our frindly German/Brit "historian" Max Muller and the dating based on world created on Oct 23rd 4004 BC idea. Because of this idea we find most of our dating and history has no basis as per the Brits.

For example what is the date of Bhagavaan Budda? The buddist traditions do not agree with the dating we are giving. No Shankaramat agrees with the date we have givne AdiShankaracharya. There is endless list of difforences from traditional historical view and dating and what we have given.

We need more that just a adhoc review of our history and dating.

Adi Shankaracharya:

Madhaviya Sankaravijaya

The Madhaviya is the oldest available, and also the most authentic and widely known among the different Sankaravijayas today. It is certainly the most popular such text in the Advaita tradition, and is also known as the Samkshepa Sankarajaya. The popularity of this work derives from the fame of its author, Madhava, who is usually identified with Sri Vidyaranya, the 13th pontiff of the Peetham. Old manuscripts of this work are available from diverse places in India, and printed editions based on a comparison of various manuscripts are available from as early as 1863 CE. Two commentaries have been written on the Madhaviya Sankaravijaya, one titled Dindima, by Dhanapati Suri (composed in 1798 CE), and another titled Advaitarajyalakshmi by Achyutaraya (composed in 1824 CE). Contemporary accounts of Sankara’s life follow this text in most details, like birth in Kaladi, meeting with his guru on the banks of the river Narmada, writing of commentaries, debate with Mandana Mishra, establishment of the Sharada Peetha at Sringeri, Ascension of the Sarvajna Pitha in Kashmir and his last days in the Himalayas.

There has been some doubt in recent times about the date and authorship of the mAdhavIya Sankaravijaya, including charges that it was reworked extensively in the 19th century CE. Almost all of this criticism is baseless. If the author of this work is not identical with vidyAraNya, the latest date that can be put to it is 1798 CE, the year in which the DiNDimA commentary was completed. Moreover, another author, sadAnanda, who wrote a Sankaravijaya sAra in 1783, informs us that his source is mAdhava’s work. As such, the criticism that the mAdhavIya was written as late as the 19th century CE, or that portions of it were re-written recently, cannot be upheld. However, the earliest possible date of this work (14th century CE) is still several centuries later than Sankara’s own date.

http://www.sringeri.net/history/sri-adi ... /biography

It is accepted that Adi Shankara appeared in 8th century(820) CE(or AD). He was born at Kalady in Kerala at bank of Poorna river(now named as Periyar river). He met His guru on the banks of Narmada. His guru was GovindaBhagavatpada(who was a disciple of GaudaBhagavatpada->Shuka->Vyasa->Parashara->Shakti->Vashishta).

At the age of 16, He authored commentaries on Brahma Sutras(authored by Badarayana/Vyasa) on the lined of Advaita Philosophy. This is a celebrated work. Later, He toured entire India 3 times on foot, refuting various other schools of philosophy in extensive debates.*

In these debates, He defeated the scholars of His time(including the famous Mandana Mishra who was the foremost disciple of illustrous Kumarilla Bhatta) and (re)established Advaita Philosophy firmly. He also authored several other works(based on Vedanta, Bhakti, Tantra, Mantra, ...etc). His works range from very short(Eka Shloki) to huge. The present day Hinduism is His heritage. Hew restored proper mode of worship in several Temples across India from Badri to Kalady. Unlike many self-styled philosophers(before and after Him), He acceded to the authority of Vedas(including Mimamsa part). He also upheld the validity of Upasana(worship) of Ishta devatas(favourite deity) and acknowledged shanmatas(6 paths/deities i.e. Shiva, Vishnu, Devi, Skanda, Ganapati and Surya).

He ascended Sarva-agna Peeta in Kashmir. He established 4 monastries in 4 directions of India.*
a) East - Puri - Govardhan Mutt.
b) South - Sringeri - Sharada Mutt.
c) West - Dwarka - Kalika Mutt.
d) North - Badri - Jyothir Mutt.
http://www.sringeri.net/history/amnaya-peethams

(*This shows that Indians had a always clear understanding of whole of India as one cultural/civilizational entity long before the advent of Muslim invaders or colonial Brits).

Finally, at the age of 32, He retreated from the world from Badri.

This version is accepted and established.

--------

For example what is the date of Bhagavaan Budda? The buddist traditions do not agree with the dating we are giving.

True, saar.

There is an excellent article on this Issue:

Date of Buddha
Most of us are taught that Buddha was born around 560 to 550 B.C. However, once we start doing some research, we find evidence that this date may be too late. Buddha may have lived much earlier. Let us see how Buddha is dated.

Let us see the Traditional Theories at arriving date of Buddha.

1) Long chronology Based on the Mahavamsa and Dipavamsa accounts which state that 218 years difference between Buddha Death and Ashoka Conversion. Which put date of the Buddha’s death is 544/543 B.C.E.
2) Corrected chronology According to Richard Gombrich, Aśoka’s dates are approximately established by the synchronism between his 13th major rock edict, which is dated by scholars in the 13th year after his consecration, and the five monarchs of the Hellenistic world named therein as reigning at the time. The date of the edict must be 255 B.C., give or take a year; Aśoka’s consecration is accordingly dated 268 B.C. So the Date of Buddha's Death is 483BC
3) short chronology Many Sanskrit , Tibetan and chinese traditions say the difference between date of Asoka coronation and Date of Nirvana of Buddha to be 100 years and Chinese accounts say 116 years. So the date can be anywhere between 544BC to 440BC depending on which theory you are following.
4) Dot-ted record. This account, taken from Chi-nese sources and referred to initially by Tao-hsüan in the Ta t’ang nei tien lu, argues that when Upāli, first collected the Vinaya after the Buddha’s death, he marked a dot in the manuscript at the end of the pavarana, and continued the process in each year thereafter. His successors, Dāsaka, Sonaka, Siggava, Moggali-putta, Tissa, Caṇḍavajji, and so forth continued the process. Samghabhadra, who presumably translated the Samantapāsādikā into Chinese, is said to have put the 975th dot on the manuscript during a visit to Canton in 489 C.E., thus establishing the Buddha’s death in 486 B.C.E.

But we are not bothered by this relative chronology based on the date of Ashoka cornation. Since we have seen that Ashoka grandfather chandragupta Maurya is itself is not based on Solid evidence the article Did Megasthanese Meet Chandrgupta. We will go to the root of the evidences to see when he can be dated.

European Account
Since the records of ancient India give only the intervals between events but do not, like later records, date the events themselves, it is necessary in order to establish dates in Indian history to call on Greek historians. Indo-Greek relations developed as a result of the Indian campaign of Alexander the Great (327 BC). About 303 BC, the Indian Emperor Candragupta came to a territorial agreement and entered into diplomatic relations with Seleukos Nikator, Alexander's former general who ruled over Babylonia. Through the reports of the Greek ambassador Megasthenes, who was ambassador to the imperial court of palimbothra , Candragupta ( Sandrokottos ) became known to Greek historians, and through them we are able to date his accession to 321 BC. But this date is now disputed due to various reasons, Further Information on Chandgragupta and Alexander Date follow article Did Megasthanese meet Chandragupta Maurya. How Let us see

Purana Account
The Puranas provide a chronology of the Magadha rulers from the time of the Mahabharata war, Somadhi (Marjari) was the ruler. He started a dynasty that included 22 kings that spread over 1006 years.They were followed by five rulers of the Pradyota dynasty that lasted over 138 years. Then for the next 360years was the 10 rulers of the Shishunag family. Kshemajit (who ruled from 1892 to 1852 B.C.) was the fourth in the Shishunag dynasty, and was a contemporary of Lord Buddha's father, Shuddhodana. It was during this period in which Buddha was born. It was during the reign of Bimbisara, the fifth Shishunaga ruler (1852-1814 B.C.), when Prince Siddhartha became the enlightened Buddha. Then it was during the reign of King Ajatashatru (1814-1787 B.C.) when Buddha left this world. Thus, he was born in 1887 B.C., renounced the world in 1858 B.C., and died in 1807 B.C. according to this analysis.

Further evidence that helps corroborate this is provided in The Age of Buddha, Milinda and King Amtiyoka and Yuga Purana, by Pandit Kota Venkatachalam. He also describes that it is from the Puranas, especially the Bhagavat Purana and the Kaliyurajavruttanta, that need to be consulted for the description of the Magadha royal dynasties to determine the date of Lord Buddha. Buddha was the 23rd in the Ikshvaku lineage, and was a contemporary of Kshemajita, Bimbisara, and Ajatashatru, as described above. Buddha was 72 years old in 1814 B.C. when the coronation of Ajatashatru took place. Thus, the date of Buddha's birth must have been near 1887 B.C., and his death in 1807 B.C. if he lived for 80 years

Professor K. Srinivasaraghavan also relates in his book, Chronology of Ancient Bharat , that the time of Buddha should be about 1259 years after the Mahabharata war, which should make it around 1880 B.C. if the war was in 3138 B.C.

Astronomical Account
A search was made from 1900 BCE to 400 BCE for the sequence of events: winter solstice, lunar eclipse, solar eclipse, followed by Vaisakha poornima, the full moon day of Buddha nirvana. It is found that there are only 14 dates possible for this sequence of events to occur:1807 BCE, 1694 BCE, 1659 BCE, 1510 BCE, 1250 BCE, 1192 BCE, 1138 BCE, 1119 BCE, 1062 BCE, 1007 BCE, 765 BCE, 690 BCE and 560 BCE. If a time limit of about three months (the time that Buddha spends in sravasti before attaining his nirvana) is imposed, then the time interval between winter solstice and vaisakha poornima must be less than 90 days and that vaisakha poornima should occur before the vernal equinox, as winter solstice occurred after his arrival at sravasti. With this restriction, most of the dates do not qualify, leaving only two dates 1807 BCE and 1510 BCE as possible dates. It is interesting to note that the ‘traditionally’ accepted dates, 544 BCE, or 483 BCE, or any of the recently revised dates do not fit the picture. One additional piece of astronomical information is needed to fix the date.

The Samyutta Nikaya , Part I, sugatta Vagga, Book II, Chapter I, Devaputtasa yuttam,suttas contain ten units in all, two of them to relate to kassapa. The others are devaputtas who visit Buddha. Sengupta identifies kassapa with prajapati and hence with winter solstice. He regards the other deities as adityas The first devaputta to visit is to be taken as the lord of the month of the lunar eclipse. We take a hint from a listing of the sons of aditi in taittirya aranyaka dhata aryaman. If we assume as Sengupta did, kassapa as dhataa or prajapati, his visit would indicate the arrival of winter solstice. Aryaman would be the first ‘devaputta’ to visit as the deity of the month, i.e., the presiding deity of the nakshatra of the full moon, where the lunar eclipse occurs. In 1510 BCE the lunar eclipse occurs at uttaraphalguni, whose deity is bhaga. In 1807 BCE, the lunar eclipse occurs at purvaphalguni , with aryaman as the deity. So the year is 1807 BCE

Furthermore, astronomical calculations by astronomer Swami Sakhyananda indicates that the time of the Buddha was in the Kruttika period, between 2621-1661 B.C.

Pali and Ceylon Chronicles
Mahavamsa and Dipavamsa , give the traditional figure of 218 years between the death of the Buddha and the conversion of Asoka is best taken as conventional. It amounts to the claim that between the death of the Buddha and the conversion of Asoka, there intervened

#) A first major event occuring after 100 years, this being the standard conventional interval of prediction in the later Buddhist literature
#) A second major event, occurring after another 100 years, this event being the rise of the ruler patron, or the coronation of Asoka.
#) A third event, occurring after a further 18 years. We may note that according to his own inscriptions, it was in the 18th year of his reign that Asoka was persuaded to accept Buddhism.

The alternative interval of 256 years, is based on counting backward from a later date in Asoka's reign, namely, the year of his abdication to pursue a life of virtue. This is the information given by the chronicles , the western scholars have taken the difference in years between ashoka , buddha and Megasthanese – Chandragupta meeting to date Buddha.

The Ceylonese Pali traditions leave out the kings mentioned RockEdicts from list of Asoka’s kingdoms, whereas Rock Edict XIII includes them. In fact, as many scholars have noted, the character of Asoka from Ceylonese and other traditions is precisely (as RK Mukherjee has said) what does not appear in the principal edicts. Rock Edict XIII, the famous Kalinga edict, is identified as Asoka’s. It was, however, Samudragupta’s (Samudragupta was a great conqueror and a devout admirer of Asoka. He imitated Asoka in many ways and also took the name Asokaditya. In his later life, he became a sanyasi).

Tibet Account
The Kalachakra tantra puts the life of Sakyamuni Buddha in the 9th. Century BCE William Jones, on the basis of Tibetan records infers that Buddha lived in the 11th century B.C. A number of Tibetan documents place Buddha at 2100 BC.

China Account
Fa-hsien was in India and at Patliputra c. 410 AD. He mentions a number of kings, but makes not even a fleeting reference to the Gupta, even though according to European scholars he came during the height of their reign. Fa-Hien puts Buddha’s Nirvana at 1050 B.C.

Qin Shi Huang, who is said to have suppressed Buddhism, in the same way that he suppressed all other Chinese philosophy. His reign lasted from 246 BCE to 221 BCE. Han Wei, a noted researcher from the Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, found evidence in the Historical Records, which were written in 104 BC. Silk Road archaeologist WANG Jianxin said Han's research sounded "reasonable" .

The Weilüe reports a tradition that an envoy of the Yuezhi king who gave oral teachings on Buddhist sutras to a student in 2 BCE

Greek Accounts
Seven Sages of Greece (Dated 620-550 B.C ) surprisingly give the Buddhist Teachings.

Thyagaraja Aiyer in his book "Indian Architecture" observes," Here lies Indian Sramanacharya from Bodh Gaya, a Buddhist monk taken to Greece by his Greek pupils and the tomb marks his death about 1000 B.C." If the Buddhist monk went to Greece in 1000 B.C., then the Buddha must have lived at least a few centuries earlier.

Somayajulu places Chandragupta Maurya in the 14th century B.C. This puts the Buddha three centuries earlier, i.e., in the 17th century B.C.

Long before the word 'missionary' came to be synonymous with Christianity" Buddhist monks ('dharma-bhanakas') were traipsing across Asia. Travelling the Silk and Spice Routes they spread their doctrines all the way from Khotan in central Asia to Antioch and Alexandria in the west. One such visit is documented in 20 BC in Athens. A Buddhist philosopher, Zarmarus, part of an embassy from India, made a doctrinal point by setting himself alight. His tomb became a tourist attraction and is mentioned by several historians.

It seems the original Therapeutae were sent on an Indian embassy to Pharaoh Ptolemy II in 250 BC. The word 'Therapeutae' is itself of Buddhist origin, being a Hellenization of the Pali 'Thera-putta' (literally 'son of the elder.') Philo Judaeus, a 1st century AD contemporary of Josephus, described the Therapeutae in his tract 'De Vita Contemplativa'. It appears they were a religious brotherhood without precedent in the Jewish world. Reclusive ascetics, devoted to poverty, celibacy, good deeds and compassion, they were just like Buddhist monks in fact. From the Therapeutae it is quite possible a Buddhist influence spread to both the Essenes (a similar monkish order in Palestine).(According to Lindter, New Testament books are also cryto-buddhist works. So, the phenomenon described in this para may be a data point to support that theory. Infact, this and the next para may be describing the early christianity i.e. cryptoBuddhism - johneeG)

Gnosticism is Influenced by Buddhism , which was a religion of quite a different order to earlier 'pagan' cults. It was a scriptural religion, making a strong appeal to the emotions. It offered a moral code – and hope. The Gnostic idea of liberating the soul from entrapment in matter is not dissimilar to the teachings embodied in the "4 Noble Truths" of the Buddha.The Greek details presented above are also sometimes dated before Alexander, so the argument that Buddhism came to Greece only after Alexander invasion does not hold water. Greek and some parts of then India like Bactria were part of Persian empire of Darius, so the exchange of ideas is not confined to Alexander era.

Korea Account
Hwanin or Divine Regent is a figure in Korean mythology. Hwanin is an alias of Indra. Hwanin is the name on Buddhism of Indra, this name is widely used in east Asia. We have evidences that Hwanin being used in 3rd Century BC in Korea.

South East Asia Traditions
Japan, Thailand, , Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia follow the Ceylon (Sri Lanka) date.

Christian Account
Apart from similarities between buddha and Jesus Christ, Most Important account has been the Barlaam and Josaphat story, which is the Christianized version of Buddha Story.

Max Muller stated that missionaries also were sent more than thirty years prior to Ashoka's reign

Philo noted the presence of Buddhists in Alexandria, Egypt.

Conclusion
The above accounts say that Buddha can be earlier than the said dates of 560BC and Western and Indology Scholars have not even explained the contradictions in their own calculations. The fundamental sheet Anchor theory (Megasthanese -Chandragupta Meeting) is itself not established. The Indian literary accounts are being dismissed summarily. And Western scholars themselves dont provide any evidence to backup their account. Since Chandragupta Maurya date by Western and Indology scholars is disputable, Buddha Date is also susequently disputable. Regarding what is being said in Ashoka Edicts and what are the claims made on the edicts , we will see in another article. For now Buddha date is nowhere settled. Date by Indian Literary sources and Astronomical calculations is 1807 BC.

Source

The Date of the Buddha by E Bruce Brooks
Re-establishing the Date of Lord Buddha by Stephen Knapp
A short note on the date of Buddha nirvana using planetarium software B. N. Narahari Achar
Indian Architecture by Thyagaraja Aiyer
Cooking the Buddhist Books by Charles S. Prebish

http://controversialhistory.blogspot.in ... uddha.html

Read it in full. It is very well written.

Infact, it seems the entire Indologist version of Indian history is based on Sheet Anchor Theory(which is dubious). Another very good article on that subject:

How Chandragupta Maurya was Equated with Sandrocottus – Sheet Anchor Chronology.

Sir William Jones could not believe in the antiquity of the Bharata War according to Indian accounts because of his Christian faith which told him that Creation took place at 9-00 a. m, on 23rd October 4004 BC. He tried to search the Greek and Roman accounts. These accounts supplied some information about India of the time of the Macedonian king Alexander. It mentioned seven names of three successive Indian kings. Attributing one name each for the three kings the names are Xandrammes, Sandrocottus and Sandrocyptus. Xandrammes of the previous dynasty was murdered by Sandrokottas whose son was Sandrocyptus.

Jones picked up one of these three names, namely, Sandrokottas and found that it had a sort of phonetic similarity with the name Chandragupta of the Puranic accounts. According to the Greek accounts, Palibothra was the capital of Sandrokottas. Jones took Palibothra as a Greek pronunciation of Pataliputra, the Indian city and capital of Chandragupta. He, then, declared that Sandrokottas of the Greek accounts is Chandragupta Maurya of the Puranas. Jones died just a year after this declaration and possibly before his death, could not know that Puranas have another Chandragupta of the Gupta dynasty.

Later scholars took this identity of Sandrokottas with Chandragupta Maurya as proved and carried on further research. James Princep, an employee of the East India Company, deciphered the Brahmi script and was able to read the inscriptions of Piyadassana. Turnour, another employee of the Company in Ceylon, found in the Ceylonese chronicles that Piyadassana was used as a surname of Asoka, the grandson of Chandragupta Maurya. The inscription bearing the name of Asoka was not found till the time of Turnour. In 1838, Princep found five names of the Yona kings in Asoka's inscriptions and identified them as the five Greek kings near Greece belonging to third century BC who were contemporary to Asoka.

In the Greek accounts, Sandrokottas of Palimbothra is described as a contemporary of Alexander of Macedonia who invaded India during 327 BC to 323 BC This decides the approximate date of Chandragupta Maurya. Princep's research decides the approximate date of Asoka, the grandson of Chandragupta Maurya as in 3rd century BC Both these dates were adjusted with the reign periods of the three successive Magadha kings, Chandragupta, Bindusara and Asoka of the Maurya dynasty given in the Puranas. Thus, the date c. 320 BC was fixed as the date of coronation of Chandragupta Maurya. It is on this date that every other date of Indian history has been constructed.

Max Mueller, in 1859 AD, finalized this identity of Sandrokottas with Chandragupta Maurya and declared c. 320 BC, the date of coronation of Chandragupta Maurya as the Sheet Anchor of Indian history. M. Troyer did not agree with this conclusion and noted this fact in the introduction to his translation of Rajatarangani of Kalhana. He even communicated his views to Prof. Max Mueller in a letter but did not receive a reply from him.

Smith's Chronology:
Historian V. A. Smith took the chronological identity asserted by the predecessors in this historical hierarchy as the basis for further calculation of the exact dates of the different dynasties that ruled over Magadha after and before the Mauryas. He took the aid of numismatics in addition to epigraphy. He could not however get over, as if by compunction, to follow the Puranas in the enumeration of the kings and their dynasties. But he reduced their reign periods. The total reduction done by these British scholars, from Jones to Smith, comes to 1300 years according to some Indian chronologists.

Indian View Chandragupta Maurya did not meet Megasthenes

Megasthenes has nowhere mentioned the word Maurya

He makes absolutely no mention of a person called either Chanakya or Kautilya.

Indian historians have recorded two Chandraguptas, one of the Maurya dynasty and another of the Gupta dynasty. Both of them had a grandson called Ashoka. While the Mauryan Chandragupta' s son was called Bimbasara (sometimes Bindusara), The Gupta Chandragupta had a son called Samudragupta. Interestingly Megasthenese has written that Sandrakuttos had a son called Samdrakyptos, which is phonetically nearer to Samudragupta and not Bindusara.

The king lists given by the Puranas say that 1500 years elapsed from the time of the Kurukshetra war to the beginning of the Nanda dynasty's rule. If one assumes the Nandas' period to be 5th century BCE, this would put the Bharatha war around 1900 BCE whereas the traditional view has always been 3100 BCE. This gives a difference of 1200 years which go unaccounted.

Megasthanese himself says 137 generations of kings have come and gone between Krishna and Sandrakuttos, whereas the puranas give around 83 generations only between Jarasandha's son (Krishna's contemporary) to the Nandas of the Magadha kingdom.. Assuming an average of 20 to 25 years per generation, the difference of 54 generations would account for the gap of the 1200 years till the time of Alexander.

The Chinese have always maintained that Buddhism came to China from India around 1100 -1200 BCE, whereas the western historians tend to put Buddha at 500 BCE

According to the Greek accounts, Xandrammes was deposed by Sandrokottas and Sandrocyptus was the son of Sandrokottas. In the case of Chandragupta Maurya, he had opposed Dhanananda of the Nanda dynasty and the name of his son was Bindusara. Both these names, Dhanananda and Bindusara, have no phonetic similarity with the names Xandrammes and Sandrocyptus of the Greek accounts.

Asoka's empire was bigger than that of Chandragupta Maurya and he had sent missionaries to the so-called Yavana countries. But both of them are not mentioned. Colebrook has pointed out that the Greek writers did not say anything about the Buddhist Bhikkus though that was the flourishing religion of that time with the royal patronage of Asoka. Roychaudhari also wonders why the Greek accounts are silent on Buddhism.

The empire of Chandragupta was known as Magadha empire. It had a long history even at the time of Chandragupta Maurya. In Indian literature, this powerful empire is amply described by this name but it is absent in the Greek accounts. It is difficult to understand as to why Megasthanese did not use this name and instead used the word Prassi which has no equivalent or counterpart in Indian accounts.

To decide as to whether Pataliputra was the capital of the Mauryas, Puranas is the only source. Puranas inform us that all the eight dynasties that ruled Magadha after the Mahabharata War had Girivraja as their capital. Mauryas are listed as one of the eight dynasties. The name Pataliputra is not even hinted at, anywhere in the Puranas.

No Concrete Proofs:
The Western scholars and their followers in India have been all along insisting on concrete evidence for ancient Indian chronology but they themselves have not been able as yet, to furnish any such evidence for the sheet anchor.

http://controversialhistory.blogspot.in ... gupta.html

-----
Nakul ji,
excellent points about unoversalism of west. The samples are very small and selective. Then, they extrapolate their conclusions based on these small and selective samples on to the entire human history. It is very much like quack exit polls...lots of speculation and guess work. At least, the exit polls talk about present, while these people talk about things that happened in great antiquity.

Actually, I find the whole idea of people able to guess the actual events(that happened long long ago) based on few scattered(in time and space) relics, preposterous. It is like reading Sherlock Holmes(very entertaining idea, but impractical).

The whole exercise is equivalent to connecting dots and find patterns in it. And, people can connect same dots in variety of ways to suit their tastes by omitting(and adding) some dots('data points').

In fact, I think the problem is the fundamental idea behind all these theories:'Linear model'. For example, according to linear model, if people hunted in 20 AD, then they must have hunted all the time before it. But, we know that it is not correct model. People can grow rich or poor, similarly civilizations can rise and fall. Knowledge/tech can be discovered/invented, lost and re-discovered/invented. Things work in cycles not linearly.

So, I think the whole of this 'field' is based on flawed fundamentals to start with it. Linear model must be rejected and cyclic model must be accepted.

Lastly, logic is not always followed in human interactions. Accidents or co-incidents can happen(it seems to me that they happen much more frequently than we people acknowledge). Then, there is also emotional angle. How one individual/group/society interacts with another is frankly very difficult to predict.
-----
Dharamraj ji,
thanks for posting the links.

member_23686 · Post by **member_23686** » 17 Sep 2012 18:45

^^^
johneeG ji, you're welcome!

Thank you for such an impressive discussion. By the way, wiki says that age of Dhruv is 70 million years....uh......

Is it really that young?

Sushupti · Post by **Sushupti** » 18 Sep 2012 19:17

"Can a donkey appreciate the fragrance of camphor?"

"Lard" Desai questions 'suitability' of Gita in modern India

http://in.news.yahoo.com/desai-question ... 00298.html

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 21 Sep 2012 15:27

Instead of "lard' we should directly use the word s**t Desai. I do not know why he is called on Tv to give british gyan to us and lecture.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 21 Sep 2012 19:24

Gita remains, at its core, a call for action and sacrifice for a greater cause than yourself and family. to top it off, the wretched Hindus had to go and make it a part of the "Prasthanatrayi" >> 1 of the 3 "sources" that are considered the "core" of Sanatana Dharma.

the controllers will always be weary of this text's continued prominence in age after age, even after the passing of so much time. other such "texts" rose up but then died down with the passage of time, but this one has passed that test it seems. and that causes serious khujli. if it was some "bhakti" based "prostrate before GOD" type of source, they wouldn't care. the underlying message in the Gita is considered "dangerous" and "uncontrollable".

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 21 Sep 2012 20:32

Narayana Rao wrote:Instead of "lard' we should directly use the word s**t Desai. I do not know why he is called on Tv to give british gyan to us and lecture.

He could question Jesus, Mohammed, Quran or Bible and then he would realize where he would stand in India or UK.

To use freedom of expression to critique some texts/art but not all based on religion is what all he can do. His behavior changes based on religion so he is a bigot, but only against certain religions and not all. For religions that he could not critique, it appears he is just another TV commentator from UK, not a bigot.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 21 Sep 2012 23:10

devesh wrote:Gita remains, at its core, a call for action and sacrifice for a greater cause than yourself and family. to top it off, the wretched Hindus had to go and make it a part of the "Prasthanatrayi" >> 1 of the 3 "sources" that are considered the "core" of Sanatana Dharma.

the controllers will always be weary of this text's continued prominence in age after age, even after the passing of so much time. other such "texts" rose up but then died down with the passage of time, but this one has passed that test it seems. and that causes serious khujli. if it was some "bhakti" based "prostrate before GOD" type of source, they wouldn't care. the underlying message in the Gita is considered "dangerous" and "uncontrollable".

It actually is 'dangerous' and 'uncontrollable'. If you look at it from the other side.

Something that lays no preferred path and instead gets in ideas that yield different results everytime, the application of which changes with time, place, experience and at the same time gets in 'cosequentialism' edgewise. Well it is only to be expected that it will always generate fear in people who want some sort of on/off switch to decide on future growth.

The ldea that the inside and outside are merely some sort of reflections of each other are going to be difficult to digest for people who are unwilling to go beyond their preferred ideation. To work on such an idea is fearful still.

In that respect, at times, I think Indics should collaborate with Mallechas. Then again I feel like not sharing my assets. I guess I will wait till I can clear up my mind to finally commit to the way forward.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 24 Sep 2012 11:55

Almost 1200 years is missing from what we call as history and this need to be filled up. Rule of Parmara and dynasty are said to missing. Is there any gurus with info on this?

One more interesting this - Every one agree that Chanukya was teacher of Maurya Chandra Gupta and he does not mention any invasions and relationships with Greeks. Further he also does not teach us about management of the great empire which his student said to have formed. Hence the Magada under Mauryas may not be a great empire as it was under gupta though it may have been the most powerfull and prominant under Maurayas.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Sep 2012 23:00

JohneeG, Try to look up Yaksha prasana episode of Mahabharata. The Vyasa one has 142 questions and Andhra Mahabharatam has a short version of ~36 questions. And comment on the questions and answers.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Sep 2012 04:47

Carl wrote:...

From a RigVeda verse on cremation, 10.16.3 -

सूर्यं चक्षुर्गच्छतु वातमात्मा द्यां च गच्छ पृथिवीं च धर्मणा ।
अपो वा गच्छ यदि तत्र ते हितमोषधीषु प्रति तिष्ठा शरीरैः ॥

"To the Sun let your Eyes go,
To the Wind your Life-breath.
By the good Deeds you have done,
Go to the Heaven and then come back again
To live on the Earth or take to the Waters
If you are comfortable with it.
Remain in the Herbs with the bodies you intent to take."

A takeaway point: Theory of Rebirth is very much present in the RigVeda, and it is directly related to Dharma, which in turn is related to Karma. The preceding and succeeding verses also talk explicitly about Rebirth and Karma.

I noticed that AIT nazis, and even so-called pro-Indic writers like Koenraad Elst, like to suggest that the Vedas have no suggestion of rebirth, or that it has nothing to do with karma. They say even the original Upanishadic conception has no suggestion of it. They say this is purely a later Upanishadic innovation, which the "Indo-Aryans" accepted from the "non-Aryan", "non-Brahmin" Indians. But they do not get into any sustained discussion of what they mean by "early" or "original". Here's a typical example fo that from none other than KE:
Another novelty is the belief in reincarnation. It is not in the Vedas, no matter how internet Hindus look for it there. The Upanishadic Brahmins Uddalaka and Shvetaketu came to know about it from a Kshatriya (not coincidentally the caste to which the later Buddha and Mahavira belonged), and explicitly acknowledged it as a novelty, not implicated in the central Upanishadic doctrine of the Self or in the liberation from the false identification of the Self with the non-Self. In recent centuries and today, most Hindus are crypto-Buddhists to whom reincarnation is a central belief and liberation is even defined as the escape through meditation from the cycle of rebirths. That is not the original Upanishadic view. I have seen many internet Hindus get angry for my making these factual observations, but hey, that’s what scripture itself says. It just goes to show how tradition may differ from real history as laid down in the Vedas.
Unless I'm understanding something wrong, I think the above is BS, delivered with pseudo-academic supreme confidence. Would like to hear from more learned gurus, time permitting.

AFAIU, the theory of Rebirth and Karma is intrinsic to the Veda-Vedanta process. However, there is no need to explicitly subscribe to this theory as doctrine, in order for the process of self-purification to work. Rather, it is postulated as a way to explain certain psychic phenomena observed during this process. Moreover, while there is no need to a priori accept it, denying this theory during the process can become a serious obstacle, because then one is invalidating one's own "subconscious" memory. Keeping these important points in mind, different sections of VedOpanishad will postulate this theory and others will remain agnostic about it. But this is a logical separation, not a historical separation!

Added another one:

RigVeda 10.16.2 -

श्रुतं यदा करसि जातवेदो ' थेमेनम् परिदत्तात् पितृभ्यः ।
यद् गच्छात्यसूनीतिमेतामथा देवानां वाशनीर्भवाती ॥

"When the Supreme Lord gives the soul rebirth and facilitates another mother-father duo based on the fruits of Karma, then the soul inherits that particular type of life-force dynamics, and becomes engaged with the sensory apparatus."

Carl, There are many refs in Mahabharata to the idea of rebirth.
Aranya parva has umpteen refs to this. One of them is:

One sage gets the choice of going to swargaloka. He asks what is the situation there? The god describes and says after their quota of punya is over they revert back to earth. Then there is Brahmaloka which is on higher plane but again after exhausting the punya one reverts. And above all there is moksha where one joins the Atman and there is no rebirth. The sage says he will tarry on earth and acquire more merit to attain moksha and not the temporary lokas.

Rebirth is a fundamental concept for Hindus. The freedom from that cycle is what we strive for.

-BTW I dont trust KE. I think his role is to express sympathy and find out what makes Hindus tick. For whom I dont know.