Purana chronology-PC Mahalanobis & Suniti Kumar Chatterji

[rniyengar]

Dear Scholars, Namaskaar!

This is of course a perennial topic for discussion. The issue may be
looked at from several angles all of which may not converge. However,
if the dates and numbers become internally consistent from a
particular hypothesis or starting point, one may expect a key to be at
hand for unraveling the PuraaNic dating system. If such an analysis
were to be possible one may not be far away from dating the Vedic
corpus on a scientific (i.e.logical) basis. To my surprise (pardon my
ignorance) I find that one of our great scientists PC Mhalanobis
(founder of ISI, Calcutta) published a paper in Sankhyaa in 1936. This
was actually a detailed review of the Bengali book “PuraaNa praves’a”
by G.Bose. The paper is most interesting. PCM upholds the statistical
validity of the hypothesis of Bose who takes the basic unit ‘yuga’ to
be 5 years as per the vedanga jyotisha. Has any one read the original
book? Is it available in English translation?
Quite befittingly, Suniti Kumar Chaterji, the famous historian wrote a
note on the book and the analysis of Mahalanobis, also published in
Sankhyaa. Both call for verifying the relation between our ancient
texts and IVC findings.

[They were not yet aware of Dholavira,Lothal etc. In 1935 Mohenjodaro
and harappa were Indian!]

Here I copy the conclusion of Mahalanobis followed by that of
Chaterji:

[Mahalanobis: Sankhyaa Vol. 2, No. 3 (1936), pp. 309-320]
“One point is worth stressing. It must not be imagined that there are
no contradictions or inconsistencies in the purãna ; but in many cases
such inconsistencies and exaggerations are more apparent than real and
can be explained easily. The inner core of historical narrative is
often overlaid with symbolical and mythological decorations some of
which were deliberately introduced to make the narrative interesting
and some of which were unintentional accretions. The main argument of
the new theory is two-fold. One which is purely numerical and
statistical in character is concerned with the reconstruction of the
different eras. The other consists of certain reasonable rules of
interpretation of a psychological and symbolic nature. The internal
consistency of the chronological portion is such as to exclude beyond
reasonable doubt the possibility of chance coincidence. The
psychological and symbolic portion naturally is more open to
criticism. But here also the way in which the different portions fit
together, especially if we keep the three-layer (proto-, meso-, and
nèopurãnic) character of the material in view, is such as to give them
considerable plausibility. Finally the obvious contradictions,
inconsistencies and confusion of names are all features which one
would expect in an authentic and genuine tradition. Such
inconsistencies in fact would be difficult to explain on the theory of
deliberate forgery. The great importance and the far-reaching effect
of the new theory will be easily realised from the above summary. With
the recent discovery of a highly developed civilisation in the Indus
valley going back to the fifth or sixth millenium B.C., it cannot be
said that the chronicle of ancient India as given in the purãna is
intrinsically improbable. It is true that external evidence is as yet
almost entirely lacking, but the internal evidence is so consistent
that it would be clearly unscientific to dismiss the new theory
without giving it a most searching examination. If the present theory
is sustained, it will completely revolutionize current ideas regarding
the chronology of ancient India. It is to be hoped that Dr. Bose will
soon publish an English version of his theory, and thus make it
available to scientific workers outside Bengal and India”. (21
December, 1935).

[SK Chatterji The Indian Journal of Statistics (1933-1960), Vol. 2,
No. 3 (1936), pp. 321-326]

“Here we have a definite challenge, which has to be taken in its true
implication ; namely that whatever be the value of the Purãna tales
about kings and sages - whether they are myth or legend or sober
history - there is a systematic chronology of a number of Ancient
Indian dynasties and their individual kings which conies from the
beginning of the 6th millennium B.C. right down to historical times.
This chronology can be proved to be correct at its lower limit when we
have synchronisms with the Greeks and other foreigners of known date.
The chronology moreover occurs in a number of time counts or eras
which shows absolute consistency and agreement with each other. This
is what Dr. Bose claims to have found out; and Professor Mahalanobis
as a Statistician corroborates his findings. We have to take serious
note of that……………. Shall we ever discover pre- Aryan records in the
form of inscriptions in the Mohen-jo- Daro or similar script to bear
out the Purãnic dynasties and dynastic lists, in their original pre-
Sanskritic forms? Shall we discover from such records the story of the
advent of the Aryans into India and their doings among the civilised
peoples of the country who preceded them and and who were so
profoundly modified by them?”

Best...
RN Iyengar

[S.R.Krishnamurthy]

Dear scholars,

 

It is unfortunate that all our historians have been obsessed with the chronology propounded by Max Muller; as stated by mahaamahim P.V.Kane, in his History of Dharmashastra. And Science does not accept it. I have deat with in detail in my unpublished book 'The Science of Hinduism'.

Einstein rejected this saying that the universe is at least 19 billions years old. In 1073 another Nobel laureate Feynmann discovered that the creation of earth is not a singularity and a cyclic repetition. Even Stephen Hawking concurs with Feynmann that the Universe, as we say, is anaadi and ananta.

 

During the last two years many discoveries have been announced. 1. Discovery of a human skull, 5 lakh year old, in turkey of a man who died of tuberculosis. 2. Discovery of forms of life more than 4.9 million years old. 3. Discovery of life more than 39.7 years or so old. 4. Very recent discovery of the remains of a man-erectus in Africa, 20 million years old.   These are the evidences that I have scanned from our newspapers. Of course all of them are scooped from scince journals like Nature.

 

So, the recent science discoveries are converging on Manusmrithi speaks of time. Manu was a great scientist, as all our great Rishis upto Shankaracharya were. Manu was also a Mathematician and Cosmologist, who expounded the Vedas. Bhagavadgita corroborates with the Vedas and Manusmrithi. With all these glaring scientific evidences what a great pity that our scholars are still sticking to the Biblical timeframe of Max Muller!

 

One scholar asked a question: what is the definition of science. Till 19th century, the West did not speak of science, though Vedas spoke of Vijnaanam. Newton was described as the greatest philosopher of his times. It is remarkable that it was only after the publication of Valmiki Ramayana, followed by the translation of Vedas that the distinction between philosophy and science was made, projecting the one as eastern and the other as Western. Science was defined as the precision of Knowledge. Even there the hint was that the West was precise and the East was imprecise. I do not blame the Westerners.

 

Was it not our own friend who rubbished the idea of science in Vedas in these columns and eulogised Kepler for discovering that the earths orbit was an ellipse? The great scholar does not know what an egg is! Because our scriptures called the universe Brahmaanda (egg-shaped, ellipsoid).

 

vijnaanam is vichikitsaka jnaanam,  analytical knowledge. Shankara described it as VibhagashaH jnaanam. When I explained with the example of Sir Isaac Newton, who the annals of History trumpet that a falling apple prompted him and led him to the discovery of Gravity; so that one may draw a lesson from the example; which made him think in the tradition of our ancient Rishis, what, why, how, when and where of; of all their observations, which is root of all precise knowledge; scholars who do not know why a river dries up and adduce funny theories patently wrong, just because some foreigners mentioned so - saahebavakyameva theshaam pramaanam! - called me a scietifically and historically illiterate! I did admit that. No use arguing with such great scholars.

 

Now the question is, in an Euclidian way, what is the hypothesis, what is the data, and what is to prove. If we first decide about these, then we can find out the proof. Else, it will be empty talk. The

I-serve held a conference in Delhi, claiming to have fixed the DOB of Rama as 11-January-7114 B.P. (Before present), with the precision of Planetarium software, and trumpeted Q.E.D.

I asked what were the parameters of the software. The author of the paper conceded that the cyclicity of the astronomical events was taken as 23500 years. Then I asked a pointed question - 'All that your findings amount to say  that Rama was born 7114 +[ x * 23500]; where the value of x can be anything from 0 to infinity. Is it not?' All that he could do was to simply nod.

 

Now, on the basis of Manusmrithi, and the Bhagavadgita chapter eight, I have located and calculated the distances to Brahmaloka, at the centre of the Universe, to heave and to pitruloka.

One scholar asked me "do you believe that the heaven exists, as the puranas say?" My reply wa "well, the scriptures speak of the earth and the various celestial bodies and heaven and Brahmaloka. And we know that the earth exists and the various celestial bodies, the planets and the stars still exist as expounded in our scriptures. Then I have not found any evidence to disbelieve the existence of heaven. And scientifically, the universe cannot exist without a brahmaloka, at the centre of the universe, as exposited in the Vedas."

 

I invited the doubting thomases for a public debate on the Issue. But the scholars are shying away.

I recall an English adage 'Ignorance is bliss where it is folly to be wise.'

 

Only I am glad that at least there were some thinkers like Mahalanobis who had the faith in the wisdom of their ancestors; and there are some like Sri R.N.Iyengar, who think of such persons.

But Macauley has emaciated our nation almost.

 

s.r.krishna murthy

 

 

2012/1/9 rniyengar <narayana...@gmail.com>

--
अथ चेत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं संग्रामं न करिष्यसि।
ततः स्वधर्मं कीर्तिं च हित्वा पापमवाप्स्यसि।।
तस्मादुत्तिष्ठ कौन्तेय युद्धाय कृतनिश्चयः।
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)

[Siddharth Wakankar]

 Dear Sri S.R.K.Murthy,

 Kindly accept my congrats for your honest and open-minded write up.Most of the Indian scholars including many.Sanskrit scholars,have stopped independent thinking about our chronology Physically we are independent,but,mentally many of us exhibit slave-tendency in blindly following what the westerners-who had less knowledge of our culture-said,with ulterior motives.We go on teaching the same old texts with some minor changes here and there and hardly look deeply into our glorious past,which is still hidden in the unpublished manuscripts.The urge for indepth study is dwindling and there are only a few scholars like Prof.R.N.Iyengar who are trying to revive  the Sanskrit lore to accord it the due credit.The mind-set of technically so-called Sanskrit scholars is still not much open to accept such valuable  research,which is being done by the technically so-called non Sanskritists like Prof.Iyengar.When Sanskritists-most of whom have little  scientific outlook and scientists-some of whom are not so sound in Sanskit-come together to work on scientific aspects concealed in Sanskrit Literature,then only,there is some hope of a revival in our outlook to our glorious past.That is what we intend to do at our Centre here in Bangalore.You are welcome to contact us in this regard and  then some tangible work could be undertaken jointly,with a view to discovering the scientific basis in our Sanskrit literature

I sincerely request my scholar-friends to pardon me if some caustic words are used by me in this mail.That is only self-introspection and no intention to hurt anybody individually or as a class.

With New Year Greetings to all..

 Sincerely yours,

Prof.S.Y.Wakankar

2012/1/10 S.R.Krishnamurthy <srkmu...@gmail.com>

--

Prof. Dr Siddharth Y. Wakankar

Professor,

Centre for Ancient History & Culture,

JGi - Jain University,

#34, 1st Cross, J C Road,

Bangalore - 560 027

 

Mobile - 099867 14608

[S.R.Krishnamurthy]

Dear sirs,

kindly give your addresses and phone no.s so that I may get in touch with you on the subject.

 

Yours fraternally,

s.r.krishna murthy

2012/1/11 Siddharth Wakankar <sywak...@gmail.com>