RNI's posts on How to appraise Indian history from ancient texts
Raghavendra H Kashyap
History is about the Past, there is no debate on this! The controversy and loud mouthing about Vedic, Aitihāsic, Purāṇic chronology is primarily due to subjective origins for estimating/measuring (or claims of it) long time periods. Let me put it this way. We need an origin or starting point for any measurement. This cannot be a zero point (Euclidian) origin as in a high school X-Y graph. But, the European model of history introduced the imaginary origin of Christ’s-birth and in our schools we were mostly exposed to this as AD and BC, slowly changing to CE and BCE. All the same for academic (not just modern) discussions an agreed origin is needed. Most of us, including me, know the names of our great-grand-parents, perhaps not the tree prior to them with their dates of birth/death. I know people would say the priests in Haridwar have a record, but that is not about how as Hindus we relate to our historical past. We know the names of Mahāvīra, Buddha, Chāṇakya, Gupta emperors, Shankarāchārya, Mogul kings and their dates (roughly as ---AD, ---BC etc) based on evidences (inscriptions, coins, records) that can be verified in case we like to check them personally. All the same we feel happy (?) about our history in relation to Pradyota (how many know him!) Nanda, Chandragupta, Bimbisara, Ashoka, Moggalāyana, Bodhāyana and then start lecturing about Takshashila and produce a film on Chāṇakya. This is all enjoyable and gives a cozy feeling about our country, society in relation to neighbouring countries; same as position of India that is Bhārata in the world as a civilization. How can I extend this goody-goody feeling to Krishna and Rama, that many are seeking in my generation? By this I mean how many years BP the Avatāra of Viṣṇu happened? I will not elaborate on the avatāra concept, since the emotions that rise in our “historical” relation with Aurangazeb, Samudra Gupta, Bhāsa, Kālidāsa, Mahātma Gandhi are entirely different from the feelings the characters in the Epics evoke. This is very much a defining character of the history our Hindu-Vedic Civilization.
Now, let me stop and question could there be different ways to present the past. Someone certainly thought of this and proposed; let us take 4304 BC as a start since, God created the world in that year on a Thursday (or whatever!). This has been probably given up, or limited to closed Bible study groups. When we like to dispassionately discuss the past of a broad and widely spread society of a country (not just of my community), different notations for characterizing time would be needed. The easiest, perhaps natural is to keep our own generation as the origin and talk in terms of Before Present (BP). Archaeologists are doing so. It is already there among biologists, anthropologists, geologists and cosmologists. Modern science has brought in Cenozoic, …Precambrian, Jurassic, Triassic,.. to communicate with the past, but still with respect to ourselves (our world) as crudely BP. On the other hand, astrophysicists/cosmologists assume Big Bang as the PAST zero point and imagine/model mathematically what happened at a Nano second from the zero time, to publish papers in prestigious Journals. From such speculations, a before present (BP) chronology for the Universe, solar system, Sun, continental drift, Vindhya, Tethys Sea, Himalayas, can be given in terms of Billion/Million years reaching to a few Lakhs. Some amongst us may feel that number as our society’s and as our country’s past history. There can be nothing wrong per se in any of these, except when we insist that the past should be a sum of all our ‘yesterdays’ which we frankly and fortunately, do not remember, but still argue that is what we are deducing from linguistic/scientific theories as the True history/chronology.
All the above may sound argumentative, but helps in seeing the ‘traditional point of view’ by which I mean the Vedic, purāṇic characterization of TIME as our past. The verifiable evidences for this are in the texts known and available in print (except for a rare one like the Mahāsalilam that saw the light of the day only last month!).
Vedas starting from RV know and allude to both short and long intervals of time. First about the Yuga.
R N Iyengar it is good but would help if you break the post in to sections addressing a specific point. There are a few questions for you to consider sharing your perspective.
Do you agree with the dates for the biological evolution of humans? If not, why not as that would be unscientific? If you yes, how do you reconcile that with vedic worldview of srshti?
Do you agree with indological dating of maharishis and the texts? If not, why not as that would be unscientific? If yes, how do you reconcile that with vedic worldview?
Do you think that the sastras are an authority on cosmology or history? If yes, why?
Author
Rajaram Venkataramani Your questions are my questions also. I am addressing them in my own way, but may not be answering them in a way that will satisfy all the readers. Some are not answerable at all, because the questions may not be well formed and appropriate. For example, is MBh a text in the sense Kadambari is a text by Baana or Leelavati by Bhaskara-II is a text? I will describe my view points in the sequel.
Wonderful post sir. Look forward to further posts in the series.
Thanks for the detailed write-up, sir. What point to consider as a reference is more of a philosophical debate, and does not change the inferred facts of chronology or a historical narrative, isn't it? For the *civilizational* or *social* history, which is what most people are interested, the BCE, CE terms are universally used and understood by all now. And why should Indian researchers, including those working on Vedic, Itihasic history not use them? They must use these standard terms so that whatever they say is *understood* by all, in the first place. I am sure Jijith Nadumuri Ravi would agree with me here. For writing on pre-history, natural history, evolution etc., BP (Before the Present) is used, and so Indian researchers writing on these topics should also use the same.
Author
Jataayu B'luru You are right in your points on how classical history writing is modelled. I am not proposing any particular chronology with BC, BP numbers. For me the Past/History is not just a few year numbers even if that is one type of characterization. What is the idea of Past-Time as Sanaatana in Hinduism is my topic. This has a civilizational dimension, but this has to be probed for its Dharmic content, before the year numbers can make sense.
BP will continue to change. BP of 2020 CE will be 30 years away from BP of 2050 CE! It is a floating anchor point for chronology.
Professor, a series is good and I fully welcome that.
But my idea would be : short videos on the same that can be posted here and also on YouTube so that it reaches a younger audience too.
Author
Raj Sibi I am primarily studying how and why the long Yuga periods came into play in our Puranic/Dharmic/avatara discourse as some type of History. I started with a paragraph but I could go nowhere. Hence I decided to post in parts. I don't know how worthwhile it is to make a video. Any way thanks for your suggestion.
Nicely put sirneed more on this
Post 2
Literal meaning of the word Yuga is “conjunction/coexistence/ coevality of two entities.” This may be a wooden yoke, connecting the back of two bullocks or a time period in days/years when the same two celestial bodies appear to conjunct. The word Yuga in pre-siddhānta astronomy, is usually qualified as Pañcavarṣīya-yuga, Rāhu-yuga, Bṛhaspati-yuga indicating specific periods of time. In RV the word Yuga and its derivatives appear more than 20 times. In some places it is an unspecified ‘time’ like generation but in some others it is an unspecified interval of years. The five year Yuga is not explicit anywhere in RV but the Vedics knew intercalation. Actually several methods were used for intercalation and hence there is no force in assuming the Five-year Yuga to be from RV. Three-year Yuga was also in vogue. Yuga in the Vedas has been used in a generic sense and to fix its value by us would be silly. Dashame yuge (RV 1.158) need not be 40 or 50 years, it could as well refer to the ninth decade of life. Forms such as yuge-yuge, yugāni, uttare yuge, pūrve yuge, prathame yuge (10.72) point clearly to an interval of time in years; multiple of which was meant in plural. Devānām yuga/Prathama yuga would be the ‘time’ of First Creation. Triyugam purā (10.97) Chaturyuga (2.18) are also used. The value of time meant is not clear, but to argue - triyugam pura means “15 years before, because yuga could not have been longer than five” - lacks logic. RV has contemporaneous information; names of kings, dānastuti, battles, sages, their progeny etc that may be worthy to be marked in ‘historical time’. But in RV+ other Vedic texts there is too much content concerning what we may today denote as natural history and science.
The Vedic cosmological hymns (RV 10.72, 121, 129; also in TS and SB) are extremely important for all later literature (and Vedic-Hinduism) because all creation started from an unquantifiable, but still perceived and articulated as The Beginning, when the Golden Egg split on the fluidic dark-matter (andhe-tamasi). Some of these statements sound contradictory, as words cannot unequivocally convey the very First. The esoteric idea of a quantified zero/singularity had not yet bloomed. Along with the Big-Split, sentient emanation of Brahman, Brahma, Pracetas, Prajāpati, phenomenal time, Vatsara, Samvatsara are cognized to have happened self-similarly.
The Vedic texts are voluminous, amorphous, packed with information, tantalizingly coded with multiple meanings, except for number counts that remain in the realm of nonlinguistic natural truths (paśyantī level) that is invariant for us also. So if mānuṣa yuga is mentioned it is reasonable to take this as a maximum 100 years. But daiva yuga could be much longer but no estimate of Time to Creation is available in the Vedas till we come to the Purāṇas. But let there be no confusion, the Vedic texts do refer to long year durations (not just any large number). This we see (PFA) in the Atharvaveda (8.2.21)
Several scholars have interpreted this as they like, nevertheless all recognize that this hymn is about time/life period in years (hāyana), perhaps 100, ayuta may be 10000 (Lakh?) and then something done two, three and four times. What is this, if not the seed for the long Purāṇic Yuga concept? My intention is not to make meaning of the above Vedic hymn, but to show that the concept of long periods of time called ‘Yuga’ (juxtaposed with numbers 2,3,4) is already there in the Vedas, unless one chooses to close one’s eyes. The Taittirīya and the Shatapatha Brāhmaṇa allude to 1000 year satra that is imaginary, but then the priests are talking of long time periods and not of carrying out a sacrifice like the Devatās did in Kurukṣetra (Maitrāyaṇi Samhita), that is a clear metaphor for a large scale natural disaster.
The Purāṇas have carried on the above ‘Time/Kāla’ concepts in their own fashion still retaining the Universal or cosmic vision/ideal, that is denoted as sanātana-dharma. (contd. Post-3)
Comments
Sir, thanks for enlightening insight in to the
Vedic Yuga - which is all about holistic span of time from staring to ending,
with a predetermined Yoga to perform certain Kriya as designed by Supreme
Cosmic Energy, named 'GOD - Genious Ominipresent Dust' to carry forward YoY.
With regards
.
[Asked ChatGPT to summarise the text. Sharing it below, sir]
1/ The word Yuga literally means "conjunction" or "coexistence" of two entities—like a wooden yoke connecting two oxen or the time when two celestial bodies appear to align.
2/ In early astronomy, Yuga was often qualified as Pañcavarṣīya-yuga (five-year cycle), Rāhu-yuga, or Bṛhaspati-yuga, indicating specific time periods.
3/ The Rigveda (RV) mentions Yuga and its variations over 20 times, sometimes referring to an unspecified time (like a generation) and at other times to an interval of years.
4/ There is no explicit mention of a five-year Yuga in the RV, but the Vedics knew about intercalation—adjusting time cycles. Some even followed a three-year Yuga.
5/ Fixing a single value for Yuga in the Vedas would be misleading. For example, Dashame yuge (RV 1.158) may not mean 40 or 50 years but could refer to the ninth decade of life.
6/ Terms like yuge-yuge, yugāni, uttare yuge, pūrve yuge, prathame yuge clearly indicate intervals of time, often measured in years.
7/ Devānām Yuga or Prathama Yuga refers to the "time of First Creation." The Rigveda also mentions Triyugam purā and Chaturyuga, though their exact time values remain unclear.
8/ The Vedas contain historical details—kings, battles, sages—but also vast knowledge about natural history and science, including cosmological hymns on creation.
9/ The Vedic creation hymns (RV 10.72, 121, 129; also in TS and SB) describe the universe's origin from a Golden Egg that split in dark matter (andhe tamasi).
10/ These texts attempt to articulate the Beginning of Time before the concept of a quantified zero or singularity had emerged.
11/ The Vedas mention long year durations, not just arbitrary large numbers. The Atharvaveda (8.2.21) references time in multiples of 100, 10,000 (ayuta), and more.
12/ This suggests that the foundation for long Yuga cycles in the Purāṇas existed in the Vedas, even if it wasn’t explicitly defined.
13/ The Taittirīya and Shatapatha Brāhmaṇa mention a thousand-year satra—an imaginary but symbolic reference to long time spans.
14/ The Purāṇas later developed these time concepts further while retaining the universal vision of Sanātana Dharma.
15/ The Vedic texts do refer to vast time cycles, even if their exact durations evolved in later traditions. (To be continued in Post-3)
He has not tagged me. I presume he want me excluded from this discussion.
I don't want to barge in without invitation.
Jijith Nadumuri Ravi oh...ok
Author
Sangeetha Deepak My posts are all public. Any one interested may read and respond. I haven't invited or barred any one. I don't know why Ravi presumes his exclusion! I find that he is in my friends list! If he has deleted me I have no idea and no problems. As a life long academic I have some good friends but hopefully no frenemies on FB or Linkedin, the only two social platforms on which I post about my avid interest in our shared past as can be gleaned primarily from the Sanskrit originals.
Thank You Sir. for sharing
Post 4
History (intermediate or 100, 1000 year scale chronology) as we call it today, was not the central theme of the Purāṇas. Still here and there, time in centuries, like the interval between Parikshit and the Nandas as 1050 years shows up in some Purāṇas. For them, this was sufficient, as societally inherited information, to believe in the historicity of Krishna and the associated MBh characters. Since the human avatāra was the Parabrahman, the contradiction was ironed out by making the texts a-historical (but not un- or anti-historical) in the cosmological time frame of the yugas expanded to manvantaras, Kalpa, half-day of Brahma. It was important to keep a notional origin as the first creation for which the long time periods (self-similar repetitions) mimicking eclipses, comet appearances, long term floods came handy. This model is derived from Vedic concepts only, including but not limited to Viśvedevāḥ, Ka-prajāpati, cosmology, self-similar evolution, bardic genealogy, some real events, extra-terrestrial impacts and observations. If we sample the Vedas, Purāṇas, epics for realistic astronomical observations (assuming the Sanskrit text to be uncorrupted and we do not hair-split driven by rightist or leftist agenda) and be able to date them, footprints on the sands of time can be gleaned. This would be a BP year value (based on modern celestial mechanics) for some human groups to have read the skies. The cultural groups associated with such celestial descriptions were at least not later than the resulting BP year. (They might have lived before and passed on a legend, recorded later). If you derive this way the date of the Kurukshetra war or Krishna’s birth date, there is no harm, because it is textual and we can be satisfied knowing that Rāma and Krishna were Great historical personages, although all the embellishment around them might be layered stories and paddings through legends. But if the event is couched in the Cosmological time line and named as itihāsa, the perception of a PAST EVENT related to our generation as human beings vanishes, but has to be imagined mentally/emotionally (bhāvanā) as from the first creation, starting from the Svāyambhuva manvantara (Era of the Self-created). This is the first era (each era is about 300 million yrs) of the kalpa with 14 manvantaras which is about 4.3 billion years in total length. Many Indian texts have attempted this type of Creationistic art or science so as not to be bogged down by the earthly (Pārthiva) frailties of Rāma or Krishna or Shiva but treat them to be transcendental for cultivating devotion towards them as antaryāmi. Further explanation of this leads to Uni-theistic Vedānta metaphysics (jñāna and bhakti as the two modes of human psyche to be kept in synchrony through dhārmic-karma) which is not the current topic.
Vedic-Hindus maintain (unknowingly or unwittingly?) to this day, their link to the putative Bigbang TIME through the routine Saṅkalpa “…ādya brahmaṇah dvitīya-parārdhe śri śvetavarāhakalpe, vaivasvata-manvantare (28-tame) kaliyuge, prathame pāde,….śakābde, ….asminvartamāne, vyāvahārike.…samvatsare….Ṛtau, māse, pakshe, Nakṣatre, tithau, vāsare…Śrimannarāyaṇa/ŚriParameshwara/….prītyartham….rudrābhshekam/Kṛshnajayantī- pūjām/ yajñopavītadhāraṇam/…darśa-śrāddham/uttarāyaṇa-puṇyakāle pitṛtarpaṇam/……kariṣye”
Note carefully, if you see the above in reverse order, mainly Three Time parameters are here; the local calendar date and time; intermediate (historical) time in years (śakābda, Vi. samvatsara, kaliyuga); long time in manvantara, reaching parārdha. All the three are important parts of Kāla in the religious Hindu saṅkalpa and have to be correct as envisioned in the Vedas, but modulated over millennia. This is quantification of Time in three scales Before Present (BP). In current practice some of the above numbers are glaringly wrong and should be corrected. But the inbuilt concept of evolutionary, natural, tectonic, human, calendar (history) linked to personal time, cannot be denied. Unfortunately, some of our own scholars declare that for Hindus time is circular/periodic and it is made longer only by multiplying with planetary periods. Such negations are based on ignorance and inability to feel the common spiritual/dhārmic thread passing through the texts they read or ignore.
First, I will consider the intermediate time scale, that has spurred contemporary Bhāratīyas to delineate their identity as the followers or otherwise of the Vedic-Purāṇic Past. (Contd. Post-5)
Comments
Very erudite and yet lucid presentation..
Agrahar Ramachandra Rao Thank you. As an academic I am just presenting some facts. But, FB thinks otherwise! My previous post-3 was removed and even after my protest and their review, it stands by its view that my post was a cyber security suspect!