On Nilesh Oak’s myth of sun setting in Pushya during Hemanta

[Nityānanda Miśra]

Dear list members

Nilesh Oak’s so-called “third linchpin” [sic] for his dating of the ‘Rāmāyaṇa’ is “Sun setting near Pushya during Hemanta season (11500 BCE–17500 BCE)”.[1] As many of you know, the  ‘Puṣya’ asterism is γ, δ, and θ Cancri. In this article, I will show how and why this claim, for which Oak relies on an incorrect translation [edited] by Satavalekar, is wrong. In fact, as most commentaries and translations state, the verse cited by Oak implies something quite different, viz. that the lunar month was ‘Pauṣa’ during the ‘Hemanta’ season.

What is the verse?
As stated by Oak many times in his talks and interviews, Oak’s ‘linchpin’ is based on the following ‘Rāmāyaṇa’ verse 3.16.12 (3.15.12 in the critical edition), uttered by Lakṣmaṇa—
निवृत्ताकाशशयनाः पुष्यनीता हिमारुणाः।
शीता वृद्धतरायामास्त्रियामा यान्ति साम्प्रतम्॥
nivṛttākāśaśayanāḥ puṣyanītā himāruṇāḥ
śītā vṛddhatarāyāmāstriyāmā yānti sāmpratam

What does Oak claim about this verse?
In his interview to DD News,[2] Oak claimed “Lakṣmaṇa describes the sky … निवृत्ताकाशशयनाः पुष्यनीता हिमारुणाः … he is referring to the sun, so sun is setting on ‘Puṣya’ ‘nakṣatra’ during the ‘Hemanta ṛtu’.” He has made similar claims at many other places. This claim is incorrect, as we will see in this article. In addition, the specific part “sun is setting” in this claim is also illogical. As per verse 3.16.2 (critical edition 3.15.2), Lakṣmaṇa spoke the above verse (3.16.12, critical edition 3.15.2) at the time of daybreak, when the night had just ended and it had dawned. If Lakṣmaṇa is describing the sky at the time of dawn, can he say “the sun is setting” (as Oak claims) or will he say “the sun is rising”? The answer is obvious.

What does the verse actually mean?
I will first give the word-for-word meaning of this verse, with the ‘sandhi’s broken down. Note that the word ‘puṣya’ in Sanskrit means both (1) “the ‘Puṣya’ asterism” (2) “the ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month” (Apte and many other Sanskrit dictionaries). With this, here is the word-for-word meaning—
निवृत्ताकाशशयनाः = “in which sleeping under the [open] sky has ceased/stopped” (निवृत्तम् आकाशे अनावृतप्रदेशे शयनं यासु ताः)
पुष्यनीताः = “led by the ‘Puṣya’ asterism or the ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month” (पुष्येण नीताः)
हिमारुणाः = “gray due to fog” (हिमेन अरुणाः धूसराः)
शीताः = “cold”
वृद्धतरायामाः = “with length much increased”, i.e. “much longer” (वृद्धतरः आयामः यासां ताः)
त्रियामाः = “nights”
यान्ति = “go, pass”
साम्प्रतम् = “now”.

Putting this all together, here my translation—
“Now, the nights—in which sleeping under the open sky has ceased; which are led by the ‘Puṣya’ asterism (or ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month); which are gray due to fog; and which are cold and much longer—pass.”

Or, in two sentences for better readability—
“In the nights that pass now, people no longer sleep under the open sky. The nights, led by the ‘Puṣya’ asterism (or the ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month), are gray due to fog, cold, and much longer.”

Does this verse refer to the sun, the sunset, or sunset in Puṣya?
No. Nowhere does the verse talk about the sun, the sunset, or the sunset in or near ‘Puṣya’. There is no word in the whole entire which refers to the sun or the sunset (more on the word अरुण in this verse later). Each of the five adjectives (निवृत्ताकाशशयनाः, पुष्यनीताः, हिमारुणाः, शीताः, and वृद्धतरायामाः) in the verse qualifies the noun त्रियामाः (“nights”). So, all adjectives apply to the nights alone. Hence, it is the nights which are “led/guided by ‘Puṣya’”, i.e., nights in which the ‘Puṣya’ asterism is prominently visible (or used as a guide) or nights which belong to the ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month.

What is the implication of the verse?
The implication of the verse is that the ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month was in the season of ‘Hemanta’. This is as per the “standard” season-month mapping in most Sanskrit texts and literature, including the  ‘Rāmāyaṇa’. This mapping also matches with ‘Caitra’ being in ‘Vasanta’ as clearly stated in the first ‘sarga’ of the ‘Kiṣkindhākāṇḍa’. This was shown in my previous article in this series.[3]

This implication does not match with Oak’s dating of the ‘Rāmāyaṇa’ and his grand “high-chronology” scheme. Precisely for this reason, Oak will never agree with this (unless he changes his date of the ‘Rāmāyaṇa’ and his chronology).

What do Indian translators say on this verse?
In this section, we will see that most Indian translators say more or less the same as what I have stated above. In part 3 of his 10-part series refuting Nilesh Oak’s date of 12209 BCE,[4] Dr. Raja Ram Mohan Roy cited four English translations (IIT Kanpur website, ‘valmikiramayan’ website, Hari Prasad Shastri, and Manmath Nath Dutt) and two Hindi translations (Gita Press and Dwarkaprasad Sharma Chaturvedi) of this verse.

All six translations cited by him interpret the reference to ‘Puṣya’ as the ‘Puṣya’ asterism being visible at night or the lunar month being ‘Pauṣa’. I will not repeat the translations cited by Dr. Roy but instead show five more translations by Indian scholars before we look at foreign scholars and finally at authoritative Sanskrit commentaries.

Here is the Gita Press English translation[5]—
“The nights now preclude repose in open air, are marked with the presence of the constellation known by the name ‘Puṣya’, look dusty with frost, and become colder and longer.”

Here is the English translation by Bibek Debroy—
“One can no longer sleep under the open sky. ‘Pushya’ nakshatra brings a brownish-grey mist. The night is now such that each ‘yama’ seems to be cold and longer.”

Here is the Gujarati translation by Sastu Sahitya Vardhak Karyalay[6]—
“આ ઋતુમાં પુષ્ય નક્ષત્ર ઉપરથી જેનું પ્રમાણ કરી શકાય છે કિંવા પોષ માસ જેની સમીપ આવી પહોંચ્યો છે એવી રાત્રિઓ ઘણી મોટી થાય છે. તેમાં નિરંતર શીત તથા ઝાકણ વરસ્યા કરે છે અને કઈ પણ પાથર્યા વિનાની પૃથ્વી પર શયન કરી શકાતું નથી.”
The translation says પુષ્ય નક્ષત્ર ઉપરથી જેનું પ્રમાણ કરી શકાય છે કિંવા પોષ માસ જેની સમીપ આવી પહોંચ્યો છે એવી રાત્રિઓ, i.e., “nights whose length can be measured by the ‘Puṣya’ asterism or nights which have been approached by the ‘Pauṣa’ month.” Note that in Gujarati, the ‘Pauṣa’ month is called ‘poṣa’ (પોષ).

Here is the Marathi translation on the ‘satsangdhara’ website[7]—
“या हेमंत कालात रात्री मोठ्या होत आहेत। यात सरदी फारच वाढत आहे। खुल्या आकाशाखाली कुणी झोपत नाही। पौष महिन्यातील या रात्री हिमपातामुळे धूसर प्रतीत होत आहेत।”
The translation says पौष महिन्यातील या रात्री, i.e., “these nights in the [lunar] month of Pauṣa.”

Here is the Kannada translation by N. Ranganatha Sharma, a tall scholar of both Sanskrit and Kannada[8]—
“ರಾತ್ರಿಯ ಹೊತ್ತು ಬಯುಲಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಜನರು ತ್ಯಜಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಈಗ ಪುಷ್ಯನಕ್ಷತ್ರದಿನ್ದ ರಾತ್ರಿಯ ಪರಿಮಾಣನನ್ನು ಕಂಡುಹಿಡಿಯಬಹುದಾಗಿದೆ. ಮಂಜು ಮುಸುಕಿರುತ್ತದೆ. ಚಳಿಗಾಳಿಯಿಂದ ರಾತ್ರಿ ಬಹು ತಣ್ಣಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ. ರಾತ್ರಿಯ ಕಾಲಮು ಅತಿದೀರ್ಘನಾಗಿದೆ.”
The translation says ಈಗ ಪುಷ್ಯನಕ್ಷತ್ರದಿನ್ದ ರಾತ್ರಿಯ ಪರಿಮಾಣನನ್ನು ಕಂಡುಹಿಡಿಯಬಹುದಾಗಿದೆ, which loosely translates as “now the length/measure of the nights can be found out (=ascertained) from the ‘Puṣya’ asterism.” I have benefited from the kind help of some Kannada speakers for this English rendering.

To summarize, eleven translations in five different languages by Indian translators (six presented by Dr. Roy and five by me) interpret the reference to ‘Puṣya’ in the verse as either ‘Puṣya’ being visible in the night or the lunar month being ‘Puṣya’ ( ‘Pauṣa’). More translations by Indian translators can be looked up. I currently do not have the time to do this.

What do foreign translators say on this verse?
Here is the English translation by Sheldon Pollock—
“No longer can one sleep outdoors. Led by the ‘Puṣya’ star the nights pass cold and gray with snow and last far longer than their three watches.”
Pollock’s translation of this word renders हिमारुणाः as “gray with snow”. Pollock has explained हिम as “snow”. The Sanskrit word हिम can mean both “snow” and “fog or mist”. Barring few exceptions like Lambasingi, it does not snow in central and south India. The scene is set in Pañcavaṭī, far south of the Himalayas, so “snow” is unlikely to be the sense of हिम here.

Here is the French translation by Alfred Roussel—
“Les voici maintenant les froides et longues nuits pendant lesquelles on cesse de coucher en plein air, à qui Pushya sert de guide et qu’un (ciel) neigeux obscurcit.”
In English, this reads “Here they are now—the cold and long nights during which we stop sleeping in the open air, to which ‘Pushya’ serves as a guide, and a snowy (sky) obscures.” I have taken help of Google Translate here.

Here is the Italian translation by Gaspare Gorresio—
“Si cessa dal dormire sull’alto delle case a cielo scoperto; le notti non han più fiori, son fatte fosche dai geli e fredde ed hanno ora più lunga durata.”
In English, this reads “We stop sleeping on the top of the open-air houses; the nights have no more flowers, they are made dull by frost and cold and now have a longer duration.” I have taken help of Google Translate here. It seems Gorresio had (or mistakenly read) a different reading with the word‘puṣpa’ (“flower”) in place of ‘puṣya’. He probably had ‘puṣpahīnāḥ’ (पुष्पहीनाः) instead of ‘puṣyanītāḥ’ (पुष्यनीताः). Still, he reads the word with the nights only and there is no reference to the sun or sunset.

In an article ‘Einteilung des Tages und Zeitmessung im alten Indien’ (“Organization of the day and timekeeping in ancient India”) in ‘Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft’ (Volume 74, page 259, 1920), Hermann Georg Jacobi wrote—
“Wenn in der angeführten Stelle des Rāmāyaṇa die kalten Winternächte genannt worden , so ist damit zweifellos der lunare Monat Pauṣa gemeint.”
Translated into English, this means “When the cold winter nights are mentioned in the cited passage of the ‘Rāmāyaṇa’, this undoubtedly refers to the lunar month of ‘Pauṣa’.” Though I can understand German, I have taken the help of Google Translate here. The reference Jacobi gives is the same verse which is under discussion, citing the commentaries of Rāmavarmā and Maheśvaratīrtha (see below).

What do Sanskrit commentaries say on this verse?
In this section, we will see that most major Sanskrit commentaries also say more or less the same on this verse as various translations discussed above. In fact, most translations are guided by Sanskrit commentaries which explain the ‘anvaya’ and break-down of compounds lucidly. Let us see how five major Sanskrit commentaries[9][10] explain the word पुष्यनीताः.

(1) The ‘Tilaka’ commentary by Rāmavarmā explains the word as पुष्यनक्षत्रबोधितरात्रिकालपरिमाणाः (“the measure of the nights’ time is known by the Puṣya asterism”). The essence is that Puṣya is visible during most of the night.

(2) The ‘Śiromaṇi’ commentary by Śivasahāya says पुष्यनक्षत्रज्ञापितनिशाकालपरिमाणाः, almost the same as what the ‘Tilaka’ says.

(3) The ‘Bhūṣaṇa’ commentary by Govindarāja explains the word as पुष्यनक्षत्रयुक्ता पौर्णमासी पुष्यं तेन नीता तत्प्रधानाः (“[nights] led by the full moon night associated with the ‘Puṣya’ asterism”). As the full moon occurs in or near ‘Puṣya’ in the lunar month of ‘Pauṣa’, the implied explanation is “[nights] led by the full moon night of [the lunar month of] ‘Pauṣa’”.

(4) The ‘Tattvadīpikā’ commentary of Maheśvaratīrtha gives two meanings which are more or less the same as given by the ‘Tilaka’ and the ‘Bhūṣaṇa’ (पुष्यनीताः पुष्यनक्षत्रेण नीताः प्रवर्तिताः, येषु दिवसेषु पुष्यनक्षत्रं रात्रिकालपरिमाणं बोधयतीत्यर्थः, अन्ये तु पुष्यनीता पुष्यनक्षत्रयुक्तापौर्णमासीनीताः, लक्ष्यते तथा च पुष्यनक्षत्रयुक्तां पौर्णमासीं नीताः गताः तदुपलक्षिता इति यावत्). Maheśvaratīrtha adds a third meaning where he interprets पुष्य as पोष्य to mean “snakes” (भोगिनः) so पुष्यनीताः = “[nights] spent with snakes”, i.e., spent with trouble. This third meaning is not relevant to astronomy.

(5) Another Sanskrit commentary, indicated as ‘स’ in the Nirnay Sagar Press edition, simply says पुष्यनीताः पुष्यमासावधिकाः, i.e., पुष्यनीताः means “belonging to the period of the Puṣya (=Pauṣa) month”. This is also correct since, as we have observed earlier, the word ‘puṣya’ in Sanskrit means both (1) “the ‘Puṣya’ asterism” (2) “the ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month” (Apte and many other Sanskrit dictionaries).

To summarize, five major Sanskrit commentaries interpret the reference to ‘Puṣya’ in verse 3.16.12 as the ‘Puṣya’ asterism being visible during most of the night or the lunar month being ‘Pauṣa’.

Why does Oak then claim sunset in Puṣya?
Oak has probably misunderstood the word अरुण in हिमारुणाः for the sun. While one of the meanings of the word अरुण is indeed the sun, the word here is not a standalone word but the second part of the compound हिमारुणाः. In addition, the usage हिमारुणाः is in plural (feminine nominative plural), and hence cannot refer to the Sun which is masculine in Sanskrit and singular. Even if one mistakenly concludes अरुण means “the sun” in हिमारुणाः, there is no word alluding to the sun setting anywhere in the verse. The last word अरुण in the compound हिमारुणाः means “gray” and the first word हिम means “fog” or “mist”. Therefore, हिमारुणाः means “gray due to fog or mist”. It is thus not a reference to the sun.

Now we come to पुष्यनीताः, the critical word. This is also in plural (feminine nominative plural). Hence, it cannot refer to the position of the sun. The word also does not allude to the sunset in any way.

Both पुष्यनीताः and हिमारुणाः have to be read with the word त्रियामाः (nights) only, and mean what has been stated earlier.

Does Oak have a source to support him?
To his credit, Oak has a translation to cite. Oak relies on the translation authored by (edited by?) Shripad Damodar Satavalekar.[11] Attacking other translations of this verse and defending his own interpretation, Oak says—[12]
“When modern Ramayana researchers twist and torture translations of Valmiki Ramayana, not only they embrace ‘asat’ [sic] by their falsehood of wrong translations and disagree with someone like Pandit Satavalekar but also create ‘Vitanda’ by their deliberate and false translations which do not match with their own claims for the dating of Ramayana.”
As expected, the grand and long-winded statement is mostly the typical Oak fluff with very little content. The only content in the statement is “disagreeing with Pandit Satavalekar”. Does Oak realize that he himself disagrees with Pandit Satavalekar in placing ‘Caitra’ lunar month during the time of the ‘Rāmāyaṇa’ in the ‘Śarad’ season? The Marathi translation of the first ‘sarga’ of ‘Kiṣkindhākāṇḍa’ authored by (edited by?) Satavalekar unambiguously states that it was ‘Caitra’ and it was ‘Vasanta’. The relevant verses are 4.1.10, 4.1.35, 4.1.41, and 4.1.91.[3]

As a modern Rāmāyaṇa researcher, Oak can disagree with Pandit Satavalekar when it suits him, but if others agree then he makes a great deal out of it. Such are Oak’s convenient standards.

Why is Satavalekar’s translation incorrect?
In Satavalekar’s Marathi translation, the whole first line निवृत्ताकाशशयनाः पुष्यनीता हिमारुणाः is mistakenly read with दिवसाः in the previous verse. The translation says सूर्य पुष्य नक्षत्रावर मावळत असतो, which probably means “the sun sets on the ‘Puṣya’ asterism”. I do not know Marathi grammar very well, but based on some kind help from Marathi speakers, the construction मावळत असतो does not seem to be the present continuous tense.

Anyway, this translation is to be deemed incorrect because of the following reasons—

(1) Against all major Sanskrit commentaries, the translation reads the first half of verse 3.16.12 with the previous verse. While that in itself is not a problem, the structure of the two verses “[many adjectives] … such are the days” (3.16.11) and “[many adjectives] … such are the nights” (3.16.12) makes such an ‘anvaya’ very unlikely to capture the original sense intended by Vālmīki. The two verses are complete and independent sentences in themselves. Therefore, reading the first half of the second verse with the first verse is neither required nor natural. In addition, reading the first half of 3.16.12 with 3.16.11 would imply the observation that sleeping under the open sky has ceased during the days (as opposed to during the nights). Indeed the translation says सांप्रत या दिवसात उघड्या प्रदेशामध्ये कोणीही शयन करीत नाहीत, for which the sense probably is “nobody sleeps in the open during these days”. This does not make natural sense, for sleeping under the open sky during the previous season (‘Śarad’) with clear skies, lack or rain, and lack of cold weather would naturally occur during the night, not during the day.

(2) Even if one reads the first half of 3.16.12 with 3.16.11, the word पुष्यनीताः (now to be taken as masculine nominative plural) would qualify “the days” (दिवसाः in 3.16.11). And so the sense of the word would be “days led by ‘Puṣya’”. This would again imply “days of ‘Puṣya’ = ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month”. It cannot mean “days in which Puṣya is visible” as asterisms are not visible in the day.

(3) Further, even if the word पुष्यनीताः qualified days of ‘Hemanta’ , it would still not refer to the sun or the sunset. In itself, the word पुष्यनीताः has no reference to the sun or the setting of the sun. The word being plural cannot refer to the sun. There is no word standing for the sun in 3.16.11 which पुष्यनीताः can qualify. The word सूर्य is a part of the compound मृदुसूर्याः, and all the six adjectives in 3.16.11 including मृदुसूर्याः qualify the word दिवसाः = “the days”. So, the meaning “the sun is setting on the Puṣya asterism” is impossible even if the first line of 3.16.12 is read with 3.16.11.

It cannot be assumed that the translator (editor?) Satavalekar took हिमारुणाः (or अरुण in हिमारुणाः) to refer the sun, for हिमारुणाः is separately rendered in the translaton as बर्फ़ामुळे प्रदेश पांढुरके दिसत आहेत (“the region looks pale due to the snow”). Interestingly, this part is not fully correct as the adjective हिमारुणाः is now qualifying “the days” and not “the region”.

Satavalekar was a tall scholar no doubt, but scholars also err. In this case, the error is obvious as I have shown above. In addition, five Sanskrit commentaries and eleven translations by Indian scholars in five languages (English, Hindi, Gujarati, Marathi, and Kannada) contradict the translation by Satavalekar.

Is there a variant reading involving ‘puṣya’?
Yes. In the endnotes to his translation of the ‘Araṇyakāṇḍa’, Pollock notes that the reading in four manuscripts (one Sharada and three Devanagari manuscripts) is ‘puṣyanetrāḥ’ (पुष्यनेत्राः) instead of‘puṣyanītāḥ’ (पुष्यनीताः). The feminine plural words ‘puṣyanetrāḥ’(पुष्यनेत्राः) = “[nights] whose leader/guide is Puṣya” (i.e., “nights of ‘Pauṣa’”) and ‘mṛganetrāḥ’ (मृगनेत्राः) = “[nights] whose leader/guide is Mṛga” (i.e., “nights of ‘Mārgaśīrṣa’”) are stock examples in grammar works. Both these examples with the structure [asterism name]-‘netrā’ are cited in the‘Mahābhāṣya’, the ‘Kāśikā’, and the ‘Siddhāntakaumudī’ and are invariably explained as nights. This is intuitive as asterisms are visible in the night and are used as a navigational guide in the night alone. In these examples, the last part‘netra’ is not from ‘netra’ (नेत्र) = “an eye” but from ‘netṛ’ (नेतृ) = “a leader, guide”. The word ‘netṛ’ (नेतृ) = “leader” comes from the root √‘nī’ (नी) = “to lead, to guide”. The word ‘puṣyanītāḥ’(पुष्यनीताः) also has the same structure, name of an asterism followed by the word ‘nītā’ (नीता) = “led, guided”, which is also from the root √‘nī’ (नी). So, the variant reading‘puṣyanetrāḥ’ (पुष्यनेत्राः) is structurally similar to ‘puṣyanītāḥ’ (पुष्यनीताः) and gives almost the same meaning, viz. that “[nights] with Puṣya [asterism] as the leader/guide”, as ‘puṣyanītāḥ’ (पुष्यनीताः) = “[nights] led/guided by Puṣya [asterism]”. Interestingly, the French translation by Alfred Roussel has this sense of ‘Puṣya’ being the guide in the nights.

The ‘Vācaspatya’ Sanskrit dictionary explains the feminine word ‘puṣyanetrā’ (पुष्यनेत्रा) as “the night in which Puṣya asterism is seen from the first phase till the end” (पुष्यः नक्षत्रं नेता प्रथमावधिशेषपर्य्यन्तसमापको यस्याः, यस्यां रात्रौ प्रथमावधिशेषपर्य्यन्तं पुष्यनक्षत्रस्य दर्शनं तादृश्यां रात्रौ). This is the also the sense suggested by ‘puṣyanītāḥ’ (पुष्यनीताः) in the Sanskrit commentaries. The commentaries imply that in the nights [of the ‘Pauṣa’ lunar month], the asterism ‘Puṣya’ is visible for almost all of the night, and hence the length of the night is made known by ‘Puṣya’. Pollock notes that the editors of Mylapore edition state, “the close of night in winter is signalled by Puṣya.”

The shades of meaning of the variant reading ‘puṣyanetrāḥ’ (पुष्यनेत्राः) add to our understanding of the main reading (and the critical edition reading) ‘puṣyanītāḥ’ (पुष्यनीताः).

What is the conclusion?
With this analysis, Oak’s false claim of “Sun setting near Pushya during Hemanta season”, based on a mistranslation by Satvalekar, is discredited. As most translations and commentaries imply, the lunar month of ‘Pauṣa’ was in the ‘Hemanta’ season as per the verse 3.16.12 (CE 3.15.12) of the ‘Rāmāyaṇa’. This correct conclusion matches with‘Caitra’ being in ‘Vasanta’ as is clearly stated in ‘Rāmāyaṇa’ verses 4.1.10, 4.1.35, 4.1.41, and 4.1.91 which were discussed in the previous article in this series.[3]

PS: I am thankful to Dr. Raja Ram Mohan Roy for reading the pre-publication draft and suggesting several minor edits.

PPS: This article is also available here: https://medium.com/@nmisra/26ef0fe7bccc

References
[1] https://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2017/08/02/astronomy-lynchpins-ramayana-mahabharata/
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PU1PW-diLM0&t=143s
[3] https://medium.com/@nmisra/7bc6464cd815
[4] https://rajarammohanroy.medium.com/refutation-of-nilesh-oaks-astronomical-dating-of-ramayana-to-12209-bce-268959819594
[5] https://archive.org/details/kalyanakalpataru0000clgo_q5o4/page/692/mode/2up
[6] https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.305987/page/n454/mode/1up
[7] http://satsangdhara.net/vara/k3s016.htm
[8] https://archive.org/details/DLIKannadaRamayana/Valmiki%20Ramayanam%20Aranyakanda-%20N%20Ranganatha%20sharma/page/n122/mode/1up
[9] https://archive.org/details/ValmikiRamayana/Aranyakanda_III/page/n82/mode/1up
[10] https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/पृष्ठम्:वाल्मीकिरामायणम्-अरण्यकाण्डम्.djvu/६३
[11] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELWcHqwWwAAXrki?format=png
[12] https://twitter.com/NileshOak/status/1204039980324130820

--

Nityānanda Miśra

[उज्ज्वल राजपूत]

नम॑स्ते महोदय! शो॒भ॒नं लि॑खि॒तम्। कच्चि॑त् पठि॒ष्यन्ती॒दं तस्या॑नुया॒यिनः॑।

[Yogananda CS]

Namaste,

That's an impressive assembly of resources! In the Kannada translation, a word has been missed in the first sentence: ರಾತ್ರಿಯ ಹೊತ್ತು ಬಯುಲಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಜನರು ತ್ಯಜಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. The correct sentence is: ರಾತ್ರಿಯ ಹೊತ್ತು ಬಯುಲಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಮಲಗುವುದನ್ನು ಜನರು ತ್ಯಜಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. (With the word ಮಲಗುವುದನ್ನು, meaning `sleeping' missing, the sentence would mean 'During the night people have given up in the open field'; what is given up in the open field during night is not hard to imagine! ☺).

regards...........................yoga

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAATk%3DrApDUFXo4vgojs%3Da%2B3Bg4iZrwAgGi7xG%2BXPM1ZUQyFzgQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Megh Kalyanasundaram]

From Manogna Sastry and myself:

Thank you for writing (and then sharing) such a detailed, pointed and sumptuously referenced article which clearly is—well it seems so to us at least—written in a way that, amongst other things, 1) facilitates engagement with its details devoid of unverifiable claims 2) is thoughtfully structured and 3) simply gets on with the job of being carefully reasoned sans grandiose prefaces to that effect.  

We learnt more than a thing or two from this article including sources we did not know of before.

Best,

Manogna, Megh

On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 8:17 AM Nityānanda Miśra <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Nityanand Misra]

On Sunday, 18 July, 2021 at 12:32:29 pm UTC+5:30 Yogananda CS wrote:

Namaste,

That's an impressive assembly of resources! In the Kannada translation, a word has been missed in the first sentence: ರಾತ್ರಿಯ ಹೊತ್ತು ಬಯುಲಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಜನರು ತ್ಯಜಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. The correct sentence is: ರಾತ್ರಿಯ ಹೊತ್ತು ಬಯುಲಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಮಲಗುವುದನ್ನು ಜನರು ತ್ಯಜಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. (With the word ಮಲಗುವುದನ್ನು, meaning `sleeping' missing, the sentence would mean 'During the night people have given up in the open field'; what is given up in the open field during night is not hard to imagine! ☺).

regards...........................yoga

ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು, Dr. Yogananda. I may have missed the word while typing the Kannada part. It was a pain to type all the various citations in Gujarati, Marathi, Kannada, etc. I have corrected the mistake in the edition of the article on medium: https://medium.com/@nmisra/26ef0fe7bccc. 

PS: I hope one day N. Ranganatha Sharma's scholarly translation of the Ramayana is available as Unicode text, so I can copy-paste and cite from it without having to type the citations.   

 

 

[Ganesh R]

Dear Sri. Nityananda Mishra, 

Thanks a lot for your thoroughly researched post. I am amazed by your patient and critical acumen. It demands so much of study and academic diligence to present the facts so well. I am also impressed by the dignity with which you have handled the present issue. Please accept my heartfelt appreciation and I also wish that self styled scholars and indologists who have no first hand knowledge of the original texts would learn from such critical feedback. 

With utmost warm regards

Ganesh

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/12155dfb-6b99-4def-93b8-f9f23c7658ecn%40googlegroups.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

I echo shatavadhani's remarks.

It needs patience to create an analytic rejection.

Nityanandji is a model.

Regards,

Bijoy Misra

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CA%2Bstn%2BhVH5%3Dg6vD_mF1UuA9CuxB_qMzn-kgzPV2wKz2i8fiQ%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nityanand Misra]

On Sunday, 18 July, 2021 at 6:30:20 pm UTC+5:30 Ganesh R wrote:

Dear Sri. Nityananda Mishra, 

Thanks a lot for your thoroughly researched post. I am amazed by your patient and critical acumen. It demands so much of study and academic diligence to present the facts so well. I am also impressed by the dignity with which you have handled the present issue. Please accept my heartfelt appreciation and I also wish that self styled scholars and indologists who have no first hand knowledge of the original texts would learn from such critical feedback. 

With utmost warm regards

Shatavadhani Galu,

Thanks for your kind words. I can only say what Kalidasa said,

आ परितोषाद्विदुषां न साधु मन्ये प्रयोगविज्ञानम्।

बलवदपि शिक्षितानामात्मन्यप्रत्ययं चेतः॥

Until ‘vidvajjana’s like you are satisfied, I do not consider my expression to be any good. Your satisfaction is the litmus test of a good expression.

धन्योऽस्मि 

[Nityanand Misra]

On Sunday, 18 July, 2021 at 1:15:28 pm UTC+5:30 Megh Kalyanasundaram wrote:

From Manogna Sastry and myself:

Thank you for writing (and then sharing) such a detailed, pointed and sumptuously referenced article which clearly is—well it seems so to us at least—written in a way that, amongst other things, 1) facilitates engagement with its details devoid of unverifiable claims 2) is thoughtfully structured and 3) simply gets on with the job of being carefully reasoned sans grandiose prefaces to that effect.  

We learnt more than a thing or two from this article including sources we did not know of before.

Best,

Manogna, Megh

Thanks to both of you. 

Kind regards, Nityananda 

[Raghavendra]

Greetings of the day,

 

Disclaimer: I am not a historian. I am in no way contributing to the series of discussions on the subject at hand. I am sharing information only. However, I have one question towards the end.

 

The southern recession of mahābhārata has following verses in the beginning of the 50th chapter of sabhā parva which appear to indicate in clear terms the date of rāmāyaṇa, 

 

भीष्म उवाच,

श्रुणु राजंस्ततो विष्णोः प्रादुर्भावं महात्मनः /

*अष्टाविंशे युगेचापि* मार्काण्डेयपुरःसरः //१//

तिथौ नावमिके जज्ञे तथा दशरथादपि /

कृत्वाऽऽत्मानं महाबाहुर्श्चतुर्धा विष्णुरव्ययः //२//

लोके राम इति ख्यातः ………………..//३//

 

(found in 1906 edition printed at nirṇaya sāgar press, Bombay, edited by śrīyuts TR Krishṇāchārya and TR Vyāsāchārya)

 

The date of rāmāyaṇa was during the 28 महायुगान्तर्गत त्रेतायुगे is clear from the above verses.

 

According to the traditional account held within the school of श्रीमद्-आनन्दतीर्थ-भगवद्पादाचार्य is that the manifestation of paraśurāma and rāmachandra took place in the 28th mahāyuga itself. The mahābhārata was in 28th mahāyuga (dvāpara).

 

The question is - How do paraśurāma and rāmachandra belong to the same 28th mahāyuga? The answer is this - we hear about the battle between kārtavīryārjuna and rāvaṇa and the former defeating the latter in the annals. Kārtavīryārjuna was one among the innumerable warrior kings killed by paraśurāma, this incident unmistakably points to the fact that bhārgavarāma, rāgḥavarāma, kārtavīryārjuna and rāvaṇa belonging to the same age (which is 28th mahāyuga)

 

As per devamāna (1 = 360), we have a total of 1200 years of all the yugās put together.

 

4800 = Kṛutayuga

3600 = Tretāyuga 

2400 = Dvāparayuga

1200 = Kaliyuga 

 

Approximately, 14 years out of the 1200 devamāna years have gone by, in Kaliyuga. We get 6014 (3600+2400+14) devamāna years,

 

Question - Is it safe to consider that rāmāyṇa took place 6,014 devamāna years ago, based on the traditional account? 

 

Thank you and Best regards,
Raghavendra
==========

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/12155dfb-6b99-4def...@googlegroups.com.

[Jayasree Saranathan]

Dear Sri. Nityananda Misra, 

 

Thanks a lot for your erudite articulation of the meaning of the verse misinterpreted by Mr. Oak, presumably thinking that हिमारुणाः refers to the sun. As soon as his interview in DD was telecast, I wrote in Jan 2020 the three mistakes in his understanding of Caitra- Sharad, Abhijit as the pole star and the sunset in the sign Kataka in Hemanta Ritu. 

https://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2020/01/should-dd-doordarshan-promote-mis.html  

 

In the context of the sunset, I would like to add that, starting from the 4th verse in that chapter (VR: 3-16), Lakshmana is talking about what is called "the pregnancy of clouds" - known as "Garbottam" in Tamil about which I am doing a 9-year long research (currently in the 6th year of this research). I maintain a separate blog for this topic to bring out the ancient wisdom of rainfall prediction from the Pregnancy that is watched in two ways,

(1) for the 14 days of the sun’s transit in the star Purvashadha and

(2) for six months starting from Hemanta ritu to Vasanata ritu

(or from Arudra darshana to Arudra Pravesha when the Sun enters the star Arudra) https://jayasreeweatherblog.wordpress.com/

 

Throughout that chapter we can see the Pregnancy features expressed by Lakshmana. One of them was the early night dew enveloping Pushya. The mention of three Yaama (1 Yaama = 2 hours, 24 minutes) following this shows that the star Pushya had risen after sunset. The specific reference to Pushya shows that the sun was in the 3^rd degree of Purvashadha (or 17^th -18^th degree of Sagittarius). The nature of rainfall later when the sun would be transiting Pushya is known from the features on the 3^rd day of the sun’s transit in Purvashadha. So, Lakshmana was observing the 3rd day of the 14-day pregnancy period. In this period the sun must be reddish. He does mention that. For the kind of features to observe for pregnancy of rainfall: https://jayasreeweatherblog.wordpress.com/2017/12/31/how-to-observe-garbottam/

 

We find a corroboration for this Rama’s description of the rainy season when he refers to the nine-month pregnancy: “nava maasa dhritam garbham Bhaskarsya Gabhastibhih” (VR: 4-28-3). Based on the first type of 14-day observation, Bhadrapada is the ninth month. Expectedly Rama refers to the Upakarma of Saama Vedins in Bhadrapada in that chapter. That description of Rama had taken place in Bhadrapada Hasta or immediately after Hasta in that month. Lakshmana’s talk in Hemanta Ritu had taken place on the 17^th or the 18^th day of solar Margashira month.

 

This is to highlight that Astro-meteorology helps in understanding certain verses and in deriving the date of observation. The dew in Pushya star observation is of that category and not as what Mr. Oak thinks.

 

I have spoken about the ‘Pregnancy’ feature in that verse in this video from 28 to 36 minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFLOwG8tPHM

 

Regards,

Jayasree  

 

 

On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 8:17 AM Nityānanda Miśra <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAATk%3DrApDUFXo4vgojs%3Da%2B3Bg4iZrwAgGi7xG%2BXPM1ZUQyFzgQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Vipin C]

Dear Nityananda Mishra Ji,

Thanks a million for sharing with us so thorough, logical, scholarly analysis on this topic. I am not a Sanskrit scholar but a student of biological/medical sciences. Your detailed presentation of critical evidence from other peers/scholars in the filed is commendable and so much in tune with what we practice. There is a need for all scholars to come together and present the best evidence on these kind of issues so that we could arrive at the truth (based upon our material senses). There is so much more to learn and “manthan” is the need of the time.

Best regards,

Vipin K Chaturvedi

Prof. UCSD Med

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJp7CVRAWJtuPFdFspKAdkg2NfJZjg7DBwroowpLrZh0caYx4A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Raghavendra]

Correction: Total: 12,000 devamāna years.

Thank you and Best regards,

Sent from RediffmailNG on Android

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https:roups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/12155dfb-6b99-4def...@googlegroups.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/1626596548.S.136649.31009....@webmail.rediffmail.com.

[Nityanand Misra]

Thank you Dr. Vipin Chaturvedi Ji, Dr. Bijoy Misra Ji, and Dr. Jayasree Saranathan Ji.

On Monday, 19 July, 2021 at 8:43:35 am UTC+5:30 Vipin CHATURVEDI wrote:

Dear Nityananda Mishra Ji,

[Bijoy Misra]

The whole episode looks to me like the social media disinformation that has become rampant in the US lately.

The technique is to take advantage of the general illiteracy of people and then attempt to throw material that

might stick.  In certain cases the process is political.  Use of abusive language is common.  A lot of bad

in the world has happened through mob mobilization. 

During occupation and colonial times, misinformation was spread as official circulars.  Lately governments

sometimes broadcast false information for political purposes.  In the scholarly world, plagiarism has been noted. 

But the trend to unanalytic assertion is a new phenomenon.  We had a public examination of one event.

There could be several others plotting their own schemes.

While some of us are attempting to reach out to the new youth, blots of this kind become incompatible to

the elucidation of pristine analytic inquiry that India gave to the world.  We need more vigilance.

Best regards,

Bijoy Misra

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/c90a7443-9d06-466f-9f36-929bd70adc83n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ramesh Rao]

We have to be careful here, and not allege malfeasance when all that has happened is the unwillingness of a scholar to engage with his critics, and his use of smelly red herrings to distract his thirty thousand plus followers from the arguments put forth and evidence offered by his critics.

As I have said repeatedly, all that was needed of Nilesh was to acknowledge that his critics had offered new evidence and had done some careful analyses of his theses, and that if he found any mistakes in his work he would correct them.

Alas, the theses he has offered are of such seductivity and power that he could not muster the courage to say "mea culpa". Instead he has blustered, feigned harm, and committed himself to the "best defense is offense" (alas, it has only been offensive...) strategy believing that his critics will tire soon and go away and allow him to ride the tiger to TV studios and Amazon sales.

Nilesh has done a lot of work. Let us give him credit. But then he has been so carried away by his own "insights" that he has now, perforce, become a huckster. Alas, mutual friends, who have been so taken in by his claims, are also getting trapped in the "best defense is offense" strategy, and are becoming abusive. For the good and the welfare of his friends and followers, Nilesh should call a halt to this offensive behavior, especially on social media. 

There is still time for him to apologize, make course corrections, and work with scholars to repair the damage he has done.

Dr. Saranathan, Dr. Raja Roy, and a few others have diligently, painstakingly sought to unpack Nilesh's theses, and Nityananda ji now offering his broad scholarly shoulders to this effort should at last get Nilesh to stop stonewalling.

Acknowledging mistakes takes courage. It is hard. Earlier we do it the better.

Many thanks to Nityananda ji for bringing his scholarship, his experience to bear upon these matters.

Regards,

Ramesh Rao

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjU4rC3EioiEZi0ntiohdUNSOOea%3D6_yLZ5-Qefsn87rmg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

Nilesh has come off better in this initial round of manthana (yes long way to go, argumentative Indian). Qualitatively his approach (all mortals are wrong in the end) reflects second order thinking better than in any of the counter arguments presented so far in this forum. I reserve further comments.

KT

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Kalicharanji,

It would help if you may expand your cryptic remarks on the subject of analysis.

Best regards,

Bijoy Misra

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/d6ed6c52-275c-4bf2-919e-c06243d2b36cn%40googlegroups.com.

[Pradyumna Achar]

Sri Kalicharanji,

Could you kindly correct my understanding of your statement if I have understood it wrongly:

   - We have to interpret texts with an assumption that the authors were lying or hiding the truth, for whatever reason

   - We have to extract the truth from statements in the texts where the author could have inadvertently leaked the truth

   This is the better approach rather than assuming that what is written is true unless proven otherwise.

Regards

Pradyumna

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

Pradumna ji,

You're nearly correct in the reading. We should even eliminate "motive" from it to take it further.

For indeed, while analysing "time domain data" (TDD) the scientist/engineer often gains better insight by translating the same into "frequency domain".

Ramayana text ~ "time domain data"

of which the "frequency translation" (i.e. research) should yield already two "peaks":

1) ~300 AD when the text was written (linguistics corroboration too).

2) a much more ancient date (nothing to feel ahamed about it).

Besides the point, but there's another basic observation:

"One cannot question a hypothesis directly".

Precession in panchanga is a hypothesis.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/iGrDaZS1elU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/5616211f-1262-4ff7-a75e-e7e51c7ce5c4n%40googlegroups.com.

[Raja Roy]

Dear Prof. Misra,

Mr. Kalicharan Tuvij did not respond to your email. However, Mr. Nilesh Oak is using Mr. Tuvij's remarks to show me and Nityananda ji in bad light. He uses the term "Woke Indic Gang". Is Mr. Oak unaware that you had responded to Mr. Tuvij? Please see the details below.

Best regards,

Raja

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjXHDsXpeN8xTkGf2Hk39Qjc%3DhW3nEPxrFqSwnPL1n%3DSYA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Dr Raja,

I have never met Nilesh, it appears that he possesses an abusive temper. 

While I appreciate his zeal, he lacks scholarly training and humility of knowledge.

He is young, can develop in time.  I would appreciate if he understood why the

text has to be understood in its full context.

I appreciate your work though the line of research of astronomical dating does not

interest me. A sky map should only be used as a supplement.

Best regards,

Bijoy Misra

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJSSQ5sFWRk7zYoeJ9uqcK9ho5n5jcPsiYrr4CtHH-X0GjBdeg%40mail.gmail.com.