Thursday, November 22, 2012

“Time Line of Lord Krishna Supported by Science” - Stephen Knapp.


An excellent compilation of proofs of Krishna's historicity given by Stephen Knapp is reproduced here from his website. I take exception to 2 of his observations that Krishna cult spread from Maharashtra to Tamilnadu and that elephants with four tusks (standing at the gates of Ravana as per Valmiki Ramayana) had become extinct as early as 15 million year ago.

Krishna was known to Tamil lands even during his life time. He had been one of the esteemed guests at the 2nd Sangam assemblage that took place in Kavaatam, the then capital of the Pandyans. Kavaatam's location can be deciphered from Shugreeva's description of the trail to the South which he described to the vanaras in chapter 4-41-19a. That place was submerged around the time Byt Dwaraka was submerged.



Krishna married Nappinnai, an Ayar (Yadava) girl of the local chieftain of the Pandyan land – the details of which can be read in the articles – the links of which are given at the end of this post. This Nappinnai was not from (northern) Mathura. She was a home product of Tamil speaking regions of the South. Perhaps, Pandaiah – the daughter of Krishna whom Megasthanes mentioned – was the daughter of Nappinnai and Krishna, who was married to the Pandyan king. The description of Megasthenes that her household requirements of dairy products were taken care by 365 families of Yadavas – on a rotational basis of one each day finds similarity with the description in Silappadhikaram.

 

In Silappadhikaram (17th chapter) , an Ayar woman by name Madari was found telling about her turn to supply dairy products to the King on that day. But she saw some bad omens and decided to enact Bala Charita which she said that Krishna used to dance at the cow sheds along with his sister and brother to enthuse the cattle. How did Bala charita (of Bhasa of Hari vamsa?) reach a rural Ayar woman in Madurai, who enacted it (described extensively in Silappadhikaram) in the dances of Krishna, if it did not come down to her generation after generation in her family?


The inference is that she must have been one among the 365 families of Yadavas of Mathura or Dwaraka whom Krishna must have sent as his gifts to his daughter on her marriage to the Pandyan king. The Krishna cult can therefore be said to have started in Tamil lands even at that time when Krishna was around. The Rasa lila which is not found in any ancient Sanskrit text but cropped up as late as the 15th century in the North, is found mentioned in Agananuru written not less than 2000 years ago goes to show that the intimate memories of Krishna had been carried by the Yadavas who had once shared their moments with Krishna. (http://thamizhan-thiravidana.blogspot.in/2011/11/81.html ). They would not have come down to Tamilnadu on their own but only at the behest of Krishna and for taking care of one of Krishna's daughters – who was Pandaiah (as Megasthenes says) and was born to Nappinnai. It is probable the Vandaiyar of Tamilnadu came in the lineage of Pandaia. Pa- va interchange is common is Tamil. Pandeya became Vandaya – Vandayar.


Coming to this lineage, there is no mention that this lineage of Pandyans was the direct one to the main throne. During Krishna's times (5000 years before present) Kavaatam was the capital, not Madurai. But Krishna must have settled this daughter in Madurai after marrying her to a prince in the Pandyan family. It was in connection with Krishna, that the temple of Kallazhagar at Thirumalirum Cholai must have come up. This temple had Balarama also according to the sangam text of Paripadal. But today there is no deity of Balarama in this temple .


The name Kallazhagar has a similarity to Ranchod Krishna of Dwaraka. That name was attributed to him for he fled from fighting Jarasandha. The one who fled from fighting or fell short of ksahtriyahood was known as Galla. (Manusmrithi 10-22). Krishna was known as Ran chod by literal meaning. But in Tamil lands the Galla is known as Kalla or kaLLan. There is a mis conception that Kalla (as a people / tribe)  name means thief (though it is one of the meanings). But those who had given up fighting were known as Kalla – ka – ga inter change owing to the absence of separate letters for them in Tamil. Kalla people were engaged in guarding temples in Tamilnadu  which is not possible if they were thieves.


The different sects of Kalla in Tamilnadu must have once been fighters or Kshatriyas. The ancestry of Piramalaik kallar going back to more than 60,000 years ago and connected to Africa shows the movement of people from Deep South and not from North west India. This name – Piramalail lallar must have come to them when they, due to some local reasons ran away. The known generations of these people had not left the hill tops, thereby showing that they took shelter in the hill tops keeping themselves at safe distanced from some enemy. As they are called as Kallar, the diffusion of the concept of Galla and its name (Sanskrit) in Tamil's life and culture is becoming evident.


Now coming to the 4 tusked elephant, from Mahabharata it is known that elephants first evolved in the Southern part of the globe. In Mahabharata 5-99, Narada narrates the route to the South (Bhogavathi) which resembles the path through Sundaland (Indonesia) which was once the place for Daityas (like Prahladha, Virochana and Bali). He also says that the first of the elephant race by name "Supratika" from which came up all the other elephant races of the world such as Airavata , originated in this part of the South of the globe. He also says that cattle and horses originated here (in the South) from which other variants of the same animal family emerged in due course and spread to other parts of the world. The original races of elephant, horse and cattle can never be found as these regions are under water now.


The 4-tusked elephant could have very been a reality in the recent past as that of 7000 years ago when Ravana lived. The land of Ravana was also close to the regions where the former elephant races originated as per Narada's version.


For more on these issues read my Tamil blog http://thamizhan-thiravidana.blogspot.in/  Currently I am writing on Tamil- Sanskrit presence in Inca culture and Polynesian islands.


-Jayasree

 

********

 

From
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/time_line_of_lord_krishna.htm

"Time Line of Lord Krishna Supported by Science"


(An Excerpt from "Advancements of Ancient India's Vedic Culture")

By Stephen Knapp

One aspect that can show us the early nature of Vedic society, and with a
little more reliability, is highlighting the time when Lord Krishna was
present. This is another point that has generated many opinions, but is now
much clearer than ever with more recent research and findings.

Astrophysicist Dr. Narahari Achar, a physicist from the University of
Memphis, clearly showed with astronomical analysis that the *Mahabharata *war
took place in 3067 BCE. Examining the *Mahabharata*, books 3, 5, and 18,
his sky map software showed that all these descriptions converge in the
year 3067. Achar also acknowledged that some 30 years earlier, in 1969, S.
Raghavan had arrived at the same date.

In determining the date of the *Mahabharata *war at Kurukshetra,
astronomical references in the epic can be used, of which there are more
than one hundred and fifty. Most of these that pertain to the war, though
there are many scattered throughout the texts, is in the Udyoga and Bhisma
Parvas. Those in the Bhisma Parva are especially systematic and are also in
accordance with the astrological omens described in the *Atharva Veda *and
its Parishishtas, referring mostly to comets. When these are put together
with the retrograde motion of Mars before reaching Jyestha, this leads to
the unique date of 3067 BCE for the date of the war, which was previously
proposed by Professor Raghavan. 1

This corroborates with the view that the age of Kali-yuga started in 3102
BCE, according to Dr. Achar. As stated in the *Puranas*, Kali-yuga had
already begun, but its full influence was held back because of the presence
of Lord Krishna. Then when Lord Krishna departed from this world, which is
said to have occurred 35 years after the war of Kurukshetra in 3067, making
it the year of 3032 BCE, then Kali-yuga began to show more of its effects. 2

In the time line for the passing away of Grandfather Bhisma, for example,
it is said that Bhisma passed away on the Magha (January-February) *shukla
ashtami*, after the winter solstice, which leads to the date of January 13,
3066 BCE for the winter solstice. 3

So, in considering the chronology according Professor Raghavan, we have:

Lord Krishna's departure from Upaplavya nagara on the mission for
peace–September 26, 3067 BCE

Krishna reaches Hastinapura–September 28, 3067 BCE

Lunar eclipse–September 29, 3067 BCE

Krishna rides with Karna–October 8, 3067 BCE

Solar eclipse–October 14, 3067 BCE

The war begins–November 22, 3067 BCE

Fourteenth day of the war, continued into the wee hours of the
morning–December 8, 3067 BCE

Balarama returns–December 12, 3067 BCE

Winter solstice–January 13, 3066 BCE

Bhisma's passing away–January 17, 3066 BCE 4

Departure of Lord Krishna– 3031 BCE.

About when Vedavyasa composed the main Vedic texts– 3000 BCE

About when the Sarasvati had dried up or disappeared–1900 BCE

The above accounts for 48 days from the time of Bhisma's fall to the time
of his passing. However, it is generally accepted that Grandfather Bhisma
had 58 sleepless nights between the time of his fall and the time of his
passing. Yet, if you count the 10 days that he lead the armies into war in
which he may also have not been able to sleep, that would give the full 58
sleepless nights that are described.5

From the internal evidence in the *Mahabharata *text, the coronation of
Maharaja Yudhisthir can be determined to be 36 years before the beginning
of Kali-yuga, or about 3138 BCE
. One scholar, Dr. Patnaik, had calculated
the date of the starting of the *Mahabharata *war to be October 16, 3138
BCE from references available in the epic itself.

Of course, different scholars may arrive at variations in their
calculations, and there have been a few different versions of the *
Mahabharata*, and over the many centuries since it was written, additions
and accretions are found. For example, verses 2.28.48-9 mention *roma *and *
antakhi* in Sanskrit, which some scholars interpret to mean Rome and
Antioch. This places these mentions not earlier than 300 BCE since Antioch
was founded in 301. 6 However, this does not limit the age of the earlier
form of the *Mahabharata,* which is known to have been written shortly
after the war of Kurukshetra.

Nonetheless, as B. N. Narahari Achar explains, other scholars have proposed
varying years for the *Mahabharata *war, from 3102 BCE to 3139 BCE.
However, none of these dates can produce the astronomical configurations
described in the *Mahabharata*.

Another point of consideration is that it is generally accepted by most
Vedic scholars that the age of Kali-yuga began in February 17-18 of 3102
BCE, which also coincides with the astronomical configurations. This also
is given credence from the Aryabhatta Tradition in which Aryabhatta, who
lived 476-550 CE, explains that when he was 23 years old, 3600 years of
Kali-yuga had elapsed. Aryabhatta, one of the great mathematicians and
astronomers of India in the 5th century CE, examined the astronomical
positions recorded in the *Mahabharata*. In his work, the *Aryabhattiya*,
he calculated that the approximate date to be 3100 BCE, justifying the date
of the Kurukshetra war to have been fought about 5000 years ago, as the
tradition itself and most Hindus have always said.

This again identifies the year of 3102 BCE. However, the *Mahabharata *itself
does not describe when Kali-yuga began. All it says is that the war took
place some time during the interval of Dvapara and Kali-yugas, and it
certainly took place before Lord Krishna left this world. But there is
evidence that Kali-yuga had already begun before Lord Krishna disappeared.

In the *Bhagavata Purana *(1.15.36) it is explained, "When the Personality
of Godhead Lord Krishna left this earthly planet in His selfsame form, from
that very day Kali, who had appeared partially before, became fully
manifest to create inauspicious conditions for those who are endowed with a
poor fund of knowledge."

Therefore, Kali-yuga had already appeared, but it was only due to the
presence of Lord Krishna who was holding back its influence. But after He
left this world, Kali's full potency took effect, which is also stated in
the *Kali-raja Vrittanta*. Thus, the war is most likely to have been in
3067 BCE and the beginning of Kali-yuga accepted as 3102 BCE.

Some people, such as Max Muller and others, have had trouble accepting this
date as the time of the *Mahabharata*, because they felt that the
descriptions of the planetary positions of the Saptarishis (Ursa Major)
were not real. However, a similar description is also given in the second
chapter of the twelfth canto of the *Bhagavata Purana*, which helps verify
the time of the *Mahabharata*.

One particular point to consider is that it has been shown that the
positions of the Saptarishis, as explained in the work of Anthony Aveni,
noted author of *The Empire of Time: Calendars, Clocks and Cultures*, that
in many cultures, even in Africa and American Indian cultures, it is
believed that the entire solar system revolves through the galaxy of the
Milky Way, around the brightest star of the Pleiades, in the Taurus
constellation. These are known as the Seven Sisters or Krittikas in the
Vedic tradition. The brightest star in the Pleiades is Alcyone, and the sun
completes one revolution around this star in approximately 3000 years. This
has made the Pleiades a sacred object in the sky in many cultures. But the
point is that it is this periodic revolution that is why the Saptarishis
repeat their positions described in the *Bhagavata Purana *every 2700
years. Thus, when calculations are based on the position of these stars, we
have to realize that the Vedic texts, including the *Ramayana* and the
descriptions therein, could be relating to time periods much earlier than
we think.

Additional evidence that can help establish the time of Lord Krishna was in
Mohenjodaro, where a tablet dated to 2600 BCE was found which depicts Lord
Krishna in His childhood days
. This shows that Lord Krishna was popular at
least prior to this date. 7

We also have records from Greek travelers who came to India following
Alexander's invasion which have left references to Krishna. Authors like
Pliny referred to Krishna as Heracles, based on Hari Krishna. They record
that Heracles (Krishna) was held in special honor by the Sourseni tribe
(Shuraseni, based on Shura the father of Vasudeva and grandfather of Lord
Krishna) in such places as the major city of Methora (Mathura).

The Greek records go on to record that Heracles (Krishna) lived 138
generations before the time of Alexander and Sandrocottas, which was about
330 BCE. This then calculates, based on about 20 years per generation, to
roughly 3090 BCE, which is about the right time considering 3102 BCE is the
date when Kali-yuga began. Thus, Lord Krishna was a genuinely historical
figure who lived about the time of 3200-3100 BCE, having lived to 125 years
of age.
*


WHEN LORD KRISHNA LEFT THIS WORLD
*

The above information leads us to the approximate date when Lord Krishna
left this world. As B. N. Narahari Achar again describes: "According to the
epic *Mahabharata*, Krishna first appears [in the epic] at the time of
Draupadi's wedding, and His departure is exactly 36 years after the war. No
information about His birth is available in the epic itself, although there
is information about His departure. Krishna observes omens
(*Mahabharata *14.3.17),
similar to the ones seen at the time of the war, now indicating the total
destruction of the Yadavas. [Astrological] Simulations show that in the
year 3031 BCE, thirty-six years later than 3067 BCE, there was an eclipse
season with three eclipses. A lunar eclipse on 20 October was followed by
an annular solar eclipse on 5 November, followed by a penumbral lunar
eclipse on 19 November, within an interval of 14 days and at an
*aparvani *time.
Thus the date of departure of Lord Krishna is consistent with the popular
tradition that He passed away 36 years after the war. The information about
His birth can be gathered from the *Harivamsha *and the *Bhagavata Purana*....
It should be understood, however, that the date of His departure from this
world is established on the information in the epic and on the basis of
[astronomical] simulations, and it turns out to be 3031 BCE." 8
*

MORE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF LORD KRISHNA
*


Sometimes there are comments and even controversies amongst those who are
less informed regarding whether Christianity or Vedic culture came first.
Some people point out that the devotional elements within the Vedic
tradition, especially in regard to the *Bhakti *movements, must have come
from Christianity first and then appeared in the Vedic Vaishnava tradition,
the followers of which exhibit much love and devotion to Lord Krishna and
Vishnu and His other *avataras*. But this idea, that Vedic culture came
from Christianity, which some Christian preachers in India still try to use
in their attempts to convert people, could not be further from the truth.
The fact is that there is archeological proof that the Vaishnava tradition
of devotion to Lord Vishnu existed many years prior to the appearance of
Christianity.

Not far from the Buddhist site of Sanchi in Central India, we take a
45-minute ride on the very bumpy road to Vidisha or Besnagar where we find
the Heliodorus column, locally known as the Khamb Baba pillar. This was
erected by Heliodorus, the Greek ambassador to India in 113 BCE. Heliodorus
was sent to the court of King Bhagabhadra by Antialkidas, the Greek king of
Taxila. The kingdom of Taxila was part of the Bactrian region in northwest
India, which had been conquered by Alexander the Great in 325 BCE. By the
time of Antialkidas, the area under Greek rule included what is now
Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Punjab.

Heliodorus writes on the stone pillar the time it was erected and the fact
that he had converted to Vaishnavism, or the worship of Lord Vishnu. The
inscription on the column, as published in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic
Society, says:

"This Garuda column of Vasudeva (Vishnu), the god of gods, was erected here
by Heliodorus, a worshiper of Vishnu, the son of Dion, and an inhabitant of
Taxila, who came as Greek ambassador from the Great King Antialkidas to
King Kasiputra Bhagabhadra, the Savior, then reigning prosperously in the
fourteenth year of his kingship. Three important precepts when practiced
lead to heaven: self-restraint, charity, conscientiousness."

This shows that Heliodorus had become a worshiper of Vishnu and was well
versed in the texts and ways pertaining to this religion. It can only be
guessed how many other Greeks became converted to Vaishnavism if such a
notable ambassador did. This conclusively shows the Greek appreciation for
India and its philosophy.

It was General Alexander Cunningham who was doing an archeological survey
in 1877 who first took notice of the significance of the column. However,
he did not attend to the inscription that was on it because it was covered
with vermilion. This was because the pilgrims who worshiped had a custom to
smear the column with vermilion.

It was only in January of 1901 when a Mr. Lake uncovered the paint from
what he thought was some lettering. Once the ancient Brahmi text was
translated, the historical significance of the column became ever more
apparent.

The British Sanskritists, due to their superior views of themselves, had
developed the idea that much of the Vedic traditions and legends of Lord
Krishna had to have been incorporated from the Bible and the stories of
Jesus. However, this Heliodorus column was the archeological discovery that
proved to the disappointed British that knowledge of Krishna and the
Vaishnava tradition predated Christianity by at least 200 years. The column
indicated that the Indians did not adopt legends of Christ to put in
their *Puranas
*to be used for the stories of Krishna as the British had hypothesized
since this gave proof that knowledge of Krishna predated Jesus by almost
200 years.

Another point to consider is that if a Greek official was so impressed with
the philosophy of Vaishnavism that he converted to it in 200 BCE, then it
means that Vaishnavism and the element of spiritual devotion to God, as
found in the *Bhakti *tradition, had to have originated several hundred
years if not several thousand years earlier in order for it to have
developed to a stage wherein the Greeks were so much impressed by it. So
this is a serious historical site to see.

The Heliodorus column also indicates that the Vedic tradition accepted
converts at that time. Only after the difficulties between Hindus and
Muslims was there a hesitancy on the part of Hindus to accept converts to
the Vedic tradition. The Vedic religion saw itself as universal and
welcomed all people into its embrace. As Raychaudhari writes: "The
Beshnagar record testifies to the proselytizing zeal of the Bhagavatas
[Vaishnavas] in the pre-Christian centuries, and shows that their religion
was excellent enough to capture the hearts of cultured Greeks, and catholic
enough to admit them into its fold."


This evidence further shows that Greece was but a part of Vedic culture and
repeated what it and its philosophers had learned from the Vedic sages
rather than being a source of the higher levels of philosophy as some
people think. Furthermore, this evidence bears witness to the fact that the
Christian tradition and its main element of devotion or *bhakti *to God was
found in Vedic culture long before it appeared within the confines of
Christianity. In fact, much of the deeper spiritual philosophy in
Christianity is but a repeat of what had been previously established and
much more deeply developed in the older Vedic tradition. So to fathom the
deeper aspects of the different levels of devotion to God, one can
investigate the Vedic and Vaishnava tradition to learn the finer details.

Additional archeological finds include the Mora Well and Ghosundi
Inscriptions, which tell us that the rich and complex Vaishnava conception
of God and full expansions of the Godhead into the material universes were
already well established in the first two centuries before Christ. Seven
miles west of Mathura in the small and unimposing village of Mora, General
Cunningham made another vital find regarding the historicity of
Vaishnavism. In 1882, on the terrace of an ancient well, he discovered a
large stone slab filled with inscriptions. Although more than half of the
writing had already peeled away on the right side, the remainder was
legible. It was transcribed, and a facsimile of the inscription was
published in the Archaeological Survey of India's *Annual Report*. The
message was clear. Not only was Krishna worshiped in the centuries before
Christ, but also His expansions or associates, especially "the five heroes
of the Vrishni Clan." Scholarly research makes evident that these five are
Krishna (Vasudeva), Balarama (Sankarshana), Pradyumna, Samba, and
Aniruddha.

This was the proof that the complex theology, metaphysics, and cosmology of
*Sanatana-dharma* and Vaishnavism definitely existed in an advanced state
centuries before Christ. The Mora Well inscription is an important
archeological proof of this historical fact.

Furthermore, in the village of Ghosundi in the Chitor district of Rajasthan
is found the Ghosundi Inscription, which largely duplicates the message of
the Mora Well Inscription. Kaviraja Shyamala Dasa first brought this
evidence to light in *The Journal of the Bengal Asiatic Society*. Today,
the inscription can be inspected in the Victoria Hall Museum in Udaipur.

The surviving part of this inscription relevant to this chapter reads as
follows: "*[this] railing of stone for the purposes of worship is [caused
to be made] in the Narayana-compound, [dedicated] to the Blessed Ones
[bhagavabhyam] Samkarshana and Vasudeva, the gods…"*

The inscription is in a form of Sanskrit script called Northern Brahmi
script, which dates the inscription as being from the second century BCE in
either the late Maurya or early Sunga periods. An almost identical
inscription also was uncovered nearby and is called the Hathi-vada
Inscription. According to K. P. Jayaswal of the Archaeological Survey of
India, these inscriptions demonstrate that not only the Kshatriyas but also
the Brahmanas or priestly and intellectual class worshiped Krishna as the
"Lord of all," and, thus, Vaishnavism was entrenched in the entire Indian
society.

The same point is made in the famous Nanaghat Cave Inscription in the state
of Maharashtra, where Vasudeva and Sankarshana (or Krishna and Balarama)
are included in an invocation of a Brahmana. On epigraphical grounds, this
inscription is dated conclusively as coming from the second half of the
first century BCE. Additionally, Raychaudhuri reports:

The Nanaghat Inscription shows further that the Bhagavata [Vaishnava]
religion was no longer confined to Northern India, but had spread to the
south and had captured the hearts of the sturdy people of Maharashtra. From
Maharashtra it was destined to spread to the Tamil country and then flow
back with renewed vigor to the remotest corners of the Hindu Vedic world.


There is also much numismatic evidence that corroborates the antiquity of
Krishna. For instance, excavations at Al-Khanum, along the border of
Afghanistan and the Soviet Union
, conducted by P. Bernard and a French
archeological expedition, unearthed six rectangular bronze coins issued by
the Indo-Greek ruler Agathocles (180?-?165 BCE). The coins had script
written in both Greek and Brahmi and, most interestingly, show an image of
Vishnu, or Vasudeva, carrying a Chakra and a pear-shaped vase, or
conchshell, which are two of the four main sacred symbols of God in
Vaishnavism.

*

DATE OF LORD RAMA
*

Another point we could discuss is the approximate date of Lord Rama. Lord
Rama appeared in the Solar Dynasty, but even the time frame of His
appearance may shed more light on the antiquity of Vedic culture.
Naturally, scholars have different views on when He may have existed. Some
say He was here a few thousand years before Lord Krishna. In fact, in an
April 2011 edition of the *Times of India*, Saurabh Kwatra writes that
using the zodiac and the recorded *tithis*, days marked according to the
phases of the moon, he calculated that the birth of Lord Rama, as related
in the Valmiki *Ramayana*, was December 4th, 7323 BCE.
While using other
forms of planetary computer software, others have come up with other dates.

Though these may be some of the more recent calculations, still the
tradition places the era of Lord Rama much earlier than that. For example,
the *Vayu Purana *(70.48) says:
*

tretayuge chaturvinshe ravanastapasah kshayat
*I*

ramam dasharathim prapya saganah kshayamlyavan
*II

This relates that the misbehaving Ravana was killed with his kiths and kins
in a war with Rama in the 24th Treta-yuga. We are presently in the
28th *chaturyuga
*(cycle of 1000 *yugas*) of the Vaivasvat *manvantara*. Furthermore, this
is corroborated by Rupa Goswami in his* Laghu Bhagavatamrita *that Rama
appeared in the Treta-yuga of the 24th yuga cycle. There are 71 cycles of
the four *yugas *in a *manvantara *period, which would mean the appearance
of Lord Rama would be about 18 million years ago.

Another interesting point is that in the Sunderkand section of the
Valmiki *Ramayana
*(5.4.27)* *elephants with four tusks are mentioned as standing at the
gates of Ravana's palace
. Also in 5.27.12 an ogress named Trijata sees in
her dream Lord Rama mounted on a great elephant with four tusks
. The fact
that they knew of elephants with four tusks is very intriguing since,
scientifically speaking, a quick reference to the elephant with four tusks
is called a Mastondontoidea, which is calculated to have evolved around 38
million years ago, and is suspected of becoming extinct around 15 million
years ago. This would help verify the ancient date of Lord Rama to be
around 18 million years ago. Interesting... isn't it?

The more we look in the right places for the right evidence, the more we
see that the Vedic tradition indeed holds the universal spiritual truths.

CHAPTER NOTES

 

1. B. N. Narahari Achar, Origin of Indian Civilization, Edited by Bal Ram Singh, Center for Indic Studies, Dartmought, USA, 2010, p. 203.

2. Nicholas Kazanas, Origin of Indian Civilization, Edited by Bal Ram Singh, Center for Indic Studies, Dartmought, USA, 2010, p. 53.

3. B. N. Narahari Achar, Origin of Indian Civilization, Edited by Bal Ram Singh, Center for Indic Studies, Dartmought, USA, 2010, p. 225.

4. Ibid., p. 231.

5. Ibid., p. 244.

6. Nicholas Kazanas, Origin of Indian Civilization, Edited by Bal Ram Singh, Center for Indic Studies, Dartmouth, USA, 2010, p. 53.

7. V. S. Agrawal, India in the Days of Panini, 1953.

8. B. N. Narahari Achar, Origin of Indian Civilization, Edited by Bal Ram Singh, Center for Indic Studies, Dartmought, USA, 2010, p. 246-7.

 

[This article is on www.stephen-knapp.com ]

 

 

 

Related posts:-


Krishna is not a myth, he is a reality!

Krishna, a reality – archeological proof.

Birth date of Krishna (astrologically)

Krishna lived for 125 years!

An examination of the chronology of Rigveda --- Narahari Achar

The sky map at the time of Mahabharata war.

IVC was the post Mahabharata culture (World Tamil Conference series 14)

Inscriptional evidence for Mahabharata times.

 

When was Rama born?

Rama's birth date.

 

On Krishna's Tamilnadu connection:-

 

http://www.tamilhindu.com/2009/12/who-is-nappinnai/  (On Nappinnai in Tamil)

The original name of Nappinnai.

 

 

 

 

 

12 comments:

jayasree said...


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Arun Upadhyay
Date: Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: Non-random-Thoughts:“Time Line of Lord Krishna Supported by Science” - Stephen Knapp.
To: jayasree


For the first time from your blog, I learnt about Galla (or Kalla in Tamil) meaning escapist from war. Interestingly, Galli was name of the Kirata king of Nepal crowned after his father Jitedasti was killed in Mahabharata war on side of Pandavas.

Aticle of Sri Narahari Achar about fixing date of Mahabharata 36 years after Kali in stead of 36 years before Kali was published in same book which had also published Janamejaya inscriptions of 27-11-3014 BC for grants to Kedaranatha and Tungabdahsra temple of Sitarama which proved the correct chronology that Mahabharata was 36 years after Kali.

Reasons of error are the following-
(1) Before starting any study after British rule, we first assume that all Indians are liars and they have given false dates & descriptions. So every date has to be ignored or changed.
(2) NASA Calender software tells that it needs to be corrected as per historical dates as the estimates for slowing of earth's axial rotation is highly uncertain for ancient eras. The error is about 70 hours for 3000 BC. It does not tell that historic dates are to be changed.
(3) The eclipse cycle repeats after 18 years 10.5 days. Its half periods of 3339 tithis are also symmetric and indicated in Rigveda

त्रीणि शतानि त्रीसहस्राण्यग्निं त्रिंशच्च देवा नव चा सपर्यन्। (ऋक् ३/९/९, १०/५२/६, वा. यजु. ३३/७)

So, Mahabharata also mentions that many astronomical signs are similar to Mahabharata war when Dwaraka drowned after death of Srikrishna 36 years later.

चतुर्दशी पञ्चदशी कृतेयं राहुणा पुनः। प्राप्ते वै भारते युद्धे प्राप्ता चाद्य क्षयाय नः॥१९॥
विमृशन्नेव कालं तं परिकल्प्य जनार्दनः। मेने प्राप्तं स षट्त्रिंशं वर्षे वै केशिसूदनः॥२०॥(महाभारत, मौसल पर्व, २/१९-२०)

(4) Rik jyotish also inicates 19 years yuga after which positions of sun-moon tally within 2 hours. So, eclipse position will be almost same 72 years 42 days after Mahabharata war.

You have already quoted Janamejaya inscriptions. I am sending originals with comments.
Karttikeya had captured Krauncha Dvipa which has Krauncha mountain-both in shape of Krauncha bird (north America and Rockies-both are in shape of flying bird). For use in war, he devised a short hand Tamil script, for technical texts, full Gatha script was used. The script used by his navy (Mayuri) is still used as same Maori culture & language in Pacific from Hawai to Newzealand. So, the inscriptions of Mexico can be still read as per present Kannada script. I am not indicating Tamil-kannada rivalry. For use of Army-navy, short-hand language(same symbols for ka, kha, ga, gha etc) was used. Gatha script in ancient times could be similar to Kannada based on Brahmi script. Karttikeya and 7th Brahma Apantaratama on Gautami banks were in about 15800 BC. This was the attack by Bharata indicated by Greek writers that India had not attacked any other country since past 15000 years (before Alexander) as it was self sufficient in food and minerals. This was copied by Maxmuller who dropped 1 zero and declared 1500 BC as start of Vedic culture. After the theft and distortion, Mac-Crindle wrote another edition of Indika in 1927 to change '15000 years' to 'never'. I am attaching my article on -Time & works of Narasimha' which has been quoted by some Americal books as only explanation of same Maori culture in whole of Pacific.

Shunda was name of Indonesia as it looks like elephant trunc in map of Asia or of world. That indicates accurate mapping in Ramayana era.-Arun

jayasree said...

Thanks Mr Arun for the details.

That Kallars were engaged in guarding the temples can be known from the 14th century inscription of Marudeesar temple at Kadaththur in Udumalpet in Coimbatore district.

Manu smrithi 10-22 tells about the 7 generations after a Kshatriya had renounced ksahtriyahood as Galla, (kallar in Tamil),
Malla (mallar in Tamil - there were MaLLar in Chera land as per Sangam text of Pathirrup patthu)
Likkhivi (the Licchavis)
Nata
Karana
Khasa
Dravida (Shudraka or Dravida raja who authored Mricchakatika was so called because he came in the 7th generation of Vratya kshatriya.)

When further degeneration did not happen, they maintained the status quo. That is how there were Galla / Kalla lineage. There were Mallar or malla lineage and so on.

The Pallvas were Mallas. There is inscriptional evidence to say that the Pallavas were the descendants of Ashwaththaama, son of Dronacharya. Though Dronacharya was a Brahmin by birth, he was more a like a kshatriya. His son Ashwaththaama lived like a kshatriya. But at the end of the Mahabharata war he had to live incognito. This forced vratyahood on him and his descendants. His first generation descendant must have lived as Galla and that lineage could have lasted for long. Sometime later they became Mallas. The differences are such that while a ksahtriya lived by the weapon the gallas used weapon only for protection. The Mallas did not use weapons but depended on muscle power (mal yuddha). A specific generation could freeze the life style they adopted and their offsprings could follow them for ever.

That is how the Kalla parampara and malla parampara or even the Dravida parampara had come into being. The Dravida raja, Shudraka was a king of his region though he did not claim himself as a kshatriya. They held on to the Vratya status though they were able to exhibit the kshatriya qualities. Why they had stuck to their vratya title might perhaps be due to the fact that people in those days maintained the record of lineage and there was no stigma attached to a vratya title.

jayasree said...

On Skanda I have a line of history based on Tamil texts. I will send you the link when I post it.

I differ on the location of Krauncha Dweepa. However the shape of Great lakes in N America is close to the shape of Krauncha bird. The tribes by name Anishinabe (A-nishi- naabhi - sounds Sanskrit)were the early settlers there. Their creator is Gichi Manidoo - manidoo sounds like Tamil Manida which means man. Their language has stunted form of 'zha' (ழ)the unique letter of Thamizh. They called their language as Anishinaabemowin - the mowin sounds like mozhi in Tamil which means language. They claim to have come from Turtle land. Only South east Asia including Sundaland was home to giant turtles. The turtle (kurma) connection is valid only for Sunda land as that land was continuously churned by mantle disturbances. The Mandarin of the Chinese might even be related to comparison of Mandara mountain in Kurma avatara which was felt in Sunda land. The Sunda in sunda straits is because of Sunda - Upasunda - the daitya asuras.

I am currently writing in Tamil on Sunda land connection to Daityas (Chinese and Incas)and Danavas (Mayas and Druids whose parentage came from Druhyus born to Sarmishtai, the danava woman.)

jayasree said...

In the article above, I have forgotten to make a mention of Krishna's fight with a Pandyan king. That king was killed and his son Sarangadwaja (also known as Malayadwaja) was nursing a grouse against Krishna. He wanted to side with Kauravas but was persuaded by Drishtadyumna to side with Pandavas. A whole chapter is devoted to his fight in the battle. (8-20)He was killed by Ashwaththama in the battle.

This also shows that Krishna had been to the Pandyan lands which however was not chronicled in Mahabharata or any other text. This also raises our curiosity why this king finally agreed to fight on the side of Krishna. Perhaps some commercial interests were involved. The entire Bharat divided between two powerful kings, one having control over the northern route to Europe through Gandahar (Gandhari connection) and other from Gujarat (Dwaraka) wishing to wrest control over that route perhaps worked in the mind of all participants.

The Tamil kings of the South had a better trade route upto Dwaraka passing through either the sea route or on southern route but beyond that they had to make sure that the northern route is less expensive and safe. This prompted Sarangadwaja to side with Krishna of Dwaraka.

That economics and commerce dictated the choice of whom to side with in the war is made known from the development of IVC culture as a trade hub. The IVC was post Mahabharata phenomenon that flourished in Yuddhishtra yuga that was mostly concentrated in the regions of Krishna's clans and not in Kaurava regions. This lasted peacefully for 1500 years until climate started playing truant with their life that left Sarasvathi completely dry.

It was when the then Dwaraka (now known as Bet Dwaraka) suffered inundation, all the 18 clans who accompanied Krishna from Gangetic region to Dwraka were once again forced to leave. This time they were led by Agasthya to South Tamilnadu through the southern route. The kingly class called Vels (Bel) and elite ones also migrated to Tamil nadu along with them. The Vels made very good rulers but were never accepted by the 3 kings of Tamil lands. There are many sangam poem on Vels.

They spoke a stunted Tamil called Kodum Thamizh (Apabrahmsa) which later became Kannada. (For whatever I am writing above, there are literary evidences to support. I am elaborating them all in my Tamil blog.) It was after their re-location to Tamil lands, the presently available grammatical work Tholkaappiyam was formulated to include these people also.

By the 2nd century AD, the Vel kings were completely wiped off. The migrated clans (mostly artisans) started having trouble from then onwards which came to be known as caste conflicts. But if one reads the inscriptions found in Kongu region (coimbatore) it becomes more than clear that acceptance problem and business rivalry had led to non acceptance of these people. The migration had continued from IVC region until 1000 years ago. These people brought Tantric culture (Idangai / left handed / vamachara) which was stoutly resisted by locals who followed Valangai / Dakshinachara / right handed culture.

Inscriptions show that Vamachara people were given separate lands and right to build temples. People of the other sect were not allowed entry into these temples and in the locations where the sect lived. Whenever rivalries broke out, the temples were broken and settlements torched - this is the precursor to the so-called caste conflict between caste Hindus and dalits. The inscriptions give a different picture which I explained above.

jayasree said...

In the article above, I have forgotten to make a mention of Krishna's fight with a Pandyan king. That king was killed and his son Sarangadwaja (also known as Malayadwaja) was nursing a grouse against Krishna. He wanted to side with Kauravas but was persuaded by Drishtadyumna to side with Pandavas. A whole chapter is devoted to his fight in the battle. (8-20)He was killed by Ashwaththama in the battle.

This also shows that Krishna had been to the Pandyan lands which however was not chronicled in Mahabharata or any other text. This also raises our curiosity why this king finally agreed to fight on the side of Krishna. Perhaps some commercial interests were involved. The entire Bharat divided between two powerful kings, one having control over the northern route to Europe through Gandahar (Gandhari connection) and other from Gujarat (Dwaraka) wishing to wrest control over that route perhaps worked in the mind of all participants.

The Tamil kings of the South had a better trade route upto Dwaraka passing through either the sea route or on southern route but beyond that they had to make sure that the northern route is less expensive and safe. This prompted Sarangadwaja to side with Krishna of Dwaraka.

That economics and commerce dictated the choice of whom to side with in the war is made known from the development of IVC culture as a trade hub. The IVC was post Mahabharata phenomenon that flourished in Yuddhishtra yuga that was mostly concentrated in the regions of Krishna's clans and not in Kaurava regions. This lasted peacefully for 1500 years until climate started playing truant with their life that left Sarasvathi completely dry.

It was when the then Dwaraka (now known as Bet Dwaraka) suffered inundation, all the 18 clans who accompanied Krishna from Gangetic region to Dwraka were once again forced to leave. This time they were led by Agasthya to South Tamilnadu through the southern route. The kingly class called Vels (Bel) and elite ones also migrated to Tamil nadu along with them. The Vels made very good rulers but were never accepted by the 3 kings of Tamil lands. There are many sangam poem on Vels.

They spoke a stunted Tamil called Kodum Thamizh (Apabrahmsa) which later became Kannada. (For whatever I am writing above, there are literary evidences to support. I am elaborating them all in my Tamil blog.) It was after their re-location to Tamil lands, the presently available grammatical work Tholkaappiyam was formulated to include these people also.

By the 2nd century AD, the Vel kings were completely wiped off. The migrated clans (mostly artisans) started having trouble from then onwards which came to be known as caste conflicts. But if one reads the inscriptions found in Kongu region (coimbatore) it becomes more than clear that acceptance problem and business rivalry had led to non acceptance of these people. The migration had continued from IVC region until 1000 years ago. These people brought Tantric culture (Idangai / left handed / vamachara) which was stoutly resisted by locals who followed Valangai / Dakshinachara / right handed culture.

Inscriptions show that Vamachara people were given separate lands and right to build temples. People of the other sect were not allowed entry into these temples and in the locations where the sect lived. Whenever rivalries broke out, the temples were broken and settlements torched - this is the precursor to the so-called caste conflict between caste Hindus and dalits. The inscriptions give a different picture which I explained above.

SantoshReddy said...

Hello Jayasree,

Regarding mahabharata war,everybody are looking from one dates perspective but in Mahabharata war, 18 Akshounis were present and for such a huge army ,anybody thought how much area was needed to stand or to fight and how metal have been used for war.....i hope this research of some people like you with different approach might make Mahabharata more Authentic and here is the link,if you can go through this i will be gald.....and waiting to see your perspective on this article...if you like that article please publish in ur blog as some other might get benefitted by it.

http://www.portraitofindia.com/mbdating1.htm

Anshuman said...

Hi Jayasree, After long time I enterd my blog dashboard, my wayback machine now in front of my eyes, excellent write-up, Soon must write as trail to your campaign

jayasree said...

Dear Mr Santhosh Reddy,

Dating a particular event on the basis of the size of the army quoted in the event is not a valid approach. If we take your view on size of Akshausinis as a valid point for dating, would you be ready to do the same for Ramayana also?

For, in Ramayana also we come across a description of the size of the army - not of men or horses or chariots that Mahabharata describes - but of vanaras!!

Take a look at these verses of chapter 28 of Yuddha khanda of Valmiki Ramayana.

" "O, king! Do you observe those monkeys resembling huge elephants in rut, rising like banyan trees on the banks of River Ganga or Sala trees on Himalayas? Those warriors, able to change their form at will, are irresistible, equal to celestials and demons, and in a battle, are endowed with the valour of the gods."

There are twenty one thousand crores, a thousand Shankus and a hundred Vrindas of these monkeys." (verses 2,3 &4)

What are these crores and Shanku? From 33rd verse onwards the explanation is given:-

""Wise men call a hundred lakhs as a crore. A hundred thousand crores is reckoned as a Shanku."

"A hundred thousand Shankus are said to be one Maha Shanku.

A hundred thousand Maha Shankus are called one Vrindam here.

A hundred thousand Vrindas are said to be one Maha vrindam.

A hundred thousand Mahavrindas are called one Padmam here.

A hundred thousand padmas are said to be one Mahapadmam.

A hundred thousand Mahapadmas are called one Kharvam here.

A hundred thousand kharvas are said to be one Mahakharvam.

A hundred thousand Mahakharvas are called one Samundram.

A hundred thousand Samudras are said to be one ogha here.

A hundred thousand oghas are acclaimed a one Mahaugha."

"This Sugreeva, the king of monkeys, having great strength and valour, always surrounded by a colossal army, is approaching you to make war, accompanied by the valiant Vibhishana and the ministers, as also a hundred thousand crores of Shankas, a thousand Mahashankus, a hundred Vrindas, a thousand mahavrindas, a hundred padmas, a thousand Mahapadmas, a hundred kharves, samudras and Mahaughas of the same number, and a crore of Mahanghas wholearmy as such is identical of an ocean." (verses 33 to 39)

This description shows that the narrator (Shuka to Ravana) wanted to convey that Rama's army of vanaras was like an ocean. To drive home the point he reminds Ravana of all the maximum numbers existed then and says that many numbers were present in the army of Rama.

If you take the literal head count of Vanaras told by this number, then that might far exceed the number of monkeys existed through out the globe until now. So it is deduced that it is a kind of comparison by exaggeration told by a narrator in the story.

(cont'd)


jayasree said...

Coming to Mahabharata, the narration of the composition of Akshausini is given by Sauti to other rishis. There he gives the description of sub- sub parts that make up an Akshausini.

(from Mahabharata 2nd chapter in Adi parva) :-

"One chariot, one elephant, five foot-soldiers, and three horses form one Patti;

three pattis make one Sena-mukha;

three sena-mukhas are called a Gulma;

three gulmas, a Gana;

three ganas, a Vahini;

three vahinis together are called a Pritana;

three pritanas form a Chamu;

three chamus, one Anikini;

and an anikini taken ten times forms, as it is styled by those who know, an Akshauhini.

O ye best of Brahmanas, arithmeticians have calculated that the number of chariots in an Akshauhini is twenty-one thousand eight hundred and seventy.

The measure of elephants must be fixed at the same number.

O ye pure, you must know that the number of foot-soldiers is one hundred and nine thousand, three hundred and fifty,

the number of horse is sixty-five thousand, six hundred and ten." (end quote)

***
Like this there were 18 akshausinis in the Mahabharata war. All these were assembled at the banks of the river Sarasvathy in a place known as 'Samanta Panchaka'.

Just before describing the size of an Aksahusini which Sauti did when asked by fellow rishis, he makes an important mention about what this place, Samnata Panchaka is all about.

It was the place where Parasurama killed the ksahtriyas that left 5 pools of blood. Five adjoining pools gave the place the name, Samanta Panchaka. Samnata Panchaka means 'the adjoining five'. Parasurama invokes his pithrus there and gets an assurance that his sins of killing kshatriys will be absolved. From then onwards, that place became a holy place where the sin of killing in war is absolved.

Sauti continues to say that " The region that lieth near unto those lakes of gory water, from that time hath been celebrated as Samanta-panchaka the holy. The wise have declared that every country should be distinguished by a name significant of some circumstance which may have rendered it famous. "

This makes it clear that Mahabharata was fought in a particular region on the banks of river Sarasavthy which already got notoriety on account of a war between Parasurama and other kshatriyas and was called as Samanta Panchaka. So the location was not widespread - nor far away as indicated in the article you have quoted.

Now let us examine how the 18 akshausinis could have assembled there.
If we read carefully the passage that describes the numbers in an akshausini, we get to read this sentence following the description of ahsausinsi by rishi Sauti.

"These, O Brahmanas, as fully explained by me, are the numbers of an Akshauhini as said by those acquainted with the principles of numbers."

Sauti had done what Shuka did in Yuddha khanda of Ramayana - that of narrating the size denoted by the numbers. What in reality was possible was that there must have been 18 units of army - each one of it quite huge resembling an akshausini.

Later in chapter 4-72, there comes the description of who brought how many akshausinis. King of Kasi and Saivya brought one akshausini. Drushtadhyumna brought one akshausini. Like this Krita varman and King of Chedi arrived with one akashusini each. But these could not have been the exact number of akshasusini. Every huge unit of army brought by important allies must have been counted as an Akashausini.

jayasree said...

@ Anshumnan,
Thanks

SantoshReddy said...

Jayasree,

Thats an excellent description...Thanks very much...!!! :)

My whole perspective was to show that mahabharata is authentic...unlike soem argue its just a an Epic Story....n i wanna bring that point up thats it... :)

Prasanna Parthasarathi said...

Why is vanara: assumed to be monkeys? why can't it be vana+nara: meaning people who dwell in forests. I donot have a profound knowledge, but then I would like to get clarified.