Mr Nilesh Oak claims to have dated an ancient update of Surya Siddhanta based on a verse from Surya Siddhanta. Following account taken from my book Myth of 'The Epoch of Arundhati' of Nilesh Nilkanth Oak establishes why he is wrong in his claim.
*****
Kali Yuga date is Siddhanta based and with the 3rd
Shaka Era in progress now, time computation is well laid out to be accurate to
seconds. It involves only Gaṇita or mathematics and identifies time through
mathematical calculation. To cite an
example an inscription found at Parthivasekara puram in Kanyakumari
district about a grant given to a Vedic learning centre records the date in
number of days such as “fourteen hundred thousand forty nine thousand and
eighty seventh day having expired after the beginning of kali Yuga”[1] This points
out to the 9th century CE when deducted from the traditional date of
Kali Yuga. Cross-referentially the king in whose name this has been issued is also
found to belong to the 9th century. The kind of computation in
number of days found in this inscription is a special feature of Jyothisha
Siddhantas.
The Siddhanta gives theoretical exposition of the
rules and concepts of different features of astronomy and time computation. The
time period of the Siddhanta is given only mathematically by calculating from
the beginning of the Kalpa, the Maha Yuga or the Yuga at the time of
composition of the Siddhanta. Without knowing this basic lakshana of
Siddhanta, Nilesh Oak has attempted to ‘date an ‘update’ of Surya Siddhanta in
an article[2]
and a video[3]
recently. This is being highlighted here to show the lacuna in his
understanding of the fundamentals in arriving at a date.
Picking out a verse in Surya Siddhanta that says
that when seen from a place situated at no-latitude (niraksha desa samsthana)
i.e. at equator, the pole star (Dhruva tara) is at the horizon,[4]
Nilesh Oak has gone on to date the Surya Siddhanta (according to him, an update
among many updates of Surya Siddhanta). Thinking that the verse refers to
visual sighting of pole stars at the two ends (north and south) he ran his
simulator to locate the time when pole stars were visibly present at the two
horizons (north and south) and arrived at a date 12,000 BCE!
No Siddhanta gives a hint like this to find out the
time of its composition nor does it give such a hint to derive any other date.
Siddhanta being Gaṇita (mathematics), it only talks about calculations for
deriving any time period.
The same idea of Surya Siddhanta used by Nilesh Oak
to “date” Surya Siddhanta is also found in Siddhanta Shiromani by Bhaskara II,
that “a man situated on the equator sees both the north and south poles
touching (the north and south points of) the horizon.”[5]
Would Nilesh Oak accept that Bhaskara II also lived in 12,000 BCE?
There need not be a star present at the point, but
the location is Dhruva, a fixed point. The Siddhantas mention this as a
universal statement. The same idea can be seen in modern astronomy in the
context of Declination. The Wikipedia article on Declination gives the same
idea.[6] Can
it be used for deciding the date of writing the article?
From another verse in Surya Siddhanta[7]
Nilesh Oak has claimed to have deduced the obliquity at the time of sighting
the pole stars at the horizons, using it as an additional hint to substantiate
the date he got from the simulator. That verse tells about the maximum extent
of one fifteenth part of the circumference of the earth, i.e. 24˚that the Sun
goes on either side of the equator (solstices). That is a standard statement
and the calculation of rising periods, ascensional differences and other
details are given for that limit. Bhaskara II mentions this in his book besides
giving methods to derive the same for latitudes less than 24˚N.[8] By
Nilesh Oak’s claims, Siddhanta Shiromani of Bhaskara II can also be traced to
12,000 BCE by interpreting that the axial tilt was 24˚ when Bhaskara II wrote
his Siddhanta.
This ‘research’ of Nilesh Oak exposes how he picks
out his evidences or Basic sentences without recourse to the admissibility of
them from the text. His first step is to interpret a verse in the way he thinks
is right, without any background knowledge of the fundamentals. The next step
is to check it in the simulator. Then the research is done. The same pattern
laid already in the discovery of the “Epoch of Arundhati” is replicated in
other ‘researches’.
The Surya Siddhanta dating ‘research’ is highlighted
here to show how Nilesh Oak is woefully lacking in fundamentals. Be it the
tradition of Arundhati or methodology of Popper or Patanjali or nimitta of
Samhita or Siddhanta to understand the calculation of time, Nilesh Oak can be
seen looking through a limited ‘window’ to claim success.
******
Another issue with his SS article:
In the India Facts article by Mr Oak on Surya Siddhanta
( http://indiafacts.org/ancient-updates-to-surya-siddhanta/) he has written that "that the Earth’s obliquity was indeed 24 degree in the year 2900 BCE and 12000 BCE!" That means the earth reached 24 degree tilt in 2900 BCE and before that in 12k BCE. Means the earth had oscillated within a span of 9000 years! His software shows that span only and not 26K or 41K span. Vedic wisdom says that the span was 7200 years. The difference was due to precession calibrated from the present value in the softwares. The rate of precession is not constant at all times. That is why our seers had mentioned in terms of time and degrees. This limited precession is explained in my video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6xc8HPfR4&t=2448s
Another issue with his SS article:
In the India Facts article by Mr Oak on Surya Siddhanta
( http://indiafacts.org/ancient-updates-to-surya-siddhanta/) he has written that "that the Earth’s obliquity was indeed 24 degree in the year 2900 BCE and 12000 BCE!" That means the earth reached 24 degree tilt in 2900 BCE and before that in 12k BCE. Means the earth had oscillated within a span of 9000 years! His software shows that span only and not 26K or 41K span. Vedic wisdom says that the span was 7200 years. The difference was due to precession calibrated from the present value in the softwares. The rate of precession is not constant at all times. That is why our seers had mentioned in terms of time and degrees. This limited precession is explained in my video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6xc8HPfR4&t=2448s
[1]
Travancore Archaeological
Series, Volume I, page 30.
[2]
“Ancient Updates to Surya
Siddhanta”, Nilesh N Oak and Rupa Bhatty, 19-03-2019 http://indiafacts.org/ancient-updates-to-surya-siddhanta/
[4]
Surya Siddhanta 12- 43 &44
[5]
Siddhanta Shiromani. 3-48,
Translation by Pundit Bapu Deva Sastri.
[7]
Surya Siddhanta 12-68
[8]
Siddhanta Shiromani. 9-19
& 20
