This blog aims at bringing out the past glory and history of India, Hinduism and its forgotten values and wisdom. This is not copyrighted so as to reach genuine seekers of these information. Its my prayer that only genuine seekers - and not vandals & plagiarists - come to this site.
Other episodes: Part 2 "Muruga initiated the first ever Vedic Homa" Part 3 ""No curse on the Big Temple"
Part 4 "Dravidian architecture does not mean 'Tamil' architecture"
In the light of the raging controversy over the language to be used in the Kumbhabhishekam of Brihadeeswarar temple of Tanjore, I was interviewed by Mr Sai Ganesh owning the YouTube channel "Desiya Siragugal". The 1st part of the video was released today. It can be viewed here:
In this part I have brought out the information on the origin of the Cholas. Quoting two inscriptions, one by the son of Rajaraja chola and the other by the grand son of Rajaraja chola, I have shown that the Cholas claimed their origins from Manu and also from Rama. They claimed direct ancestry from Bharata, the son of Dushyanta and Shakuntala. I have highlighted the literary sources too that claim Rama as the ancestor of the Cholas.
These evidences raise a serious question on the exclusivity of Tamil origins, mainly of Cholas. It also highlights the pan-Indian nature of the Cholas and through them the Tamils and their practices. More in the next video.
தஞ்சை பெரிய கோயில் குடமுழுக்கு
நெருங்கி கொண்டிருக்கிறது. இந்த வேளையில் குடமுழுக்கை சமஸ்க்ருதத்தில் செய்யக்கூடாது
என்றும் தமிழில்தான் செய்ய வேண்டும் என்றும் ஆர்பாட்டம் செய்து
கொண்டிருக்கிறார்கள்.இது தொடர்பான விளக்கங்களைக் காணொளி
மூலமாக மக்களுக்கு எடுத்துச் சொல்ல விரும்புகிறேன். அந்த முயற்சியின் முதல்
பகுதியாகராஜராஜன் தமிழன் தானா என்ற கேள்விக்கு இந்தக் காணொளி விடை
கொடுக்கிறது.
இதில் முதலாவதாக தஞ்சாவூர் என்பதே
தமிழ்ச் சொல்லா என்று ஆராய்ந்து அது தஞ்சலா
என்னும் சாதகப் பறவையின் பெயரால் அழைக்கப்படுகிறது என்று தெளிவு படுத்தி உள்ளேன்.
தஞ்சலா என்பது சமஸ்க்ருதப் பெயர்!
அடுத்ததாக சோழர் வம்சாவளியை
ஆராய்ந்துள்ளேன். ராஜராஜன் மகன் முதலாம் ராஜேந்திரனின் ஆறாம் ஆண்டில்
வெளியிடப்பட்ட திருவாலங்காடு செப்பேட்டில்
கொடுக்கப்பட்டுள்ள சோழர் வம்சாவளியை சுட்டிக் காட்டியுள்ளேன். அதில் சோழன்
பரம்பரை மனுவில் ஆரம்பித்து
ராமனின் வம்சாவளியுடன் ஒத்துப் போவதைக் காட்டியுள்ளேன். அந்த வம்சாவளியில் சிபியும், அவனுக்குப் பின்னாளில் துஷ்யந்தனும்
வருகிறார்கள். துஷ்யந்தன்-சகுந்தலைக்குப் பிறந்த மகனே பரதன்.
அவனுக்குப் பிறந்த மகன் சோழ
வர்மன் என்பவன். அவனே சோழ தேசத்தையும் சோழ வம்சத்தையும் உருவாக்கினவன் என்பதையும் சுட்டிக்
காட்டியுள்ளேன்.
தொடர்ந்து சோழன் என்றால் என்ன அர்த்தம் என்று ஆராய்ந்துள்ளேன்.
சோழன் என்பதற்குத் தமிழில் பொருள் இல்லை என்பதையும் அது சமஸ்க்ருதத்திலிருந்து
வந்தது என்பதையும் நிரூபித்துள்ளேன்.
இந்த ஆதாரங்களின் மூலம் சோழர்கள்
வடக்கிலிருந்து வந்தவர்கள் என்பது தெளிவாகிறது. அவ்வாறு வந்தவர்களைத் தமிழன் என்பதா? வந்தேறி என்பதா?காணொளியைப் பார்க்கவும். பகிரவும்.
Today the resurgent youth of India, convinced about
the dubious nature of the Aryan Invasion / migration theory promoted by western
Indologists and Left leaning Indian Indologists, are craving to see the Vedic
past as old as possible with Ramayana and Mahabharata at any olden time,
preferably much anterior to the Biblical 5000 year- mark of creation. When
marketed with ‘scientific’ and ‘software’ approach, those who have no exposure
to Indic (Vedic) way of life, never had the patience to read or study the
Itihasas and never bothered to know the basics in the subjects needed for
understanding or dating the Itihasas are found to fall a prey to what is being
marketed. The Government funded DD News seems to be the recent victim of this
market trend!
This thought was upper most in my mind when I
watched a video of an interview with Mr Nilesh Nilkanth Oak by DD News on the
date of Ramayana. He is quoting three pieces of information from Valmiki
Ramayana all of which are wrongly interpreted by him. The last two are Sanskrit verses which one
can read and know why he is wrong.
To get a quick idea of all the three, watch the
video from 1-05 to 2-50 minutes.
Was Rama born in Sharad ritu?
The first mis-information and mis-interpretation by
Mr Oak is about the season (ritu) of Rama’s birth. Rama was born in Caitra
month when five planets were in own or exalted houses. Mesha being the exalted
house for the Sun, it is an obvious reference for the Sun in Mesha and not in
any other sign. That is the time of Vasanta ritu.
Contrary to this, Mr Oak claims that the description
of the Valmiki Ramayana of the time of Rama was that of Sharad Ritu!! In support of this he quotes in the video rainfall
and dance of peacocks of which the latter comes in the context of coronation
and not at Rama’s birth. But then that was a comparison and not a real
situation.
(Meaning:Those delighted kings complimented king Dasharatha so
speaking with a loud applause as the peacocks cry in delight when they see the raining great
cloud.)
Can anyone take this to mean
that the event took place in the rainy season? But Mr Oak thinks so. He has a
penchant to treat analogies as actual astronomy references that I have already
revealed in my video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gp5nKmvIRWM&t=584s)
and it is up to us to hold on to our common sense.
Coming to the other reference in
the video, at the time of Rama’s birth there is no reference to rainfall or
sharad season. Mr Oak has mistaken the shower of flowers from the heavens as
referring to real rainfall (पुष्पवृष्टिश्चखात्पतत् 1-18-17 ख= heaven) and flowering season. Such rain of flowers
appears in the context of celebration of any event. For example there was a
rain of flowers at the time of Ram-Sita marriage (पुष्पवर्षोमहानभूत् 1-73- 29 and पुष्पवृष्टिर्महत्यासीदन्तरिक्षात्सुभास्वरा 1-73-37). Such rain of flowers happened when Rama
killed Ravana (निपपातान्तरिक्षाच्चपुष्पवृष्टिस्तदाभुवि1-108-28).
The same expression reported at
the time of Rama’s birth is mis-interpreted by Mr Oak to suit his date. That
date is what he sees in his software designed to deduce the tropical zodiac
whereas the Vedic calendar follows the sidereal zodiac. With least thought and
application about this feature Mr Oak passes on wrong
information in the name of research and that is being aired by Doordarshan
funded by our money. Why
didn’t anyone there in the DD do a minimal research on whether Mr Oak’s claims
are true to what Valmiki says before calling him for the interview?
Valmiki on Vasanta
ritu as the time of Rama’s birth.
Coming to what Valmiki says
about the season of birth of Rama, there is a sequence of events starting at
Vasanta ritu three years before Rama was born. The sage Rishyasringa was
brought to the kingdom by Dasharatha. When the Vasanta ritu started the
preparation for the Asvamedha yajna was also started.
{Meaning: After a lapse some time when spring season
has come the king Dasharatha desired to perform the Vedic ritual(1-12-1)}
The preparation went on for a year at the end of
which the ritual of the Asvamedha was started. This also happened in the
Vasanta ritu, says Ramayana.
पुनःप्राप्तेवसन्तेतुपूर्णःसंवत्सरोऽभवत्|
प्रसवार्थंगतोयष्टुंहयमेधेनवीर्यवान्||
१-१३-१
{Meaning: On completion of one full year another
springtime arrived, and then Dasharatha a determined one to beget progeny by
performing Horse Ritual entered the ritual hall. (1-13-1)}
The ritual of letting out the horse went on for a
year at the end of which the horse returned to the ritual hall.
{Meaning: Then after completion of one year
and on regaining the ritual horse, the Emperor Dasharatha commenced his Vedic
Ritual on the northern banks of River Sarayu. (1-14-1)}
By now the next Vasanta season had commenced when
the final Yajna was done for three days. By that yajna Dasharatha got rid of
his sins (1-14-58) and commenced the Putrakameshtai yajna performed by Rishyasringa.
The Yajna Purusha appeared from that yajna and offered a vessel of “PAyasam”.
It was here there is a description of jubilation in
the ‘antahpura’ (inner chambers or chambers of the queens) that was compared
with the sharad sky illuminated with moon-rays.
harSarashmibhiH uddyotam = lit up with beams of
happiness; tasya antaHpuram = his, palace chambers; abhiraamasya
shaaradasya = heart pleasing, of autumn; chandrasya amshubhiH =
with moon's, rays; nabhaH iva = sky, like; babhuuva = became.
{Meaning: Lit up with beams of happiness
Dasharatha's palace chambers shone forth like the autumnal sky brightened with
moonbeams. (1-16-25)}
The link word ‘iva’ (like) says what this is about. This
is not a reference to the actual sharad season.
The narration further continues with how the PAyasam
was distributed among the three queens of Dasharatha. All these had happened in
immediate succession in the vasanta ritu (The 3 day Asvamedha, Putrakameshti
and drinking of pAyasam).
Upon the completion of the yajna (Putrakameshti) six
ritus passed by and in the twelfth month which happened to be Caitra month Rama
was born. From the previous Vasanta ritu when the yajna was done and pAyasam
was drunk, six ritus had gone by. Once again it was the time of Vasanta ritu.
That is the deduction from Ramayana.
{Meaning: On completion of the ritual, six seasons have passed by; then in the
twelfth month, i.e., in chaitra-mAsa, and on the ninth tithi of that chaitra month
(1-18-8)}
The deduction of the ritu running at the time of
Rama’s birth must be done in this way from the text of Valmiki Ramayana. There is
corroboratory support from other texts of yore for Vasanata ritu in Caitra month.
“Madhus ca mAdhavs ca vAsantikAv ritu” is the pramana from Taittriya
samhita (4.4.11.1) and Vajasaneyi Samhita (13.25), where Madhu
refers to the solar month of caitra. That this was applicable to Rama’s times
is ascertained from the fact that the rules of performance of the Asvamedha
yajna done by Dasharatha as a prelude to Putrakameshti yajna are detailed in
Taittirya samhita. Valmiki says that the rules are as per Kalpa sutras. But all
these rules contain one important element namely, Time! The time was Vasanata
ritu.
The preparations started in Vasanta ritu, the
Asvamedha yajna started in the next Vasanta ritu, the regaining of the horse
and sacrifice of the same happened in the subsequent Vasanta ritu, the Putrakameshti
yajna done in the Vasanta ritu and the birth of Rama occurred in the next
Vasanta ritu.
Rejecting all these, or perhaps unaware of all these
Mr Oak claims that Valmiki Ramayana referred to Sharad season at Rama’s birth.
Then only he can ‘corroborate’ it ‘scientifically’ using his western astronomy
based software.
Was Abhijit the Pole star in Ramayana
times?
Abhijit was never recognised as a pole star in any
text of Vedic culture. It was one among the 27 stars of the zodiac in the past
but was removed from the count and replaced with Krittika when Uttarayana no
longer started from Abhijit. Brahma rashi was another name for Abhijit. The
verse quoted by Mr Oak in the video is this. Let the interviewer whose
proficiency in Sanskrit is exemplary or anyone in the know of the language tell
the world whether this verse says that Abhijit was the pole star.
brahmarāśir viśuddhaś ca śuddhāś ca paramarṣayaḥ
arciṣmantaḥ prakāśante dhruvaṃ sarve pradakṣiṇam.
{Meaning: The Brahma Rashi (Abhijit) is becoming
clear; the Parama rishis (Sapta rishis) also are clear. They are shining with
bright light and all of them are going around the Pole star (6-4-49)}
The verse doesn’t say that Abhijit was the pole
star. It only says that Abhijit and the Sapta rishis having become clear are
going round the pole star. The pole star was different from Abhijit. In Mr Oak’s
date of Ramayana at 12K BP Saptarishis were not circumambulating the pole star
as seen from the south Indian latitude reported by Lakshmana.
The above illustration is from Stellarium simulated for
Mr Oak’s Ramayana date. Abhijit was not at the polar point (NCP), it can never
be as it lies outside the precession circle. At that date Abhijit was
circulating the Pole point while Saptarishis were crossing the sky from east to
west. Saptarishis were nowhere near the pole star at 12K BCE. This is a strong
evidence to disprove Mr Oak’s date of Ramayana.
Did Sun set at Pushya in Hemanta Ritu?
The third absurdity promoted by Mr Oak is that the
Sun set near Pushya star in Kataka nakshatra in Hemanta Ritu thereby theorising
that Uttarayana started in Kataka! The verse doesn’t say so. And at no time any
text of the Vedic culture said that Uttarayana started at Kataka.
This verse looks complex but discernible only when
one knows the meteorological indicators of rainfall ingrained within. The
season was Hemanta ritu and Lakshmana was going to the river in pre-dawn time
with Rama and Sita. Overnight there was heavy dew enveloping the Pushya star
that seemed to be in sleep in the sky. After it reappeared from the tawny dew,
the chillness continued for three Yaama by which time the pre-dawn set in and
the three were on their way to do morning works.
There is early night fog in Hemanta ritu hiding the
rise of Pushya. Pushya rises after sunset only in Hemanta ritu. But Mr Oak has
mis-interpreted this verse by assuming that अरुणाः means Sun.
The verse does not say anything about the sun. It says हिमअरुणाः to mean tawny
coloured fog. The explanation for this verse along with the reasons why Mr Oak
is wrong can be viewed in this video from 30 to 36-30 minutes.
The DD video shows three crucial views of the Vedic
culture mis-interpreted by him in the course of his research that gives an unrealistic
date. Why unrealistic? Ice Age was still
going on at that time with most of North India in severe cold. The Himalaya was
heavily snow-clad and glaciated at that time. There was no scope for de-glaciation
of Gangotri giving rise to the river Ganga before that date. I asked Oak to
give proof for Ganga running at his date of Ramayana. He has not given any till
date. He can never give one, for Ganga didn’t come into existence at that date.
Setu was a thoroughfare at his date of Ramayana. At
12k BP, the ocean level around the world was 120 metre below present. The sea
level rise maps clearly show that the water had not risen to the present level
until 7000 years ago. Today Setu is just below 3 feet to 3 metre depth from the
sea surface. There is a natural bund connecting the Indian and Lankan landmass
and that was well above the sea level at 12k BP. In Oak’s date of Ramayana,
Rama could have just walked across the bund. There was no need to build a bund.
How many in the DD know at least these two basic in-congruencies?
Our name, our research community and our Itihasasas are at stake and will be
damned and ridiculed as unscientific, unintelligent and lacking in common sense
if Mr Oak’s research on Ramayana is accepted by the Indian public or media. Let
not Doordarshan be in the forefront to bring such disgrace to India, Indians
and their immeasurable treasure of Itihasas. The inundation maps produced by Graham Hancock are given below. A comparison of them for different time periods is given below to pin point the date when the need arose to link the two countries by human efforts. The availability of maps start from 21,300 years BP.
It can be seen that Setu was well above the sea surface at 12,400 BP, the date close to Mr Nilesh Oak's date of Ramayana. Rama could have just walked across this part if Mr Oak's date is true.
Until 8900 BP, the land connection was there naturally, helping in the movement of people. But things changed after this period as sea level rose above the connecting land by 7700 BP.
The below-maps show this.
By 7700 BP sea water passed through the connecting land. By 6900 BP the connecting land was completely under sea water.
So any construction of a bridge could have happened only between 7,700 and 7000 years BP. The naturally occurring base is already there. What people had to do was to raise structures on the base for a few meters. This was what Rama’s Vanara sena had done!
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 bookMyth
of 'The Epoch of Arundhati' of Nilesh Nilkanth Oakestablishes 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
[1]Travancore Archaeological
Series, Volume I, page 30.
The day of Vaikuntha Ekadasi that opens the door to Vaikuntha is
an important day in all the Vishnu temples of South India. Lord Vishnu mounted
on his Garuda vehicle leaves the temple through Vaikuntha
Dvara (the Gate to Vaikuntha) or ‘Paramapada
Vaasal’ (the Gate to Paramapada) well before sunrise followed by his
devotees. This is the only day this special Gate is opened in any Vishnu temple
with the concept that Vishnu is taking along with him his devotees to
Vaikuntha. This day falls on Shukla
Ekadasi in the month of Margashira.
Gate to Moksha
This also happens to be
the day Krishna rendered Gitopadesa to Arjuna.
The intriguing fact is that this concurrence with the date of Vaikuntha Ekadasi
is lost in the memory of our people for very long.
Many think that Margashira Shukla Ekadasi identified as the day Krishna
preached Bhagavad Gita occurred in the lunar month of Margashira. As a result
the Gita Jayanti is being celebrated in the solar month of Kartika before the
occurrence of Full Moon in Kartika star. Flawed understanding of the Time
computation has led to this mistake.
Four-fold calculation
of Time.
Time is calculated on
the basis of four factors simultaneously. The location of the sun, the moon,
the star transited by the moon and all these three occurring at or after
sunrise in a day determine the time running on that day. A reference such as
Margashira Shukla Ekadasi means the sun is in Margashira or Sagittarius with
the moon in the 11th tithi of the waxing phase at that time. The
star of the day could vary in different years, and therefore it is omitted in
this particular reference, but these three (solar month, lunar paksha and
tithi) pertaining to solar and lunar movement are always noted as a marker to
denote a specific day.
The Sun being the cause
of Time, it cannot be left out in any reference to Time. As such Margashira
Shukla Ekadasi as the day of Gitopadesa
can be observed only when the Sun is in Margashira and not in Kartika
(Scorpio). This combination further denotes that the lunar month is Pushya.
This leads to the revelation that the Mahabharata War
had taken place in lunar Pushya month.
The month-wise analysis
of the Mahabharata events done by me based on the internal evidences shows the
date of Gitopadesa with the Sun still confined within the sign of Margashira.
(The ayanamsa is not exact but close to it by a degree or two further inside
Sagittarius.)
Date
of Gitopadesa.
Krishna’s advice to
Arjuna being two-fold, one, showing the way to Moksha
(Liberation) and the other, projecting Himself as the
protector of the Good and the annihilator of the Evil, these two are remembered
on the day of Margashira Shukla Ekadasi as Mokshada
Ekadasi or Vaikuntha Ekadasi by the followers of Vishnu.
Explaining the first, Mahabharata
has never been treated as a historical document, but as Veda accessible to all
and understandable by everyone. The core teaching lies in Bhagavad Gita and
that has been infused in the day Krishna imparted. More than the Mahabharata
connection, the importance of the teaching of Krishna to attain Vaikuntha has
taken precedence and a mock rehearsal is enacted on the same day in the solar
month of Margashira. In the absence of knowledge of even the existence of the
observance on this day in other parts of India, it is no wonder Gita Jayanti has
lost touch with the time when it ought to be observed.
The second feature is
the ingeniously designed idea of Garuda Seva –
of Vishnu flying in his Garuda Vahana on this day. Krishna had given the word
to protect the Dharmic people from the adharmic ones. Whenever He comes out mounted
on Garuda, it means He is out to destroy the Evil. This “ugra roopam” of the Lord with ‘panchayudhas’ – the five
weapons is in tune with his promise of protecting the righteous from the evil that
Krishna had given on Margashira Shukla Ekadasi.
The two core concepts of
Gitopadesa enshrined in the observance of Vaikuntha Ekadasi can have no other rationale
than remembering the day Krishna gave Gitopadesa to mankind through Arjuna. Vaikuntha
Ekadasi observance must put at rest any doubts on the solar month of Gitopadesa.
