Asteroid impacted Mohenjo Daro? (Part 20 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 20th part of the Mahabharata Series, we explore the possibility of an asteroid impact in the Mohenjo Daro region, on the banks of River Sindhu. The Mahabharata mentions the Sindhu's water reversing due to a south-westerly wind gush, likely caused by a falling meteor or asteroid.

The skeletal remains in Mohenjo Daro's Lower Town show a peculiar line of four impacted sites with radioactive substances, previously cited as proof of Aryan invasion and massacre. However, research suggests the dead were squatter workers in a workshop hit by asteroid fragments. The site was abandoned, leading to a mound forming – "Mohenjo Daro" which means "Mound of the dead"

A Varaha seal on a skeleton links to working people given the Varaha identity, a symbol of Jayadratha, Sindhu's king and Dhritharashtra's son-in-law.

The impact, seen only in the Lower Town and not on the Great Bath (which emerged in the Mature Phase, ~2500 BCE), suggests this event predates the Great Bath. The impact date: Karthika Shukla Dwadasi (25th August, 3136 BCE), when Krishna travelled to Hastinapura.

Did an asteroid impact the river Sindhu? (Part 19 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 19th part of the Mahabharata series, a peculiar event is recorded. As Krishna journeyed towards Hastinapura, Vyasa mentions several ominous signs (nimittas). Unusual occurrences were also observed in Hastinapura, including earthquakes causing well water to gush out and Krishna hearing a sonic boom. In Hastinapura, a south-westerly wind swept through, causing severe damage.

A researcher (5561 BCE) interpreted this as evidence of the southwest monsoon, deducing Krishna's departure was during the rainy season. However, this is disputed, as such winds are more common in pre-monsoon periods, not post-monsoon (Kaumuda/Karthika month).

The wind reportedly reversed the flow of east-flowing rivers, including the Sindhu. Scientifically, such intense air movement, capable of altering water flow, often accompanies asteroids dragging air at speeds of tens of thousands of miles per hour. If an asteroid had struck a river, it could cause this reverse impact. Vyasa suggests the Sindhu River was impacted.

Although the Sindhu (Indus) generally flows south, it meanders, appearing east-flowing in regions like near Mohenjo Daro. Could there be evidence of an asteroid impact in Mohenjo Daro? We will discuss in the next part.

Krishna's peace mission (Part 18 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 18th part of the Mahabharata Series, we explore the sequence of events following the end of exile (from Ashadha) until Krishna's departure to Hastinapura on a peace mission. The month-wise events include the timing of Abhimanyu's marriage. The next significant date provided by Vyasa helps us pinpoint Krishna's departure: it was the end of Sharad season in Kaumuda month.

The season calendar of the 5-year Yuga is presented, which can't be replicated in astronomy simulators. Researchers often show autumnal equinox for their respective dates based on western precession, adding to the confusion of the viewers. The Kaumuda month has also been debated, especially by 5561 BCE researcher without any historical knowledge – it’s resolved here using Arthāpatti. Post-Krishna's arrival in Hastinapura, Karttika Pourṇimi occurred. Curiously, many researchers 'found' a lunar eclipse, despite no textual hint. They latch onto this as part of 'triple eclipses', ‘proposed’ by someone in the past. Unfortunately, they ignored several nimittas on Krishna's journey and in Hastinapura mentioned by Vyasa– which we'll unravel in the next part.

Please watch and share widely

Solar eclipse on the day of exile? (Part 17 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 17th part of the Mahabharata Series, a crucial question is discussed: Was there a solar eclipse on the day of exile? Many researchers claim a solar eclipse occurred, citing a verse where Vyāsa describes Rahu afflicting the throne (symbolizing the Sun) in an out-of-season (aparvani) context, likely referring to Draupadi's humiliation in the Assembly.

Using the pramana, Arthapatti, it is explained that aparvani indicates absence of the necessary conditions for amavasya and thereby an eclipse. It is also pointed out since the exile ended on Dasami (supported by calendric features in the Mahabharata), the exile could not have started on an amavasya day. A sample case by quoting the simulation of a researcher is discussed to show how the idea of a solar eclipse on the first day of exile is wrong. However, researchers argue for this non-existent solar eclipse, presenting simulations to support their claim. Ironically, their subsequent analyses hinge on this potentially incorrect eclipse, impacting interpretations of Mahabharata's astronomical features. Please watch the video and share widely.

Date of end of exile (Part 16 of the Mahabharata Series)

In the 16th part of the Mahabharata Series, the exile's end date is established. The first calendric hint occurs when Trigarta forces stole Virata's cattle on a Saptami day. Via Arthāpatti, it is established this was Krishna Saptami with Vishti Karana. Next day, on Krishna Ashtami, Kauravas ransacked the Virata city, forcing disguised Arjuna (Bṛhannala) to fight. Arjuna revealed himself to the prince and started fighting by blowing his conch and raising his flag. 

The Kauravas noticed this and thought that had Arjuna revealed himself prematurely but  Bhīṣma clarified that the Pandavas had already spent more than five months in exile. However,  the Pandavas revealed themselves on the third day after Ashtami, i.e., on Krishna Dasami.

The date is established as Ashaḍha Krishna Saptami in Dakshinayana. The entire 13-year period, including five Adhika Masa-s, is constructed based on this. It must be pointed out that no astronomy simulator can establish these calendric dates as given in the Mahabharata.

Please watch the video and share widely.

Ratha Saptami - the anomalous Uttarayana (Part 15 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 15th part of the Mahabharata series, we examine the anomalous Uttarayana event known as 'Ratha Saptami' that occurred post-war. Given that the Uttarayana timing in the 5-year Yuga was manually calculated and didn't align with the Sun's actual celestial movement, a question arises: why did Bhishma adjust the Uttarayana day from Shukla Trayodashi to Shukla Ashtami?

Analyzing Bhishma's verse reveals that the lunar Magha month had advanced, synchronizing with the Kumbha month. It was as if Time itself had accelerated, prompting Bhishma, an expert in temporal calculations, to compensate by subtracting four tithis, thereby declaring Shukla Ashtami as the Uttarayana time.

The Sun was supposed to have changed direction on Shukla Saptami, which didn't align with the then-prevailing calendar. This unusual solar transition is commemorated as Ratha Saptami, observed as a vrata. Panchanga guidebook indicates Ratha Saptami is observed in Kumbha Masa, echoing the Mahabharata period event. Dating the Mahabharata transcends pinpointing the war year; it unravels a temporal anomaly hidden within the epic, revealed through Ratha Saptami.

Please watch the video and share widely.

Mahabharata Calendar (Part 14 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 14th part of the Mahabharata Series, I will demonstrate the creation of the 5-year Yuga calendar pertinent to the Mahabharata era. Drawing insights from Lagadha's Vedanga Jyothisha, the calendar reveals that 3136 BCE, the year of the war, marked the commencement of the 'Samvatsara' year within the 5-year Yuga cycle. It was in this year that Bhishma awaited the onset of Uttarayana in the subsequent year, the second year of the cycle. 

Bhishma departed on Uttarayana which coincided with Shukla Ashtami, whereas the calendrical calculations show Uttarayana in Shukla Trayodashi. This discrepancy gives rise to the Ganesha Moment, that will be explored in the forthcoming part.

How Bhishma calculated the extra days of exile (Part 13 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In part 13 of the Mahabharata Series, I've explored how Bheeshma calculated the extra days Pandavas spent in exile. This marks our entry into Mahabharata dating.

The dating features start with Trigartas and Kauravas stealing Virata's cattle at the end of Pandavas' incognito period. When Arjuna (Vṛhannala) revealed himself via conch and flag, Kauravas claimed he did it early. Bheeshma differed, explaining how Pandavas spent extra months in exile. It shows they followed the 5-year Vedāṅga Yuga where solar days/seasons differ from what Mahabharata researchers use in astronomy simulators. Check it out & share widely!

Janamejaya Inscription (Part 12 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 12th part of the Mahabharata Series, the Janamejaya inscription is discussed. It is a primary source of evidence and shabda pramāna. Janamejaya, Arjuna's great-grandson and Abhimanyu's grandson, was present when Mahābhārata was first recited with author Veda Vyāsa. Grants he gave to rishis of Vrikodara Kshetra remain valid, as the place has been continuously occupied by rishis for 5000 years.

The man-made bridge across Tungabhadra river led to the name Bhima Setu; archaeologists should examine its boulders to verify the age and match it with the grant's date. This grant uniquely mentions the Pandavas – Janamejaya refers to his great-grandfathers. The inscription's age and continuous ascetic occupation make it the world's oldest surviving. Why do Mahābhārata researchers overlook this, yet focus on 7th-century Aihole? Is it because it doesn't fit their astronomy simulations?

Please watch the video and share your thoughts. Share the video widely.

Panchanga Pramana for Kali Yuga (Part 11 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In Part 11 of the Mahabharata Series, I focused on the Panchanga Pramana for the Kali Yuga, starting at 3101 BCE, stating the years elapsed since then. Where is the Pramana from 3067 BCE researchers for the years elapsed since "Kali Yugam Prāptaṃ Viddhi"?

I cited Shabda Pramana from Siddhanta Shorimani and north Indian Panchangas. I quoted Madhva Panchangas too, as Madhvacharya's work was referenced by 3067 researchers. Even those panchangas reference to 3101 BCE only.

The rationale for 3101 BCE is explained, contrasting with the Julian construct of 3102 BCE, which yields incorrect inferences. I've also shown how native astrologers write horoscopes with Kali Yuga dates, serving as living Pramana for the Kali era date. Please watch and share this widely to remove the misconceptions planted by other Mahabharata researchers.

Did Kali Yuga arrive at Krishna's exit? (Part 10 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 10th  part of the Mahabharata series, I am addressing doubts around the start of Kali Yuga and its link to Krishna's exit. This is crucial to derive the Mahabharata date as discussed in Part 9.

Some researchers claim Kali Yuga began when Bhima struck Duryodhana, citing Krishna's "Kali Yugam Praptam Viddhi" statement. But why focus on this verse alone when other instances in the Mahabharata mention Kali Yuga's start? Vidura, Hanuman, and Yudhishthira also reference Kali Yuga. Why not consider these contexts? I challenge those advocating the 3067 BCE date to provide the number of Kali days elapsed since then, with evidence (pramana). I'll share the elapsed days per Shabda Pramana in the next part. Watch this video and share widely.

Mahabharata date given by Vyasa (Part 9 of the Mahabharata Series)

In the 9th part of the Mahabharata series, I'm revealing the identity of the person in the sample case from the previous part. This shows that planetary combinations alone can't determine the year - the year must be known first. Vyasa provided four hints in the text to find the war date.

These verses discuss a 35-year gap between the war and Krishna's departure. Knowing Krishna left in 3101 BCE (Kali Yuga's start), the 36th year prior was 3136 BCE.

I'm also sharing 10 dates from Mahabharata researchers for viewers to decide. Please share this video widely.

Why different MB dates for the same set of planetary references? (Part 8 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In Part 8 of the Mahābhārata series, I address a common doubt: why researchers arrive at different war years despite using the same planetary references. I start with a sample case, asking you to find an unnamed person's birth year based on three planetary combinations similar to Mahābhārata's. Then, I analyze how 3067 BCE, 5661 BCE, and 3162 BCE were arrived at. Can the researchers of these years find the sample person's year using the same "pick and fit" method they used for Mahābhārata dates? 

This part aims to spark thought; please share widely.

Aihole inscription refers to Kali Yuga and not Mahabharata war date

The Aihole inscription, found in a Jain temple in Karnataka, praises Chālukya king Pulakeśin II and provides key evidence for Kali Yuga's date. However, a single reference to Bhārata has sparked controversy, with two interpretations: it refers to either Kali Yuga's start or the Mahābhārata war's start.

Two researchers used the Aihole inscription to date the Mahābhārata: one (Chandru Ramesh) linked Kali Yuga's date to the war, placing it at 3101 BCE (Kali Yuga's actual start), and another (Vedveer Arya) interpreted it as the war's date, placing it at 3162 BCE. Both are incorrect. This article clarifies the inscription's meaning through word-by-word analysis and allied inputs.

Two verses of this inscription, numbered 33 and 34 give the date of the Jain temple built by Ravikīrti. The importance of the verse is that it gives the time in both Kali years and the Śaka years. The date related part of the inscription as given in Indian Antiquary is shown in Fig.1.^[i]

Fig.1. Date of the Aihole inscription

The underlined word in Fig.1, “Bhāratādāhāvāditah”, is disputed. What does this mean? From the time of Mahābhārata war?  Or from some other event of the Bhārata?

This verse was analysed by Kota Venkatāchelam who suggested a correction of “shateshu” in verse 33 to “gateshu”. But he assumed that the verse refers to Mahābhārata time and deducted 37 years (not mentioned in the verse) to arrive at the Mahābhārata date as 3138 BCE which has been picked out by a few researchers.^[ii] There is no basis for the 37-year gap between Kali Yuga and the war, when the Mahābhārata has stated clearly about a gap of 35 years. Kali Yuga started on the 36^th year after the war.

Let us now examine the verse to know the time period given and keep the disputed “Bhāratādāhāvāditah” at the end of the decipherment.

Verse 33:

Trimśatsu = 30

trisahasreṣu = 3000

Bhāratāt dāha avādita = (to be translated at the end)

Sapta abda śatayukteṣu = 700

Gateṣu = gone

abdeṣu pancasu = 5 years

Verse 34:

Pancāśatsu = 50

Kalaukāle = in Kali’s Time (7th case)

ṣadsu = 6

pancaśatāsu = 500

Samāsu = putting together, aggregation, conjunction, combination, connection, union, totality. (Stem:  samāsa: masculine vocative singular)

samatitāsu = samatIta = gone or passed by

Śakānām = of the Śaka (6^th case)

Api – unto, on

bhubhujām = king (accusative)

Meaning:

Trimśatsu (30) trisahasreṣu (3000) Sapta abda śatayukteṣu (700) abdeṣu pancasu (5)

Gateṣu Kalaukāle (having gone in Kali Kaala) = 3735 years gone in Kali Kāla

Pancāśatsu (50) ṣadsu (6) pancaśatāsu (500) Samāsu samatitāsu Śakānāmapi = 556 years having gone in the Śaka era.

Kali years = 3735

Śaka years = 556

Kali years – Śaka years = 3735 – 556 = 3179

3179 are the elapsed years before the beginning of Śālivāhana Śaka! So, the Śaka mentioned in the inscription is Śālivāhana Śaka.

Deducting 78 CE when this Śaka began = 3179 – 78 = 3101 BCE = Kali Yuga begin date.

Thus, this inscription makes a clear statement on the elapsed Kali years and the elapsed years in Śālivāhana Śaka. The Kali age mentioned as “Bhāratādāhāvāditah” doesn’t refer to the end of the Mahābhārata war. Then what does it mean?

Let us split the word.

Bhāratāt = singular, masculine, 5^th case = from Bhārata, a reference to Yudhiṣṭhira, the foremost among the Bhārata-s.

Dāha = √dah, burning, combustion, internal heat. (Also means ‘place of cremation’. There is something called, “Dāha-bali” mentioned in Garuda Purāna, which is pinda offered to the deceased at the time of cremation. Dāha is associated with cremation agni.)

Fig 2: Sanskrit Dictionary meaning

Bhāratāt Dāha reminds us of the final fire deposited within the body of Yudhiṣṭhira at the Prājāpatyaṃ Yajna when he gave up everything. It doesn’t mean war.

The last word is vādita.

vādita = spoken or declared

The meaning is complete.

Bhāratāt Dah (√dah) vādita = from (the time) Bhārata declared that they consumed (reposited) the fire (within by Prājāpatyaṃ yajna).

This is a clear indication of the abdication of the throne by Yudhiṣṭhira that took place at the beginning of Kali Yuga.

How the Bhārata-s consumed Agni

Srimad Bhagavatam says that Yudhiṣṭhira conducted “prājāpatyāṁ” by which he placed Agni within himself![iii]

prājāpatyāṁ nirūpyeṣṭim

agnīn apibad īśvaraḥ

prājāpatyām — Prājāpatya sacrifice;

nirūpya — having performed;

iṣṭim — goal;

agnīn — fire;

apibat — placed in himself;

īśvaraḥ — capable.

Meaning: Yudhiṣṭhira performed a Prājāpatyam yajna and placed in himself the fire for quitting household life.

His brothers, on seeing Kali’s Adharma everywhere followed his footsteps by doing the same yajna.[iv]

Thus, all the Pandava-s (Bhārata-s) had done the Prājāpatyaṃ yajna to quit the householder dharma and become Sadhus.

A unique feature of Prājāpatyaṃ yajna as given in Yajur Veda and extoled by many luminaries such as sage Yajnavalkya and Bodhayana is that after relinquishing all the belongings, the doer of this yajna gives up his Agni too, but places it within himself.

As long as one is a householder, the sacrificial fire must be kept burning throughout life. Even when the Pāṇḍavas went to the forest, they took their Agni with them for daily Agnihotra. During their year of incognito living, their Agni was sent to Drupada's kingdom for maintenance. This Agni remains with oneself until death, when one's mortal remains are consumed by it.

For one who had relinquished his householder Dharma and embraced Sanyasa Dharma by doing the Prājāpatyaṃ yajna, the Agni that is going to consume his mortal remains would be placed within oneself! It is like self- cremating and doing one’s last rites by oneself. All the Pandava brothers had done this by Prājāpatyaṃ Yajna as soon as Kali Yuga started.

This information is contained in Aihole inscription!

The Aihole inscription stands as a solid proof for linking the abdication with the beginning of Kali Yuga.

It must be noted that the Bhārata war year isn't stated in any inscription. Kali Yuga year is the anchor for Time, not the Mahābhārata war date. Researchers should correct this misinterpretation. Readers should learn the correct interpretations and facts about Kali Yuga's date.

---

[i] Indian Antiquary, Vol 5, p.70

[ii] Pandit Kota Venkatachelam, “The Age of the Mahabharata War” pp.55-56

[iii] Srimad Bhagavatam: 1-15 -39

[iv] Srimad Bhagavatam: 1-15-45

How Western Astronomy differs from Vedic Astronomy (Part 7 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In Part 7 of the Mahābhārata Series, I'll explain why Western astronomy isn't suitable for dating. It uses shifting rasi-s, altering Aries' starting point, causing 3067 BCE researchers to place Aries' start in Rohiṇī and 5561 BCE researchers in Mithuna. In contrast, Vedic astronomy's Aries position and to and fro computations are provided for comparison. Our horoscopes and festivals are based on this model. Please watch and share widely.

Moon-data not reliable in Astronomy simulators (Part 6 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 6th part of the Mahābhārata series, I'll present evidence on why astronomy simulators aren't suitable for dating epics. NASA's ephemeris moon data and eclipse data diverge from reality pre-1800 CE. Simulator makers themselves don't guarantee reliability due to earth's and moon's unpredictable movements. The error margin is 10% by 500 BCE. Just imagine the errors 5000 years ago!

Unfortunately, these commercial, hobbyist simulators are used for serious research in India, specifically for sensitive research like Mahābhārata dating. Please watch the video and share widely.

Epigraphic evidence to prove unsuitability of Astronomy Simulators (Part 5 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 5th part of the Mahabharata series, I'm presenting two inscriptions, one from 400 years ago and another from 1000 years ago, to demonstrate that they don't match with NASA data. I also prove through these inscriptions that the moon data is behind by 26 degrees even 400 years ago. By 1000 years ago, the moon rise timing itself varied from the ephemeris data. 

The reason was a simple extrapolation of the current data to past dates in the ephemeris, while the ayanamsa wasn't a standard one but changed from time to time. Ayanamsa being the crucial determinant of planetary position in Vedic astronomy, I'm highlighting the defect in the accusation against me for using Surya Siddhanta ayanamsa for Mahabharata time. Watch and share widely.

Unsuitability of Astronomy Simulators (Part 4 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 4th part of the Mahabharata series, I've highlighted why astronomy simulators are unsuitable for dating the Mahabharata. By comparing screenshots from simulators used by researchers who propose 3067 BCE, I've shown that the moon's position varies across simulators. The Vernal equinox also shifts significantly, contradicting Shabda Pramana.

I've also pointed out that these simulators don't use the sidereal year, which is used in our Vedic society. The sidereal year is longer than the Julian or Gregorian year used by these simulators. This means dates given by researchers using astronomy simulators fall short of the actual sidereal days used by Vyasa.

Methodology of Mahabharata Research (Part 3 of the Mahabharata Series)

 This is the 3rd part of the Mahabharata series, outlining the methodology used to determine the date of the Mahabharata war. Analysis reveals that astrology simulators, specifically Surya Siddhanta, are more reliable for dating the war than astronomy simulators. The choice of simulator is critical, and its reliability is tested through planetary conjunctions, such as the super conjunction at the start of Kali Yuga when Krishna departed. Surya Siddhanta's ayanamsa accurately simulates this event, making it the preferred choice. The next part will explain why astronomy simulators are unsuitable for dating the Mahabharata.

Method of Mahabharata research (Part 2 of the Mahabharata Series)

 In the 2nd part of the Mahabharata Series, the research methodology is discussed. It involves collecting data, applying relevant subject knowledge for analysis, and categorizing data into primary and secondary sources (as per Western methods) and into 6 Pramana-s (as per Vedic methods).

This rigorous approach differs from the 'pick-and-fit' unscientific method used by others. It enables the identification of relevant data and eliminates irrelevant factors, such as the Epoch of Arundhati, ensuring a more accurate understanding of the Mahabharata.

Ganesha Moment (Mahabharata Series -1)

I just started a video series on validating the year of the Mahabharata war as 3136 BCE. The first part is posted here which is about "Ganesha Moment". Why Lord Ganesha was made a scribe for writing the Mahabharata by Veda Vyasa and what it means to us are discussed in this part.

The question of whether there are interpolations in the Mahabharata is answered through the "Ganesha Moment". Please watch, download and share widely. Other parts will be posted one by one mostly on a daily basis.

Historical Timelines of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana (My paper published in IKS)

My research paper, "Historical Timelines of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana," has been published as a chapter in the IKS Publication. This chapter offers fresh insights into the chronology of these epics, presents a critical analysis of existing research, and provides compelling evidence on Ram Setu supported by recent ISRO-NASA findings.

Title: 

Historical Timelines of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana

Abstract

The Ramayana and the Mahabharata, India's two seminal epics, have been integral to Indian culture, spirituality, and identity for millennia. However, the historical timelines associated with these epics have been subject to diverse interpretations, with numerous researchers proposing varying dates, that not only confuse people but also lead to fragmented scholarship, misrepresentations in popular culture, and challenges in establishing a clear cultural and archaeological context. This lack of consensus can undermine traditional beliefs and create ongoing debates within both academic and public spheres. A closer examination of the epics reveals that they include inherent chronological indicators that have been overlooked by researchers thus far. This chapter emphasizes the inherent chronological clues in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, explaining why the existing dates are inaccurate. It also offers a revised chronology based on these indicators, which is corroborated by modern scientific evidence.

Keywords: Krishna, Gāndhārī, Kali yuga, comet-hit, GISP2, Hancock, ISRO, Sea-level, Ram Setu

Introduction

The Mahabharata and Ramayana are considered authentic accounts, as they are classified as 'Itihāsa', meaning 'it happened thus'. These epics were composed by contemporary sages who were also characters within the narratives, making them reliable primary sources for dating purposes. The texts were recited in the presence of the authors and, in the case of the Ramayana, even in the presence of Rāma, the main hero. This ensures the authenticity of the texts, which have been revered for centuries.

Notably, the dates of these epics can be determined through historical dating methods, utilizing Pancānga features like tithi and star positions, as well as planetary combinations mentioned within the texts themselves. Although methods like archaeology, hydrology, and carbon dating are limited in establishing precise dates, they can offer valuable corroborative evidence to validate the exact dates determined through other means. The Mahabharata presents a well-defined timeline, anchored to the historically significant event of Lord Krishna’s departure from the physical world. This event marks the beginning of the Kali Yuga era, which has been continuously tracked in India to calculate important dates in Indian history, as corroborated by numerous inscriptions found across the subcontinent.

In the words of the renowned epigraphist Dr. R. Nagaswamy, "Every aspect of life in this land, from administration and education to judiciary, has been meticulously documented" until the East India Company's takeover in the 18th century (News report: The Hindu, June 06, 2019). These records employed calendar elements of Kali Yuga or its current sub-period, namely the Śaka era. Although the Gregorian calendar has gained widespread use these days, the Kali-Śaka time scale remains an integral part of India's religious practices.

In the context of the Kali Yuga's initial year, which marks Krishna's departure, the date of the Mahabharata war—occurring somewhat earlier—can be determined through internal references within the epic itself. Furthermore, a distinct temporal gap exists between the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, which predates it. By examining these key features, it becomes evident that internal evidence from both epics exposes the flaws in the various proposed dates put forth by researchers, rendering these dates untenable. The chapter begins with an exploration of Mahabharata’s dating, followed by an analysis of the Ramayana's timeline, ultimately providing a comprehensive understanding of the historical sequences within these two ancient epics.

Krishna's departure: A historical anchor for the Kali Yuga era

There are several textual references linking the arrival of Kali Yuga to Krishna’s departure. Some of them are listed here. In Harivamśa (1.53.59), Vyasa states that Māheśwara Yuga began when Krishna left the world¹. Although some may argue that Māheśwara Yuga is distinct from Kali Yuga, multiple scriptures concur that a new Yuga commenced upon Krishna’s exit. Initially, Vyasa characterized this new Yuga as Rudra Yuga or Māheśwara Yuga, marked by the manifestation of 'Raudram'.

However, in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (SB)² Vyasa repeats that Kali Yuga fully manifested upon Krishna’s departure (SB: 1.15.36). The text describes:

"When Lord Kṛṣṇa left the earth, Kali, who had partially appeared, became fully manifest, creating inauspicious conditions for the ignorant."

The subsequent verses (SB: 1.15.37 and 1.15.45) reveal that Yudhiṣṭhira and the younger Pāṇḍava-s, recognizing the advent of Adharma and Kali Yuga, chose to leave the earth.

Further, the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam provides firsthand testimony from Krishna himself about the onset of Kali Yuga. In his conversation with Uddhava (SB 11.7.4-5), Krishna states:

"I will soon abandon this earth, and Kali Yuga will overwhelm it, stripping it of piety."

"Once I leave, you should not remain on this earth, for in Kali Yuga, people will be addicted to sinful activities."

Krishna’s words indicate that his physical presence on earth delayed its onset and Kali yuga manifested fully after he left.

This perspective is consistently echoed across various Puranas:

Vishnu Purana (5.38.8) states that upon Hari's departure from the earth, the dark age of Kali descended.

Brahma Purana (2.103.8), Matsya Purana (271.51-52), and Bhāgavata Purana (1.18.6) all concur that Kali Maha Yuga commenced precisely at the moment of Krishna’s physical departure from the world.

These ancient texts collectively affirm the synchronicity of Krishna’s exit and the onset of Kali Yuga.

Year of Krishna’s departure

By simple calculation, the starting point of the Kali Yuga can be traced back to 3101 BCE, given that as of the year 2024 CE, 5125 years of the Kali Yuga have elapsed. For astronomical verification, the reputed Vedic astronomer Bhāskara-II estimated the start date to be 3179 years before the commencement of the Śālivāhana Śaka era (Siddhānta Śiromaṇi: 1-28)³. Given that the Śālivāhana Śaka began in 78 CE, this places Krishna’s exit in 3101 BCE, marking the end of the Mahabharata era.

This significant year marks Krishna’s departure, the Pāndava-s' abdication of the throne, and the ascension of their offspring, Parīkshit, who initiated the Kali Yuga kingly list. In 1957 CE, the Indian Calendar Reform Committee mistakenly recommended 78 CE, the start of the Śālivāhana Śaka, as the beginning of India's timekeeping system, perpetuating a misconception that India's calendar system is only around 1946 years old, thereby overlooking the country's incredibly rich and ancient epic heritage.

This oversight has led to a significant knowledge gap among the current generation, leaving many unaware of the Kali Yuga tradition and its historical significance, marked by Krishna’s departure. This lack of understanding is evident in numerous research studies on the Mahabharata's date, which demonstrate that researchers were largely uninformed about the historicity of the Kali Yuga's beginning.

The Gāndhārī curse: A clue to Krishna’s departure

A crucial piece of internal evidence within the Mahabharata (MB)⁴ that helps establish its timeframe is the curse of Gāndhārī, the mother of the Kaurava-s. After the devastating war that claimed the lives of all her sons, Gāndhārī rushed to the battlefield, overcome with grief. As she mourned the loss of her children and the defeat of the Kaurava-s, her anguish turned to anger, and she blamed Krishna for the immense tragedy that had befallen both the Kaurava-s and the Pāṇḍava-s. With a heavy heart, she reproached Krishna for not preventing the war and bringing peace between the warring cousins. In a fit of rage, Gāndhārī cursed Krishna, proclaiming that 36 years hence, Krishna’s own clan, the Vrishni-s, would meet a similar fate, destroyed by Krishna himself (MB: 11-25-41). Accepting the curse, Krishna acknowledged the inevitability of the tragedy that would befall his own kin.

According to the Mahabharata, when the 36^th year arrived, King Yudhiṣṭhira observed ominous signs (MB: 16-1-1). Vaiśampāyana stated that a great calamity befell the Vrishni-s in that 36^th year following the Mahabharata war (MB: 16-2-2). Upon witnessing inauspicious omens, Krishna realized that the 36^th year had arrived, marking the fulfillment of Gāndhārī’s curse, which she had uttered in grief over the loss of her children (MB: 16-3-18, 19). The Mahabharata thus references the demise of the Vrishni-s and Krishna in four distinct contexts.

The 36^th year, which corresponds to Krishna’s departure, is forever etched in the Kali Yuga calendar as 3101 BCE. From this, the year of the Mahabharata war can be calculated as 36 years prior to 3101 BCE, which yields 3136 BCE. In essence, there is a 35-year gap between the war and Krishna’s departure, a detail well-established within the Mahabharata itself.

Researchers seeking to date the Mahabharata can readily utilize these two crucial features – the year of Krishna’s departure and the 35-year gap between his departure and the war – to pinpoint the year of the Mahabharata war. However, it is noteworthy that researchers have not adequately leveraged these details in their investigations.

Neglecting internal chronology: A shortcoming in the Mahabharata studies

A review of the dates proposed for the Mahabharata war by various researchers reveals a glaring omission: none of them have considered the crucial internal evidence of the 35-year gap between the war and Krishna’s departure. The dates given by them are as follows:

1.     Nilesh Oak – 5661 BCE (2560 years before Kṛṣṇa left)

2.     Vedveer Arya – 3162 BCE (61 years before Kṛṣṇa left)

3.     Dr. M.L. Raja – 3143 BCE (42 years before Kṛṣṇa left)

4.     Dr. Saroj Bala – 3139 BCE (38 years before Kṛṣṇa left)

5.     Chandru Ramesh – 3101 BCE (Mahabharata war and Kṛṣṇa’s exit at the same time)

6.     Prof. Narahari Achar – 3067 BCE (34 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

7.     Dr. Manish Pandit – 3067 BCE (34 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

8.     Dr. DK Hari & Dr. Hema Hari – 3067 BCE (34 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

9.     Jijith Nadumuri Ravi – 1793 BCE (1308 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

10.  Pushkar Bhatnagar – 1793 BCE (1308 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

The failure of researchers to accurately date the Mahabharata war can be attributed to their oversight of the four pivotal verses highlighting the 35-year gap between the war and Krishna’s departure, a crucial aspect of Gāndhārī's curse. Internal evidence is paramount when dating historical events, and in the case of the Mahabharata, Gāndhārī's curse serves as a primary chronological anchor. Any planetary alignments or other evidence should be used to corroborate this date, rather than supersede it.

Scientific evidence of a comet-hit before Mahabharata war

A unique and remarkable celestial event, detailed with precision in the Mahabharata, offers strong scientific evidence for determining the exact year of the Mahabharata war as 3136 BCE, which is 35 years prior to 3101 BCE, the year Krishna departed from his mortal form. This extraordinary event is referenced as a series of ominous 'nimitta-s' (omens) that unfolded over 13 days, commencing from the moment Krishna embarked on his journey from Upaplavya to Hastinapura, in the month of Kārtika, in a last-ditch effort to negotiate peace and prevent the impending war.

These omens included 48 terrestrial, 12 atmospheric, and 20 planetary anomalies, foreshadowing a catastrophe from the sky. The initial impact was calamitous, causing water to flow in the opposite direction in seven rivers, including the River Sindhu (MB: 5.82.6). Karna described meteors (Ulkā) falling from the sky with deafening noise (MB: 5.141.10), while Vyasa provided a more vivid account: “dhūmaketur mahāghoraḥ puṣyam ākramya tiṣṭhati” (A terrible and ominous comet appeared, enveloping the Pushya constellation) (MB: 6.3.12).

This cosmic impact precipitated a rare premature Amavasya (No-Moon Day) on the 13^th tithi (MB: 6-3-28), which has been immortalized in collective memory as Bodhayana Amavasya. This event altered the Earth's orbit, causing a delay in Uttarāyaṇa (winter solstice), forcing Bhīṣma to wait on the arrow bed. The delayed Uttarāyaṇa is commemorated as Ratha Saptamī (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Shift of moon into dotted orbit by the comet-hit (illustrative)

Picture credit: Self

The premature Amavasya resulted in the loss of a tithi which changed the tithi-star alignment once for all. This altered alignment persists to the present day, manifesting as a discrepancy in dates preceding the impact, such as the birth date of Rāma, which will be examined in further detail subsequently.

The tithi loss presupposes a change in the Moon's orbit causing a change in the lunar nodes (Rahu and Ketu), which is indeed recorded in the Mahabharata (MB: 5-141-10 & 6-3-11). Another peculiar observation is also found in the Mahabharata. During Krishna’s private conversation with Karna after his peace mission, Karna remarks, "somasya lakṣma vyāvṛttaṃ" (MB: 5.141.10). This same phrase is repeated by Vyasa to Dhṛtarāṣṭra on the eve of the war: “vyāvṛttaṃ lakṣma somasya” (MB: 6.2.32). The literal translation of this phrase is, “The mark (sign) of the moon became separated or parted with.”

This observation holds significant importance. Following the catastrophic impact on Pushya day in the month of Kārtika, Karna and Vyasa reportedly observed the lunar surface that night, which was the 6^th day of the waning moon.  (Ṣaṣṭhī Tithi). To determine the location of the moon where fresh marks could have been observed, this writer observed the 6^th waning tithi in a Kārtika month. The observation revealed that while most of the visible lunar surface was covered with dark marks, known as 'Maria', a plain region called ‘Highlands’ was partly visible on the side of Maria. These two regions on the lunar disc on Full Moon Day are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Location of Maria and Highlands on the lunar disc

Picture credit: space.com

Karna and Vyasa must have seen fresh marks on the plain ‘Lunar Highlands’ region, leading them to remark that the spots on the moon had shifted places. Figure 3 photographed from Chennai in South India, depicts the Moon's appearance on the 6^th day of its waning phase – the day deduced from the description in the Mahabharata. Notably, a part of the Highland is visible where new features could have emerged on that fateful night⁵.

Figure 3: Waning phase of the moon with the lunar mark shifted (indicated by the white arrow)

Photo credit: Dr. Bharani (Nature photographer)

The Mahabharata's description of shifting lunar spots implies that an impact took place on the Lunar Highlands. It appears that the same comet, which fragmented over Earth, also struck the Moon, altering its orbit and causing an unusually early Amavasya (new moon). The details can be found in my book, where I provide a comprehensive explanation⁶.

A research article published on NASA's website (August 19, 2021)⁷ by Dr. Quanzhi Ye et al.⁸ reveals that a comet disintegrated near Mercury's orbit approximately 5,000 years ago. According to the study, the comet was visible from Earth. While the research suggests that the fragmented pieces escaped the solar system, the Mahabharata describes a more complex scenario, wherein numerous fragments struck the Earth and Moon over a 13-day period, with particularly severe impacts occurring on days 1 and 9 (Pushya day).

The lunar impact likely ejected rocks into space, with some escaping the Moon's gravitational pull. This scenario is substantiated by the recent discovery of an asteroid in Earth's orbit, which was confirmed to be of lunar origin. The recently discovered asteroid 2024 PT5 was found to have been ejected from the Moon due to an impact a few thousand years ago. It was subsequently captured by Earth's orbit and has been traveling alongside it (Figure 4).

Figure 4: The asteroid 2024PT5 of lunar origin

Picture credit: https://www.businesstoday.in/visualstories/news/nasa-finds-a-mini-moon-agency-finds-a-10-meter-lunar-fragment-hiding-in-plain-sight-205132-26-01-2025

Researchers Theodore Kareta et al. (2025)⁹ made a profound observation in their paper published in The Astrophysical Journal that the lunar fragment appears to have originated from the Lunar Highlands. Notably, this is the exact region identified in the Mahabharata as the impact site, providing a striking correlation between ancient scripture and modern scientific discovery.

GISP2 ice core data reveals a significant drop in global temperature in 3136 BCE, consistent with the expected climate disruption caused by a cosmic impact. (Figure 5). Mahabharata’s account of a comet impact in the same year provides a compelling explanation for this previously unidentified event.

Figure 5: Rapid temperature-drop in 3136 BCE

Graph credit: Joachim Seifert, Climatologist.

A key indicator of a meteor impact is the release of nitrogen dioxide (NO2), causing red clouds, bloody rains, and discoloration of water bodies. The Mahabharata describes these exact conditions as ominous signs (nimitta-s), suggesting a strong connection to the meteor impact described in the epic.

Fragments of the comet likely hit the Sindhu region, where mysterious skeletons were found in Mohenjo-Daro's Lower Town (Figure 6). Initially attributed to massacre victims (suggesting Aryan Invasion Theory), the remains show radiation evidence of intense heat and rapid cooling. The aligned “massacre” sites suggest a meteor shower, supporting Mahabharata’s account of a comet impact (Brian: 2020).¹⁰

Figure 6: Impact sites in Mohenjo-Daro (Sindhu region)

Picture credit: Hemphill Brian¹⁰

Thus, the Mahabharata provides compelling internal evidence that points to 3136 BCE as the year of the epic war. This date is corroborated by a convergence of scientific and archaeological evidence, including the comet impact and corresponding findings at Mohenjo-Daro.

The Rama date conundrum: A tithi-star mismatch

The Valmiki Ramayana (VR)¹¹ provides Pancānga and planetary details that aid in determining the specific dates of various events in the Ramayana. However, the dating of Rama's birth has long been a subject of debate due to a seeming incompatibility between his birth star, Punarvasu, and his birth tithi, Śhukla Navamī, in the month of Mesha (Aries). Astronomically, this combination is impossible in Aries, as Punarvasu is not aligned with Śhukla Navamī in this month. This discrepancy has led many researchers to question the historicity of the Ramayana, dismissing its astronomical features as mythical.

Researchers attempting to date Rama overlooked the discrepancy in tithi-star positions, likely due to their reliance on Western astronomy simulators, which cannot accurately replicate ancient Indian tithi-star configurations.

To align Rama's birth star, Punarvasu, with his birth tithi, Śhukla Navamī, in the Mesha month (Aries), the Amavasya must have occurred in Pūrva Bhādrapada. However, calculating from Pratipat, the moon would be in Punarvasu on the 9^th day, i.e., Śhukla Navamī, but the sun would have only moved 9 degrees, and be in Uttara Bhādrapada (Pisces), making this alignment impossible. Valmiki's account of this combination at Rama's birth poses a puzzle. Upon exploring different permutations, it's found that only when there's an Adhika Caitra Māsa followed by Nija Caitra Māsa can Rama's birth tithi-star alignment be replicated, albeit with one tithi less.

A similar instance of twin months (Adhika and Nija) occurs during the Rama-Ravana war. Hanuman found Sita on Māgha Full Moon, but by the time Rama's army reached Lanka, it was Phālguna. The Ramayana specifically mentions Indrajit's death on Krishna Caturdaśī, likely in Phālguna (VR: 6-92-66). The next day marked the beginning of Caitra and the war between Rama and Ravana. However, Rama returned to Bharadvāja Āśrama in Prayāga by Caitra Pancamī, leaving only five days between Indrajit's death and Rama's arrival. The Ramayana describes the war with Ravana after the death of Indrajit as lasting ‘Sapta Rātraṃ’ (seven nights) (VR: 6-107-65), which researchers have struggled to reconcile, leading some to label it an interpolation.

According to the astrology simulator, Indrajit's death occurred in Adhika Phālguna, followed by the war in Nija Phālguna, which concluded on Śhukla Ṣaṣṭhī, allowing ample time for subsequent events and Rama's onward journey to Prayāga. None of the previous researchers were able to accurately reconstruct these chronological sequences.

Rama’s birth date

Valmiki's descriptions of tithi, star, and planetary positions throughout the Ramayana were verified using an astrology simulator (Jhora), revealing a remarkable consistency from Rama's birth to his coronation. Specifically, Rama's birth date corresponds to January 9, 5114 BCE, in the Gregorian calendar, aligning with Nija Caitra month, Śhukla Aṣṭamī (one tithi less), Punarvasu, on a Monday in the year Parābhava¹².

Notably, all planetary positions described by Valmiki matched this date, with Saturn showing a minor deviation of just one degree, potentially attributable to rotational anomalies over the past 7,000 years. Alternatively, this one-degree drift into the next sign can be astrologically interpreted as Saturn having shifted to the previous sign (Libra) because it was in retrogression, being opposite to Sun at Rama’s birth. According to Jyotiṣa, this extraordinary convergence of planetary and Pancānga factors is unlikely to recur within 4,32,000 years.

Internal evidence for Ramayana date

The Valmiki Ramayana mentions the Pāndya kingdom in the South as a contemporary kingdom, providing internal evidence for its period. Sugrīva instructed the Vānara-s to search for Sita after crossing the Tāmraparani river, specifically in the Pāndya's Kavātam (VR: 4-41-19). Notably, Kavātam was the second Tamil Sangam capital, established around 5550 BCE according to Nakkīrar’s text ‘Irayanār Agapporul’¹³. This date serves as the upper limit for Ramayana’s date, providing a significant historical anchor.

A corroboration of the Pāndya king's story can be found in the Sinnamanur copper plate inscriptions, which reveal that Ravana purchased peace with the Pāndya king, fearing the Brahmāstra in the king's possession¹⁴. This incident is also echoed in Kālidāsa's Raghu Vaṁśa (6^th sarga, verses 59-65)¹⁵, where the Pāndyan king is described as wielding the formidable Brahma Śiro Astra, obtained from Lord Shiva. This powerful weapon allegedly prompted Ravana, the Lankādhipati, to seek peace with the Pāndya king, lest his people suffer the consequences of this extraordinary astra.

The internal evidence from the Ramayana, specifically the reference to the Pāndyan capital, corroborates the date of 5114 BCE, further validating the findings of this research.

Verifying the Ramayana date: The Puranic king list of the Ikṣvāku dynasty

The Purana-s provide a crucial checkpoint for dating the Ramayana through the Ikṣvāku king list, extending from Rama to Brihadbala. A comparative analysis of this list across several Purana-s reveals a consistent, sequential lineage with minor discrepancies. With a maximum of 32 kings and an average reign of 60 years, the time gap between the Ramayana and the Mahabharata is estimated to be less than 2000 years, providing a vital clue for establishing the historical timeline of the Ramayana.

The table in Figure 7, prepared from Vishnu Purana (4-22), Vāyu Purana (2-26), Bhāgavata Purana (9-12) and Shiva Purana (5-39) reveals a consistent list of 32 kings following Rama, without interruption. Other Purana-s, including Skanda Purana, Agni Purana, Padma Purana, and Brahma Purana, also provide lists of kings between Rama and Brihadbala, with fewer than 32 names. Collectively, these Puranic accounts suggest a relatively consistent 2000-year gap between the Ramayana and Mahabharata.

Figure 7: The King-list of Ikṣvāku dynasty from Rama to Brihadbala

Flaws in previous Ramayana dating theories

Despite the presence of internal evidence, such as the reference to the Pāndyan capital providing an upper limit for the Ramayana’s date, and the Puranic list indicating a less than 2000-year gap between the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, researchers have either inflated or downplayed the date. The following list presents the proposed dates by various researchers:

1.     Nilesh Oak – 12,209 BCE

2.     Vedveer Arya – 5674 BCE

3.     Pushkar Bhatnagar – 5114 BCE (10^th January)

4.     Dr. Saroj Bala – 5114 BCE (Replicated Bhatnagar’s)

5.     Dr. DK Hari & Dr. Hema Hari – 5114 BCE (Replicated Bhatnagar’s)

6.     Jijith Nadumuri Ravi – between 1950 BCE and 1850 BCE

These researchers relied on astronomy simulators that utilize the shifting zodiac, rather than the fixed sidereal zodiac employed by Vedic society. Astronomy simulators are not designed to pinpoint the Pancānga features such as tithi and star or Adhika māsa and Nija māsa. Furthermore, their studies were marred by several critical errors:

Ø  Failure to address the tithi-star mismatch

Ø  Inaccurate planetary positions at Rama's birth

Ø  Incorrect calculation of Rama and Sita’s ages at marriage

Ø  Misinterpretation of the asteroid hit before war with Khara as a solar eclipse

Ø  Inability to accurately recreate the 21-day war period as given by Valmiki

Notably, Pushkar Bhatnagar incorrectly identified the asteroid hit described in the Ramayana as a solar eclipse. Ironically, this very asteroid hit provides a crucial scientific corroboration for the date of the Ramayana, offering a significant breakthrough in verifying the epic's historical timeline.

Scientific evidence for the date of the Ramayana

Similar to the Mahabharata, the Ramayana also references nimitta-s (ominous signs) in various contexts. Notably, it describes the effects of an asteroid hit in 18 verses of the 23^rd chapter of Aranya Kanda, specifically in the context of the war with Khara. Unfortunately, Pushkar Bhatnagar misinterpreted this event as a solar eclipse.

The corresponding year being 5078 BCE, it was found imprinted in the GISP2 graph indicating a cosmic impact that is accompanied by a decrease in global temperatures (Figure 8).

Figure 8: GISP2 graph showing a steep decline on 5078 BCE

Graph credit: Joachim Seifert, climatologist

The steepness of the decline suggests that the impact was catastrophic. This scientific evidence corroborates Ramayana’s account of an asteroid hit, providing a remarkable verification of the epic's historical narrative. The Ramayana narrative indicates that the asteroid hit was audible to Rama and Khara in Panchavati (present-day Nashik). This suggests that the impact region was in close proximity. A search revealed impact craters near the Trimbakeshwar temple, within a 40 km radius of the proposed site of the Rama-Khara war (Figure 9).  This event has been recorded in the international Catalogue of Impact Structures, mentioning three meteor craters near Trimbakeshwar tempe¹⁶. Despite the catalogue suggesting a likely date of 3100 BCE, additional geological analysis is warranted, as the site’s features align with descriptions in the Ramayana and corroborate the GISP2 graph indicating an impact event.

Figure 9: Probable impact craters (indicated by black arrows) near Trimbakeshwar temple

Picture credit: Google map

Sea level maps reveal timing of Ram-Setu inundation

Further evidence supporting the historicity of the Ramayana comes from sea level maps related to Ram-Setu. These maps indicate that the Setu, a natural land bridge connecting India and Lanka, was inundated approximately 7000 years ago. This timing suggests that during Rama's era, the land bridge was inundated necessitating the construction of a bund to facilitate crossing. This is revealed in the sea level maps created by Glenn Milne published by Graham Hancock.¹⁷

Figure 10 shows the maps found in Hancock’s book (Underworld, p. 262-263). The land connection remained above sea level until around 7700 years ago, after which it began to submerge gradually over the next 800 years, becoming fully submerged by 7000 years ago.

 

Figure 10: Sea level maps

Picture credit: Hancock (2002)¹⁷

This serves as one of the pieces of evidence supporting the dating of Rama’s period to around 7000 years ago.  Further corroboration comes from ISRO scientists, led by Dandabathula, who utilized NASA's ICESat-2 satellite to map the waterway's depth¹⁸. Their findings reveal a maximum depth of merely 3 meters, with breaches in the bund at 11 locations. This supports Al Beruni's description of Setubandha as “isolated mountains between which the ocean flows,”¹⁹ during his time about 1000 years ago.

The illustration in Figure 11, from the ISRO research paper, provides a visual representation of Ram Setu. Figure a in the illustration displays the satellite image of the visible portions, while Figure b presents the elevation map, where '0' denotes the sea surface. The map reveals scattered landmasses above the sea surface, intersected by narrow channels with a maximum depth of 3 meters, likely caused by erosion from seawater. The extent of erosion could have been less pronounced when Rama attempted to traverse this section.

Figure 11: Illustration of Ram Setu (Adam’s Bridge) by ISRO scientists

(a)  Satellite image showing the exposed sand banks along the Adam’s Bridge crest line.

(b)  The Elevation profile along Adam’s Bridge’s crest line shows narrow channels up to a depth of 3 m.

Picture credit: Figure 5 in Dandabathula et al. 2024¹⁸

Further cross-validation was conducted using global sea level maps prepared by scientists at Pennsylvania University²⁰, as illustrated in Figure 12.

Figure 12: Sea level map

Picture credit: The Pennsylvania State University²⁰

Sea level rise maps prepared by the scientists of The College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University for the period of last 20,000 years, reveal that the sea level was 3 meters lower than today's level precisely 7,000 years ago. This finding is corroborated by Graham Hancock’s Sea level maps. The data suggests that the necessity for constructing a bund between India and Lanka emerged approximately 7,000 years ago, remarkably aligning with the Ramayana's estimated timeline.

Conclusion

The dating of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana has long been a subject of debate, but a clearer understanding is emerging as the Mahabharata provides definitive internal evidence, especially through four verses referencing the 35-year gap between the Mahabharata war and Krishna's departure from the world. This evidence, retained in collective memory and reflected in the native Kali Yuga calendar, firmly anchors the date of the Mahabharata at 3136 BCE. A crucial element in this dating is the loss of a tithi due to a simultaneous impact on both the Earth and the Moon, a factor that must be accounted for to reconcile the mismatch in the star-tithi of Rama's birth. Further examination of the internal reference to Pāndya’s Kavātam establishes a limiting date for the Ramayana. By addressing the shortcomings of previous researchers’ dates, the birthdate of Rama is firmly set at January 9, 5114 BCE, as determined by the Pancānga features of an astrology simulator. Additional evidence, such as the asteroid impact preceding the Khara war and the depth of Ram Setu, offers further validation. These insights, thoroughly analyzed in my upcoming book¹², contribute to the understanding of the chronological framework of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana and pave the way for a deeper appreciation of their place in history.

References

1. Harivamśa. (Trans). Chapter 53. An account of Santanu’s family.

2. Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International, Inc. https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/

3. Wilkinson, L. (Trans). (1861). Siddhānta Śiromaṇi. The Baptist Mission Press. Calcutta.

4. Ganguli, K.M. (Trans). (1883 - 1896). The Mahabharata. https://sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm  

5. Saranathan, D.J. (2021). Did the Cosmic impact described in the Hindu Epic Mahabharata cause the Piora Oscillation? Academia Letters, Article 1385. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1385

6. Saranathan, Jayasree. Dr. (2021). Mahabharata 3136 BCE: Validation of the Traditional Date. Rathna Offset Printers. Chennai. ISBN: 978-93-5779-786-3

7. NASA Hubble Mission Team. (2021). Comet Atlas May Have Been a Blast from the Past. https://science.nasa.gov/missions/hubble/comet-atlas-may-have-been-a-blast-from-the-past/  

8. Quanzhi Ye et al. (2021). Disintegration of Long-period Comet C/2019 Y4 (ATLAS). I. Hubble Space Telescope Observations. AJ 162 70. DOI 10.3847/1538-3881/abfec3

9. Kareta, T., et al. (2025). On the lunar origin of near-Earth asteroid 2024 PT5. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 979(L8). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ad9ea8

10. Hemphill, Brian. (2020). Who Were the 'Massacre' Victims at Mohenjo-daro? A Craniometric Investigation. 10.2307/j.ctv19vbgkc.18.

11. Rao, D. H. (Trans). (1998). The Valmiki Ramayana. https://www.valmikiramayan.net/     

12. Saranathan, Jayasree. Dr. (2024-25). Ramayana 5114 BCE. ISBN: 978-93-340-8461-0 (Unpublished)

13. Nakkīrar. Irayanār Agapporul. (Tamil Sangam text). Sarada Publications. Chennai.

14. South Indian Inscriptions: Vol IV, copperplates from Sinnamanur, Tirukkalar, and Tiruchchengodu. (1929). p.451. https://archive.org/details/dli.csl.7342/page/n12/mode/1up

15. Rao, D.H. (Trans). (2010). Raghu Vaṁśam. https://sanskritdocuments.org/sites/giirvaani/giirvaani/rv/sargas/06_rv.htm  

16. Mikheeva, A. V. The Complete Catalog of the Earth's Impact structures. (Last update: 2025) http://labmpg.sscc.ru/impact/index1.html

17. Hancock, G. (2002). Underworld: The Mysterious Origins of Civilization. Crown edition.

18. Dandabathula, G., Ghosh, K., Hari, R. et al. (2024). Physical features of Adam’s Bridge interpreted from ICESat-2 based high-resolution digital bathymetric elevation model. Sci Rep 14, 14896 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-65908-2

19. Sachau, Edward. C. (1910). Al-Biruni’s India: An Account of the Religion, Philosophy, Literature, Geography, Chronology, Astronomy, Customs, Laws, and Astrology of India about 1030AD. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd, London. p.209.

20. The College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ )