Route to Citrakūta deciphered from the Rāghava-Yātrā inscription (Sri Rama Navami special)

 The 85th chapter from my upcoming book "Ramayana 5114 BCE" is reproduced here:

85. Route to Citrakūta deciphered from the Rāghava-Yātrā inscription

A significant archaeological discovery was made on December 18, 2024, at Garwah Fort in Prayagraj District, Uttar Pradesh. A stone slab bearing an 11th-century inscription, issued during the reign of Chaṇḍela king Kīrtivarman (1060-1100 CE), was unearthed. The 16-line inscription, written in Sanskrit and composed by the king’s minister Vatsarāja, provides a eulogy (Praśasti) of Bhagavān Rāma.

Rāghava-yātrā inscription (Image courtesy: Avatans Kumar)

Dated to 1095 CE (1152 Vikram Saṃvat), the inscription was erected on the eleventh day of the waxing half of the Caitra month (Caitra śukla ekādaśī), following a ceremonial procession (Rāghava-yātrā) in honour of Rāma. The inscription recounts the departure of Bhagavān Rāma, Lakṣmaṇa, and Sītā, and mentions the presence of an āśrama at the site, where a maṭha was later constructed.[1] The discovery of this inscription at Garwah Fort reveals the route taken by Rāma towards Citrakūta, providing valuable insights.

From Ayodhyā, Rāma journeyed to the Tamasā River, where he spent the first night of his exile on its banks. The following day, he arrived at Guha’s abode in Śṛṅgaberapura where he matted his hair. He rested under an Ingudi tree on the second night. The next morning, he crossed the Gaṅgā by boat and landed on the southern bank. From there, he began walking eastward towards the confluence of the Yamunā with the Gaṅgā. Along the way, he spent the third night under a tree near the Gaṅgā River. By the next evening, he reached Bharadvāja’s Āśrama, situated near the confluence of the Gaṅgā and Yamunā. He spent the night (his fourth night in exile) at the āśrama.

The route up to this point is illustrated below.

Rāma’s travel from Śṛṅgaberapura to Bharadvāja-Āśrama

Sage Bharadvāja described to Rāma the path to Citrakūta, which was ten krośa[2] from his āśrama (VR: 2-54-28). He instructed Rāma to reach the confluence of the Gaṅgā and Yamunā, then proceed along the Yamunā (Kālindī) River. This indicates that the confluence was at a short distance from his āśrama. From the confluence, the Yamunā River flowed westward. The sage advised Rāma to follow the Yamunā until he reached an ancient, sacred spot (tasyāstīrtham pracaritam purāṇam) frequented by many, and to cross the river at that spot (VR: 2-55-5).

After crossing the river by raft, an ancient Banyan tree named Śyāma, visited by the Siddha-s, could be spotted on the southern bank of the Yamunā. Rāma followed the path as instructed by Bharadvāja and reached the Banyan tree, where Sītā offered her prayers for a safe journey and return from exile (VR: 2-55-25). After walking a krośa from the tree, they arrived at a forest, where they collected twigs and flowers. Then they reached a level ground and spent the night. The Rāghava-Yātrā inscription appears to have been found at this location, as their next stop was Citrakūta only.

The Yamunā riverbank is now dotted with numerous bathing ghats, but identifying the exact location where Rāma, Lakṣmaṇa, and Sītā crossed the river requires careful consideration. According to Bharadvāja’s description, they had to walk a short distance along the Yamunā’s western bank to find an ancient tīrtha, a bustling bathing ghat (VR: 2-55-5). The Yamunā’s rapid flow, driven by its descent towards the Gangā, suggests that this crossing point was likely closer to their confluence.

A notable landmark on the opposite bank was a banyan tree. In search of the probable crossing site, an ancient and sacred ghat on the Yamuna’s northern bank, known as Akshayavata Ghat, draws attention. This ghat is named after a banyan tree (Akshayavata). Interestingly, in olden days, pilgrims thronged the banyan tree on the northern shore, which became the Akshayavata shrine. When the Allahabad Fort was built, this banyan tree was encompassed within the fort complex, prompting pilgrims to demand entry into the fort to worship the tree. “The underground shrine to the Akshayavata - an ‘immortal’ banyan tree - was and is a fundamental part of the Prayāga pilgrimage process.”[3]

Alexander Cunningham hypothesized that the Akshayavata tree was the same tree mentioned by Xuanzang in the seventh century, where Hindu pilgrims would “throw away their lives.” The sacredness and antiquity associated with this banyan tree are connected to the banyan tree of the Rāmāyaṇa period, although its location was mistakenly noted on the northern bank. It is believed that the tree was maintained over time by replanting branches from the original tree. Taking these details into account, it can be inferred that the Akṣayavaṭa Ghāṭ, located a little west of the confluence, was likely the site where Rāma crossed the river on a raft.

The probable crossing location in the Yamunā river

The probable location of the river crossing is indicated by an arrow mark on the Google satellite map. Upon crossing the river, the trio arrived at the ancient banyan tree. The satellite image reveals a lush landscape, corroborating the Rāmāyana’s account of Sītā and Lakṣmaṇa gathering flowers and twigs in this very stretch. This scenic route ultimately led them to a level ground, which likely served as their resting place.

Interestingly, this site is now occupied by Garhwa Fort, where several inscriptions, including the Rāghava-Yātrā inscription, have been discovered. The banyan tree, known as Syāma in the Vālmīki Rāmāyana, and the resting place of the three on a level land must have been retained in memory. It is likely that the branches of the original banyan tree were preserved, specifically at the northern ghaṭ where Rāma crossed the river. The resting place must have been preserved for ages, as evidenced by the numerous inscriptions found in the region, which was dotted with many temples. The entire route from Śṛṅgaberapura to Citrakūta via Garhwa Fort is meticulously mapped on Google Maps, providing a precise visual representation of the journey undertaken by Rāma, Sītā, and Lakṣmaṇa.

Google map showing the route to Garhwa Fort and Citrakūta

From the resting ground in Garhwa Fort, a straight westward route had taken them to Citrakūta.

The date given in the inscription can be simulated:

It was Yuva Varsha, Caitra Shuka Ekādaśī. The corresponding Gregorian date was March 25, 1095. Magha nakshatra started by that morning which was a Monday. The date shows that Sri Rāma Navamī was celebrated a day before on 23^rd March when Śukla Navamī coincided with Puṣya nakshatra.

Date of the Rāghava-Yātrā inscription

The procession of Śrī Rāma must have commenced on the Navamī day and culminated on Ekādaśī. It is impossible to confirm whether this combination was identical to the one during Rāma’s return to Ayodhyā from exile. Sage Vālmīki provides only two hints: Caitra Śukla Pañcamī, when Rāma arrived at Bharadvāja’s āśrama, and Puṣya nakṣatra, when he landed in Ayodhyā. The tithi of that day can only be ascertained using a simulator, after establishing Rāma’s birth date and other planetary and pañcāṅga features mentioned by Vālmīki.

However, it can be stated with certainty that the coronation could not have occurred the next day, considering verse 6-128-50, which states that the Paṭṭābhiṣeka water was brought at dawn (pratyūṣasamaye), as the next day was Āśleṣā, an inauspicious day for coronation. Since Bharata had already requested Rāma to perform the Paṭṭābhiṣeka on the same day (VR: 6-128-9), it is concluded that the Paṭṭābhiṣeka was performed on the day Rāma landed in Ayodhyā.

Moreover, his sandals, which had been ruling the country in his absence, were ceremoniously returned to him the moment he landed in Nandigrāma. The Puṣya day was preferred by Daśaratha; hence, Rāma chose that day for his coronation. The water pots arriving at dawn could have actually been on the day of his arrival, as Sugrīva had sufficient time to procure them since Rāma’s landing at Bharadvāja’s āśrama.

The systematic decipherment of the dates indicates that the day had Puṣya and Navamī together. Those raising objections about Navamī must understand that the tithi-s associated with the deities were chosen for their consecration. Moreover, the stigma against Navamī and Aṣṭamī arose after the birth of these avatāra-s, for the purpose of assigning those tithi-s for spiritual progress, not for material works.

Date of coronation of Sri Rāma

---

[1] Avatans Kumar. (2025). “A Thousand-Year-Old “Prashasti” Inscription Sheds Light On The Ramayana”. https://indiacurrents.com/a-thousand-year-old-prashasti-inscription-sheds-light-on-the-ramayana/

[2] Krośā means “the range of the voice in calling or hallooing”, a measure of distance, given as Kos= 1000 daṇḍa-s. It means a calling distance.

[3] Kama Maclean. (2008). “Pilgrimage and Power: The Kumbh Mela in Allahabad, 1765-1954” OUP USA. P. 65.

How Long Did Sītā Live?

There are numerous references in the Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa that help decipher Sītā's age. One of the earliest references is her age at the time of exile. In the Araṇya Kāṇḍa, Sītā recounts to Rāvaṇa that she was eighteen years old, and her husband was twenty-five when they were exiled.

mama bhartā mahātejā vayasā paṃca viṃśakaḥ || (VR: 3-47-10)

aṣṭā daśa hi varṣāṇi mama janmani gaṇyate |

Meaning: “My husband who was very bold was twenty-five years and I had completed eighteen years since my birth.”

Additionally, her age at the time of marriage can be inferred from her conversation with Hanumān in the Aśoka Vana, where she mentions spending twelve years in Rāma's household, enjoying a pleasant life.

samā dvādaśa tatra aham rāghavasya niveśane || (VR: 5-33-17)

bhunjānā mānuṣān bhogān sarva kāma samṛddhinī |

Meaning: “I enjoyed worldly pleasures in abundance for twelve years at Rama's abode.”

By subtracting twelve from eighteen, it can be deduced that she was married at the age of six.

After spending fourteen years in exile, Sītā returned to Ayodhya at the age of 32, where she became queen. However, within two years, she was sent to the forest by Rāma, at which time she was pregnant. It was during this period that she gave birth to her twin sons.

Śatrughna happened to be visiting Vālmīki's āśrama on the very night of their birth. At that time, Śatrughna was en route to Madhuvana (Mathura) to vanquish Lavanāsura, and Rāma's children were born during his brief stay at the āśrama.

Subsequently, Śatrughna returned to Ayodhyā after twelve-years. During his journey back, he spent a night at Vālmīki's āśrama, where he overheard Rāma's sons rehearsing the Rāmāyaṇa, which had been taught to them by Vālmīki. Based on Śatrughna's return timeline, it is inferred that Rāma's sons were twelve years old by then. Consequently, Sītā's age at this point would have been 32 + 2 + 12 = 46 years.

In the same year, Rāma initiated the Aśvamedha yajña, during which his sons recited the Rāmāyaṇa, which they had learned from Vālmīki. Recognizing them as his children, Rāma desired Sītā's presence. Upon her arrival, Rāma asked her to take an oath (śapatha), which she did, invoking Mother Earth. As a result, she was swallowed by the Earth, marking the end of her mortal life on earth.

The sequence of Sītā's age at different events

·       Marriage – 6 years

·       Started exile – 18 years

·       Exile – 14 years

·       Return from exile – at 32 years

·       Lived as a queen – 2 years (approximately)

·       Sent to forest – at 34 years

·       As a mother – 12 years = age (34+12 = 46 years)

·       Left the world = at 46 years (approximately)

Thus, Sītā's lifespan as a human being was approximately 46 years. Within this period, she spent time with Rāma from age 6 to 34. Excluding one year of her stay in Aśoka Vana, this translates to 28 minus 1, resulting in a maximum of 27 years spent with Rāma.

Building upon my previous article , the 27-year duration of Sītā's life with Rāma was equated to 10,000 years by ancient commentators. This equivalence matches with the Vedic principle "Ahorātraṃ saṃvatsaraḥ", which states that one day and night is equal to one year.

In the Vedic calendar, one year consists of 360 days, with the Sun moving at a rate of one degree per day, covering 360 degrees in a year. Applying the "Ahorātraṃ saṃvatsaraḥ" principle, we can convert 10,000 years to 10,000 days.

Dividing 10,000 days by 360 (days per year), i.e., 10000 ÷ 360, we arrive at approximately 27.77 years, which closely matches the 27 years that Sītā lived with Rāma.

This calculation suggests that ancient commentators employed the "Ahorātraṃ saṃvatsaraḥ" principle to justify the attribution of 10,000 years to Sītā and Rāma's time together, despite Vālmīki not explicitly stating this.

This rationale provides insight into the interpretation of verses such as "daśa varṣa sahasrāṇi daśa varṣa śatāni ca" (VR: 1-1-97 and 1-15-29), where 10,000 and 1000 years are separately mentioned. By applying the "Ahorātraṃ saṃvatsaraḥ" principle, the commentators equated 10,000 years with approximately 27.77 years, that was the duration of time spent by Sītā and Rāma together. 

According to the Upanyāsaka-s, the remaining 1000 years are said to represent the time Rāma spent without Sītā. Applying the same calculation, 1000 years is equivalent to 1000 days.

Converting these 1000 days to years, we get 1000 ÷ 360 = 2.77 years. This suggests that Rāma lived for approximately 2 years and 6-7 months after Sītā's departure from mortal life.

This information also provides a basis for calculating Rāma's age, which I leave for readers to explore. In my forthcoming book, I will present various calculations proposed by ancient scholars, offering a deeper understanding of the epic's chronology.

 

Related article: Rāma's 11,000-Year Rule According to Vālmīki

Rāma's 11,000-Year Rule According to Vālmīki

Upanyāsaka-s have traditionally glossed over the notion that Rāma ruled for 11,000 years, a detail mentioned by Vālmīki in three instances within the first six kāṇḍa-s. While some scholars have offered rationales to justify the 11,000-year timeframe, this aspect has rarely been a focal point in discourses. The literal interpretation is, of course, impossible, given Rāma's human birth and mortality. As a human avatāra, his purpose was to exploit the vulnerability of Rāvaṇa, who had inadvertently left humans out of his boon of invincibility from Brahmā. This loophole allowed Bhagavān Viṣṇu to take on human form as Rāma and vanquish Rāvaṇa.

Lately, a section of Upanyāsaka-s has been propagating the idea that Rāma lived for 11,000 years, citing the notes of the commentators of their sects. They interpret the statement of Rāma, as Viṣṇu, that he would protect the world for 10,000 and 1,000 years, in the literal sense. However, this assertion raises several questions. If Rāma, as a divine incarnation, could live for 11,000 years, how did his brothers, their wives, and other associates, such as Sugrīva and Vibhīṣaṇa, manage to live for an equally long period? What about their children who were present when Rāma left his mortal coil? The issue is that devotees attending these discourses often fail to pose these questions to the Upanyāsaka-s themselves, and ask me instead in the social media, which prompted me to write about this anomaly.

The 11,000-year duration of Rāma's rule is mentioned in three distinct contexts within the first six kāṇḍa-s. Firstly, Nārada recounts Rāma's life history to Vālmīki, mentioning this timeframe (VR 1-1-97).  Secondly, in Brahmā's realm, Viṣṇu informs the Devas that he will protect the world for 11,000 years (VR 1-15-29). Thirdly, following Rāma's coronation, Vālmīki offers a nuanced explanation of this duration. The number 11,000 is often split into 10,000 and 1,000 years, a distinction elaborated upon by Vālmīki in the Pattābhiṣeka Kāṇḍa.

According to Vālmīki, Rāma performed hundreds of Aśvamedha yajña-s for a period of 10,000 years.

rājyan daśasahasrāṇi prāpya varṣāṇi rāghavaḥ |

śatāśvamedhānājahre sadaśvānbhūridakṣiṇān || (VR: 6-128-96)

Meaning: “Raghava, in the ten thousand years of his rule performed hundred horse sacrifices with excellent horses and gave donations liberally.”

This was followed by a 1,000-year reign, during which he ruled the kingdom alongside his brothers.

sarve lakṣaṇasampannāḥ sarve dharmaparāyaṇāḥ || (VR: 6-128-106)

daśavarṣasahasrāṇi rāmo rājyamakārayat |

Meaning: “All were endowed with signs of good culture, given to righteous behaviour. Rama ruled the kingdom for ten thousand years with brothers.”

The same account is reiterated in the seventh kāṇḍa, the Uttara Kāṇḍa, which specifies that Rāma conducted Vājimedha and Vājapeya yajñas, as well as Agniṣṭoma, Atiraatra, and Goṣava yajñas, for the same 10,000-year duration. (VR: 7-99-9 and 10)

Thus, the 10,000-year timeframe is explicitly mentioned twice in connection with Rāma's performance of yajña-s. However, some Upanyāsaka-s offer a different interpretation, claiming that the 10,000 years refer to the duration of Rāma and Sītā's life together, while the additional 1,000 years represent Rāma's reign without Sītā.

But where does Vālmīki mention this? Why don't listeners ask these Upanyāsaka-s for the source and rationale behind their claim? The fact is that Vālmīki provides clear references to Rāma and Sītā's ages at various events, allowing us to reconstruct Sītā's lifetime.

The 10,000-year duration, as mentioned earlier, is associated with Rāma's performance of yajña-s. It's worth noting that some yajña-s are mentioned for 1,000 years, which is humanly impossible. Scholars like Jaimini have discussed the rationale behind such large timeframes. In my upcoming book, "Ramayana 5114 BCE", I will explore these justifications by Jaimini rishi and explanations proposed by scholars in the past.

However, the literal interpretation of Sītā living with Rāma for 10,000 years and Rāma ruling for 1,000 years is unsupported by Vālmīki's text. Instead, we should approach the mention of 11,000 years with a nuanced understanding, using the wisdom imparted by the rishis to decipher its true meaning.

Considering the claim that Sītā lived with Rāma for 10,000 years, I will present, in my next article, the specific details of Sītā's age as described by Vālmīki. This will provide a clearer understanding of her lifetime.

Next article: How Long Did Sītā Live?

Related article: Did Rama rule for 11,000 years

As a panelist in an Event of the Hindu University of America (HUA)

I had the privilege of participating in a panel discussion on December 14, 2024, for a fundraising project supporting the Hindu University of America (HUA). HUA is dedicated to exploring and promoting

ancient Indian knowledge systems. During the discussion, I shared my perspectives on the scope and significance of HUA's endeavors.

I highlighted the stark reality that academic environments for Hindu theological studies are scarce, not only in India but also globally. Currently, only a handful of institutions in India, located in Pune, Nagaland, Kottayam, and Dehradun, offer academic programs in theology, but these courses focus primarily on Christian studies. Internationally, numerous institutions offer programs in theology for various religions, but Hinduism remains a glaring exception.

Furthermore, I emphasized the lack of opportunities for publishing research papers on Hinduism, as there are no reputable universities to encourage and support such publications. Despite India ranking fourth in research output globally, none of these efforts focus on Hindu studies. This is where the Hindu University of America can play a vital role by inviting papers, exploring Hinduism-related topics, and providing a platform for publishing and disseminating knowledge.

In light of the negative publicity surrounding caste issues in Western circles, I stressed the importance of creating a digital repository of Hindu thought on caste and other relevant topics. This repository would serve as a valuable resource for promoting awareness and understanding.

Finally, I noted that the Government of India's proposal to fund subscriptions for various research papers presents an opportune moment for HUA to seek support for its publishing efforts and digital library creation. By collaborating with HUA, we can work towards bridging the knowledge gap and promoting a deeper understanding of Hinduism and its rich cultural heritage.

இதிஹாசப் பார்வையில் ஆரியப் படையெடுப்பும், ஹரப்பன் நாகரிகமும் (My talk in VoC)

 I am delighted to share the news about the A3 Conclave organized by Voice of Covai in Coimbatore. The conclave, which took place on November 30 and December 1, 2024, at Codissia, brought together 27 speakers, including myself, to discuss the significance of Bharatiya culture in shaping India's identity and future.

The A3 Conclave, which stands for "Awake, Arise, Assert," aimed to promote and celebrate Bharatiya values and Sanatana Dharma. I am glad to be part of this inaugural event, which was conceived to inspire and empower individuals to assert their cultural heritage.

As one of the speakers, I had a fantastic opportunity to share my insights and engage with like-minded individuals. The conclave was indeed a thought-provoking platform for discussion, debate, and assertion of the timeless wisdom and principles that have sustained our nation. 

The event coincided with the return of Sri Annamalai, President of TN BJP, from his 3-month research stint at Oxford University. He graced the occasion as the chief guest and delivered his first public address after his return.

The conclave faced unexpected challenges due to heavy rainfall along the east coast of India, resulting in delayed and cancelled flights. Unfortunately, Union Minister Sri L. Murugan was unable to attend and inaugurate the event as scheduled.

On November 30, I presented a talk titled "இதிஹாசப் பார்வையில் ஆரியப் படையெடுப்பும், ஹரப்பன் நாகரிகமும்" (Aryan Invasion Theory and Harappan Civilization in the light of Itihasa). My presentation delved into genetic studies on the Yamnaya culture, analyzing the movement of people from Europe preceded by an earlier movement of people from Bharat to Europe through the lens of Ramayana events. Additionally, I explored the Harappan culture from the perspective of Mahabharata, shedding new light on the ancient civilization. I also made a case for re-naming the Harappan culture as “Mahabharata Culture”.

My talk can be watched in this video:

Tipu Sultan a martyr or an offender? (My talk in Tamil Janam TV)

Was Tipu Sultan a martyr or a sinner?

In connection with Tipu Jayanti in November, I gave an interview to Tamil Janam TV on Tipu's atrocities.

I talked about many facets of Tipu, such as his rigor in  religious conversion, temple destruction, and the horrific killing of the Mandayam Iyengars. The places raided by Tipu and his father Hyder Ali had left a trail of destruction and also conversion. I pointed out evidences of temples ransacked by them and how people had to flee their home towns to escape their fury. Popular example is that of the former Chief Minister of TN, Mr. MG Ramachandran (MGR) whose ancestors fled from Pollachi to Palakkad to escape the wrath of Hyder Ali. 

I also pointed out the genetic research that shows Muslims of India, particularly in places like Tamilnadu and Kerala were converts. This is established by common ancestry between them and the Hindus in the neighborhood. Genetics show cultural change from Hinduism to Islam and no foreign component in the Muslims. 

To watch the interview click the video:

Flood at the end of a Yuga and the flood faced by Manu (Part 8 of Yuga series)

 Yuga Series in Dheivam Channel :8 (Last Part)

In this, I talk about whether there is a connection between climatic changes and the Yuga. Earlier in a movie, it was shown that people saved the essentials to escape on a ship, expecting that the world would be destroyed due to change of Time. This is how Vaivaswata Manu escaped a flood. I explained how Manu had known in advance the coming of a flood by observing the behavior of a fish.

I also explained many details about Time, the changes that occurred with Time, the first flood that brought Manu to the River Saraswati, the place where he reached after being swept away by the flood and the first rains in the Indian sub-continent. 

I concluded this series by saying that these details have no connection with Yuga. Yuga is a different genre which I explained in the previous parts of this series.

The last part can be viewed here:

Yukteshwar Giri's yuga concept differs from the Vedic concept (Part 7 of Yuga series)

 Yuga Series in Dheivam Channel: Part 7.

In this, I have talked about the 24,000-year Yuga calculation given by Yukteshwar Giri. He says that Yuga is based on the precession cycle. This concept is based on the idea that the earth's axis keeps moving backwards; it takes 24,000 years to complete one circle. This is called precession; this cycle of 24,000 years is considered to be divided into four yugas, according to Yukteshwar Giri. 

This concept is not mentioned in our scriptures. Based on the astrological texts like Surya Siddhanta, there is no precession; but the sun moves forwards and backwards. That is, the sun does not move in a straight line in the universe. It moves in a winding path like a snake. Everything in the universe moves in a spiral.

To us who travel with the sun, this curved path looks as though the sun is moving forwards and backwards.

Also, the earth's axis does not move. If it is true that it moves, then on the days of equinox (equal day and equal night), the sun will not be visible in the middle of our temple towers. I have explained such details in this part to establish that Yukteshwar Giri's version is not correct and that the Yuga concept is not based on precession.

The talk can be watched here: 

Difference between Dharma and Maha yuga and how catastrophes occur in the change of Maha Yuga-s (Part 4 of Yuga series)

This is the fourth part in a series of my talks about Yuga given to Dheivam Channel. 

I have explained that the Maha Yuga, which is a part of the Kalpa called day or night of the life of the creator God Brahma, is different from the Dharma based Yuga in which Rama was born. 

The time period of creation and destruction of the entire world and also of the Universe is measured in Maha Yuga scale. But in the case of human life, the twin existence of Dharma and Adharma measure time. In other words, the Yuga Dharma determines a Yuga. Whenever the Dharma of a Yuga decreases, God incarnates. When Treta Yuga Dharma decreased, Rama incarnated. 

The existence of Yuga Dharma and avatara-s of God to protect Yuga Dharma happen only in the land of Bharat. To put it in another way, Dharma based Yuga happens only in Bharat. In contrast, the yuga of Brahma's Kalpa, which consists of millions of years, is common to the entire world.

When a Maha yuga changes, disasters occur on cosmic or global scale. 5000 years ago, before the beginning of the Kali Maha Yuga such a disaster was caused by a break-away comet hitting the earth. It caused Amavasya to advance to Trayodasi tithi. Many old-timers would have seen this as a story in the movie 'Karna'. That story was not a figment of imagination but a real event mentioned in the Mahabharata. It caused a change in Time. The unusual Amavasya on Trayodasi resulted in the loss of a tithi, with a new alignment of star-tithi which continues till date.

This loss of tithi when extrapolated to Rama's time (before that catastrophic event in the Mahabharata time) gets reflected in the mismatch of Rama's birth star Punarvasu, with Rama's birth tithi (Shukla Navami) when the Sun is in Mesha.

For further details, watch the video. Share.

How the Treta Yuga of Rama is determined (Part 3 of the Yuga series)

In the 3rd part of the Yuga series given to Dheivam Channel, I explained how the Treta Yuga in which Rama lived is determined.

The basis is Yuga Dharma in which Dharma and Adharma co-exist in the ratio of 3:1. 

In such a Yuga, Rajasa will be high. Since the kings were over-zealous with Rajasa, Parashurama incarnated to subdue the Rajasic kshatriyas. 

Rama lived in the same period as an avatara. Avatara-s occur to protect the Yuga Dharma. Shambuka Vadha was done by Rama to restore the balance of Dharma and Adharma in Treta Yuga. Details such as this are given in this video. Please watch and share.

Yuga in Vedanga and in Jyothisha Siddhanta (Part 2 of Yuga series)

 In the first part I explained the meaning of Yuga.

In this section (2nd part), I explained how Yuga described in Vedanga Jyothisha is different from what is described in Jyothisha Siddhanta. In Vedanga Jyothisha, 5-year yuga is given, whereas Jyothisha Siddhanta-s describe Yuga in lakhs of years in the context of Brahma Deva's age. During Rama's time, the 5-year was in vogue. In our current times, we follow the Maha Yuga system which is actually used to measure Time from Creation to Destruction. 

I also explained how these two types of yugas are calculated. I have given the details about Krita, Treta, Dvapara and Kali as numbers, by citing the use of them in the dice game in the Mahabharata. 

Watch here and share.

My talk about Macaulay education in Vettaiyan movie (Dinamalar channel)

My speech in the Dinamalar video.

I have talked about the education system introduced by Macaulay which continues to this day. Macaulay's aim was religious conversion. Macaulay has written that not a single Hindu or Muslim will remain in India in the next 30 years with the education policy he brought. He also wrote that the time was ripe to convert all Indians into to Anglo-Indians.

His methodology was three-fold: (1) Make Indians to think like the westerner though they may remain Indian in blood and colour. (2) Make Indians look at their scriptures such as Vedas from western prism. (3) Make Indians look at their regional languages and culture from western outlook.

To achieve the first, he replaced the then existing self-sufficient education system by English education to cater to his clerical needs. 

The achieve the second, he asked Max Muller to interpret the Vedas from a Western perspective, Max Muller fulfilled his wish by inventing Aryan invasion in the Vedas and made Indians believe that Aryans came from Europe to conquer the Indians. Brahmins were the residual Aryans, according to them.

His third aim was fulfilled by Caldwell who taught us that Tamil was Dravidian and that our culture was Dravidian who were driven out by the Aryans from their habitat in the Indus. 

Macaulay, Max Muller, and Caldwell were the Tri-Murthi-s who destroyed Indian education and culture. I discussed these details with data on how the old education system was self sufficient and how it was destroyed.

Macaulay's education led to a situation where one has to pay to get education. Not everyone got education. Mahatma Gandhi had said that at the Round Table Conference in 1931 and also highlighted how it increased the poverty level.

Mahakavi Bharathiar wrote in his autobiography how the Macaulay education ruined him. His father sent him to study in that educational system, but it was expensive; he did not gain knowledge, 

To show the world what Gandhiji had said then, that the English had destroyed the roots of our 'beautiful tree' of education, Dharampal titled his book as 'The Beautiful Tree' in which he compiled all the available evidence on how the Indian education system worked wonderfully until the British destroyed it. To the best of my ability, in the time available, I have explained how we had progressed in many fields like astronomy, astrology, sculpture, weaving, etc.

I also talked about the economic growth in the past 2000 years as given by an English economist named Madison. According to his statement, from the year 1 of the Common Era to 1820, we were creating 45% of the world's production. After the advent of Macaulay education, our industries collapsed. 

The video can be watched here:

Tamil Naadu or Dravida Naadu (my talk in Twitter Space)

Like a piece of junk food, the talk of 'Dravidam' keeps raising its head from time to time. When it was the talk of the town during Karunanidhi's rule, some 13 years ago, I started a website named "Thamizhan Dravidana" to study the Dravidian concept and had written more than a hundred research articles. Read a sample article here.

திராவிடமும், திராவிடரும்

The obsession with Dravidam continues in the current regime of the DMK too. 

In this connection I was called to speak on Dravidam in a Twitter Space.

It can be heard here:

https://x.com/i/spaces/1RDGlyRegkNJL

Was Lord Macaulay responsible for education for all? (Tamil Janam TV)

The recently released movie 'Vettaiyan' starring with super hero-s like Rajinikanth and Amitabh Bachchan created a stir by the opening verse on Lord Macauley that he was responsible for bringing education for all which was denied until then. I was asked about the veracity of this observation and my replies were telecast by Janam TV (Tamil) channel. 

I bring out the facts about the existence of a national universal education throughout India for ages which was uprooted by Macaulay. It resulted in closure of traditional schools and impoverished the masses. This also gave rise to child labour for the first time in India. How that happened can be learnt from my interview here: 

இராமர் வாழ்ந்த யுகம் எது என்று தெரியுமா?

அறிவு என்பது இரண்டு வகைப்பட்டது. சாஸ்த்திரங்களிலிருந்து பெறுவது ஒரு வகை. அவ்வாறு பெற்றதை உள்வாங்கி ஆராய்ந்து புரிந்து கொள்வது இன்னொரு வகை. இவ்வாறு புரிந்து கொண்ட அறிவின் மூலம்தான் சூரியன் இருளை நீக்குவதைப் போல அறியாமையை நீக்கிக் கொள்ள முடியும் என்று விஷ்ணு புராணம் (6-5) கூறுகிறது.

ஆனால் கோனார் நோட்ஸை மனப்பாடம் செய்தது போல ஒப்பிக்கும் அறிஞர்கள் உள்ள இந்த காலக் கட்டத்தில், அதிலும் அவர்களை ஆட்டுவிக்கும் சூத்திரதாரியாக கிரிப்டோ வேடதாரி இருக்கையில் அறிவு எங்கிருந்து, எப்படி வரும்? கோடிகளிலேயே திளைக்கும் கிரிப்டோவுக்கு அடங்கி மூளையையும் அடகு வைத்து விட்ட அறிஞர்களுக்கும், கிரிபட்டோ வேடதாரிக்கும் கொஞ்சம் யுகம் பற்றிய அறிவைப் புகட்டும் பதிவு இது.

யுகம் என்றால் என்ன?

யுக்மா என்னும் சமஸ்கிருதச் சொல்லிலிருந்து யுகம் என்னும் சொல் வந்தது.

யுக்மா என்றால் இரட்டை (twin) அல்லது ஜோடி (pair) என்று பொருள்.

அது மட்டுமல்ல, பேரூழி (eon) என்பதையும் யுகம் என்பார்கள்.

இவற்றுள் பேரூழியைக் கணிக்கும் யுகக் கணக்கையே, இராமர் வாழ்ந்த காலத்துக்குச் சொல்வது கிரிப்டோவுக்கு

சௌகரியமான ஒன்று, இராமர் வாழ்ந்ததே கற்பனை என்று சொல்லிவிடலாமே. இந்த அழகில் சயின்ஸ் கூடாது என்று சொல்லிக் கொண்டே, லட்சக் கணக்கான, இல்லை இல்லை, கோடிக்கணக்கான ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன் இராமர் பிறந்தார் என்று இந்த யுகக் கணக்கை எடுப்பவர்கள், அது சயன்ஸ்ஸில் தான் வருகிறது என்பதை அறிந்திருக்கவில்லை.

ஆமாம். பேரூழியான யுகக் கணக்கு, கணிதம், கோளம் சார்ந்த ஜோதிட சித்தாந்தத்தில் வருவது. இதை ஆங்கிலத்தில் astronomy என்பார்கள். அது முழுவதும் கணக்கு. அதிலும் நவ கிரகங்களின் சாரத்தின் அடிப்படையில் கணக்கிடப்படுவது.

பேரூழி என்னும் யுகம்

இராகு கிரகம் தவிர்த்து, மீதி 8 கிரகங்கள் ஒரு முறை மேஷ இராசியின் ஆரம்பத்தில் சந்தித்தால், மீண்டும் அதே புள்ளியில் இணைய 4,32,000 வருடங்கள் ஆகும். இது ஒரு பங்கு. ஒன்று என்பதற்குக் ' கலி என்று பெயர்.

அதன் இரண்டு மடங்கு (8, 64,000) துவாபரம் என்று பெயர். அதற்கு இரண்டு என்று அர்த்தம்.

அதன் மூன்று மடங்கு (12,96,000) திரேதா எனப்படும். திரேதா என்றால் மூன்று என்று பொருள்.

அதன் நான்கு மடங்கு (17, 28,000) கிருதம் எனப்படும். கிருதம் என்றால் நான்கு என்று பொருள்.

இவை வெறும் எண்கள்தான். இந்த எண்களைத்தான் மகாபாரதத்தில் அக்ஷ விளையாட்டு (சூதாட்டம் என்று மகாபாரதம் சொல்லவில்லை) அல்லது பாசக விளையாட்டு என்று சகுனியும், தரும புத்திரரும் விளையாடும் போது, கிருதமா, திரேதாவா, துவாபரமா, கலியா என்று கேட்டு விபீதகம் என்னும் அஷ காய்களை உருட்டுவார்கள். நாம் சிறு வயதில், ஒற்றையா, இரட்டையா, பரட்டையா என்று புளியங் கொட்டையை

வைத்து விளையாடுவோமே, அது போல.

நம் அறிஞர்கள் கோனார் நோட்சை தாண்டி படிக்கணும். கலி, துவாபரம் என்ற கணக்குதான் மேலே சொன்ன யுகக் கணக்கு. இந்த கணக்கு பிரம்மனுடைய நாள் எனப்படும் கல்பம், அவரது ஆயுசான 100 வயது ஆகியவற்றைக் கணிக்கப் பயன் படுவது. ஜோதிட சித்தாந்தங்களில் விவரிக்கப்படும் இது, ஆன்மீகத்திலும், மனிதனது வாழ்க்கையை கணிக்கவும் கொடுக்கப்படவில்லை. இது படைப்புக் கடவுளான பிரம்மன் ஆயுளை அளக்கப் பயன்படுவது.

இது ஶ்ரீமத் பாகவதம் 12- 4 இல் விளக்கப்படுகிறது. இதைப் பற்றிச் சொல்ல ஆரம்பிக்கும் பொழுதே

சதுர் யுக சஹஸ்ரம் து

பிரஹ்ம்மனோ தினம் உச்யதே (12-4-2)

என்று ஆயிரக் கணக்கான ஆண்டுகள் கொண்ட சதுர் யுகம் பிரம்மனுடைய தினத்தைக் குறிப்பது என்பர், என்கிறது.

அப்படியென்றால், இதை நம்முடைய காலத்தை அளக்க, கலி யுகம் 5126 என்று நாம் பயன் படுத்துகிறோமே என்று கேட்டால், நாம் தான் கோனார் நோட்ஸ் நெட்ரு போடுகிறவர்களாயிற்றே, அறிவு, சிந்தனை என்பதெல்லாம் நமக்குக் கிடையாதே. அதனால் வேத வியாசரும், அன்றைய பூர்வ ரிஷிகளும் ஒரேடியாக 4,32,000 ஆண்டுகளை ஆறு சாகைகள் என்று பிரித்து கொடுத்து விட்டார்கள். அதன் படி இப்பொழுது மூன்றாவது சாகையான சாலிவாஹன சகத்தில் நாம் இருக்கிறோம்.

ஆர்யபட்டர் கொடுத்துள்ள இப்படிப்பட்ட கணிதம் சார்ந்த யுகக் கணக்கை, கீழே பார்க்கவும்.

நான்கு யுகங்கள் சேர்ந்த சதுர் மஹா யுகம் (43,20,000) மேஷ இராசியின் துவக்கத்தில் ஆரம்பிக்கும் என்று எழுதியுள்ளார். அதாவது, கிருத யுகம் மேஷத்தில் ஆரம்பிக்கும்.

இது ஒரு வகை யுகம். இது இரட்டை அல்ல என்பதைக் கவனிக்கவும்.

தர்ம யுகம்

இன்னொரு வகை இருக்கிறது. அது தர்மம், அதர்மம் என்ற இரட்டையைக் கொண்டது. எப்படி இரண்டு மாடுகள் வண்டியை இழுக்கின்றனவோ அவ்வாறே தர்மமும், அதர்மமும் மனிதனுடைய காலத்தை இழுக்கின்றன.

இந்த விவரங்களை, ஶ்ரீமத் பாகவதம் 12-2 இல் பூமி கீதம் என்னும் பகுதியில் காணலாம். நன்றாகக் கவனியுங்கள். 2 ஆவது அத்தியாயத்தில் தர்மம் சார்ந்த யுகமாகவும், 4- ஆவது அத்தியாயத்தில் பிரம்மனின் தினத்தைச் சொல்லும் ஆயிரக் கணக்கான வருடங்களைக் கொண்ட யுகமாகவும் ஶ்ரீமத் பாகவதம் வேறு படுத்திக் காட்டியுள்ளதைக் கவனிக்கவும். இரண்டும் ஒன்றல்ல. பிரம்மனுக்குச் சொல்லப்பட்டதை பூமி கீதம் அத்தியாயத்தில் சொல்லவில்லை என்பதைப் புரிந்து கொள்ளுங்கள்.

இனி இந்த 2- ஆவது அத்தியாயத்தில் சொல்லப்பட்ட விவரத்தைக் காண்போம்.

பல மன்னர்களால் ஆளப்படும் இந்த பூமியில், சதுஷ் பாதத்தில் தர்மம் நிற்கும் போது, அது

கிருத யுகம்.

மூன்று பாதத்தில் தர்மம் நிற்கும் போது ஒரு பாதம் அதர்மம் என காலம் திரேதா யுகத்தைக் காட்டும்.

இரண்டு பாதத்தில் தர்மம் நிற்கும் போது, இரண்டு பாதம் அதர்மத்துடன் துவாபர யுகத்தை இழுத்துச் செல்லும்.

ஒரு பாதத்தில் தர்மம் நிற்கும் போது, மூன்று பாதத்தில் அதர்மம் கலி யுகம் என நடத்திச் செல்லும்.

இதை சத்வம், ராஜசம், தாமசம் அடிப்படையிலும் சொல்லப்படுகிறது. கிருதத்தில் சாத்வீகமும், திரேதாவில் ராஜசமும், துவாபரத்தில் ராஜச- தாமசமும், கலியில் தாமசம் மட்டுமே தூக்கலாக இருக்கும்.

இதைச் சொல்லும் ஶ்ரீமத் பாகவதம், மேலும் ஒன்றைச் சொல்கிறது. தர்மத்தை நிலை நிறுத்துவதற்காக பகவான் இப்படிப்பட்ட காலக் கணக்கில்தான் அவதரிப்பார்.

கல்கியின் அவதாரத்தைப் பற்றிச் சொல்லும் ஶ்ரீமத் பாகவதம் தர்ம பதியாக கல்கி அவதாரம் எடுத்து கிருத யுகதைக் கொண்டு வருவார் என்கிறது.

அப்பொழுது சொல்லப்படுவதைக் கவனமாகக் கேளுங்கள்.

ஆரியபட்டீயத்தில் சொல்லப்பட்டுள்ளது போல இந்த காலக் கணக்கில் கிருத யுகம் மேஷத்தில் ஆரம்பிக்கவில்லை.

கடக இராசியில், சூரியன், சந்திரன், குரு ஆகிய மூன்றும் பூச நட்சத்திரத்தில் சேரும் போது கிருத யுகம் ஆரம்பிக்கும்.

இந்தச் சேர்க்கை நூறு வருடங்களுக்கு ஒரு முறை உண்டாகும். ஆனால் அப்பொழுதெல்லாம் கிருதம் உண்டாகாது. தர்மத்தின் அளவு நான்கு பங்காகி, கல்கி அவதாரம் எடுத்தபின் இந்தக் கிருத யுகம் உண்டாகும்.

இந்த தர்மம் சார்ந்த யுகத்தில் திரேதாவில் இராமர் பிறந்தார். இது அரசனின் தர்ம பரிபாலனத்தைப் பொறுத்தே அமைகிறது என்று வால்மீகி இராமாயணமும், மகாபாரதமும் பல இடங்களில் சொல்கிறது.

வேதாங்க யுகம்

மூன்றாவதாக, வேதாங்க ஜோதிடத்தில் யுகக் கணக்கு வருகிறது. அதில் யுகம் என்பது இரட்டை. சூரியனும், சந்திரனும் உத்தராயணத்தில் ஆரம்பிக்கும் பயணம் மீண்டும் அதே புள்ளியில் வருவதற்கு 5 வருடங்கள் ஆகின்றன. அதற்குள் இரண்டு அதிக மாதம் வருகிறது. அதிக மாதத்துடன் ஒரு ஏறு முகம், ஒரு இறங்கு முகம் என இரட்டை இருக்கிறது.

இதையே, மகாபாரதத்தில் பின் பற்றினார்கள். இதையே இராமாயண காலத்திலும் பின்பற்றி இருக்க வேண்டும். ஏனெனில் இராமர் யஜூர் வேதத்தில் சமர்த்தர் என்றும், வேதாங்கங்களை அறிந்தவர் என்றும் ஹனுமன் கூறுகிறார். பஞ்ச வர்ஷாத்மக யுகம் எனப்படும் இந்த யுகத்தைத்தான் இராமரும், அவர் காலத்தவரும் பின்பற்றியிருக்க வேண்டும்.

இராமருக்கு முன்னால் வாழ்ந்த தீர்கதமஸ் முனிவர் 10 - ஆவது யுகத்தில் மூப்பு எய்தினார் என்று ரிக் வேதம் சொல்வதன் மூலம் இராமருக்கு முற்பட்ட காலத்திலிருந்தே இந்த 5- வருட வேதாங்க யுகம் பயன் பாட்டில் இருந்திருக்கிறது என்று தெரிகிறது.

" தீர்கதமா மாமதேயோ ஜுஜுர்வான் தஸமே யுகே” (ரிக் வேதம் 1-158-6) என்னும் இந்த ஸ்லோகத்தில்,

10- ஆவது யுகம் என்றால் தீர்கதமஸ் 50 முதல் 55 வயதுக்குள் மூப்படைந்தார் என்று அர்த்தம்.

இந்த யுகம் உத்தராயணத்தில் ஆரம்பிக்கிறது. இதன் ஐந்து வருடங்களுக்கும் சம்வத்சரம், பரிவத்சரம், இடாவத்சரம், அனுவத்சரம், வத்சரம் என்று பெயர். அந்தந்த வருடத்தில், அதன் பெயரைக் கொண்டுதான், சங்கல்பம் செய்திருக்க வேண்டும்.

இந்த யுகக் கணக்கை கீழே பார்க்கலாம்.

Y-VJ என்பது யஜூர் வேதாங்க ஜோதிடக் கணக்கைத் காட்டுகிறது. யஜூர் வேதியான இராமர் இதைத்தான் பின்பற்றியிருக்க வேண்டும். மஹாபாரத காலத்து 5 வருட யுக காலண்டரை மஹாபாரத புத்தகத்தில் கொடுத்தேன். அதுபோல இராமாயண காலத்து 5 வருட காலண்டரை வரப்போகும் இராமாயண புத்தகத்தில் கொடுக்கிறேன்.

இராமர் காலத்தில் இருந்த தர்மத்தின் அளவின் அடிப்படையில் திரேதா யுகமாக இருந்திருக்கிறது. அதாவது அப்பொழுது ராஜசம் அதிகமாக இருந்திருக்கிறது. அதீத ராஜசத்தால் மன்னர்கள் ஆட்டம் போடவே பரசுராமர் அவர்களை அழித்தார்.

அந்த யுகத்தின் தர்ம அளவைக் காப்பதற்கு, நாரதர் முதலானோர் அறிவுரைப்படி இராமர் சம்பூக வதம் செய்திருக்கிறார்.

ஆக, யுகக் கணக்கு இவ்வாறாக இருக்க, எல்லா சாஸ்திரங்களையும் ஆராயாமல் பொத்தாம் பொதுவாக கோடிக் கணக்கான ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்னால் இராமர் வாழ்ந்தார் என்று சொல்வது கிரிப்டோக்களின் அஜெண்டா தான்.

சுஸ்ருத சம்ஹிதை 1.4.7 சொல்கிறது

एकं शास्त्रमधीयानो न विध्याच्छास्त्रनिश्चयं ।।

तस्माद्बहुश्रुत : शास्त्रं विजानीयाच्चिक्थसह: ।।

ஒரே ஒரு சாஸ்திரத்தை ஒருவன் படித்து, சாஸ்திரம் சொல்லும் முடிவை அறிய முடியாது. அதனால் சிகிச்சை செய்பவன் பல சாஸ்திரங்களையும் அறிந்திருந்தால் தான் சரியான முடிவு எடுக்க முடியும்.

இதையே சுக்ர நீதியும் சொல்கிறது.

இந்த அணுகு முறையைக் கொண்டுதான், சாஸ்திர நிரூபணம் செய்ய வேண்டும்.

இராமர் கால நிரூபணமும் இந்த அணுகு முறையைக் கொண்டுதான் செய்ய முடியும்.

தாமசம் ஓங்கியுள்ள இந்த காலக் கட்டத்தில், மடாதிபதிகளையே ஆட்டிப் படைக்கும் வேடதாரி அசுரர்கள் இருக்கும் இந்த காலத்தில், சாஸ்திரம் மக்களைச் சென்று அடைவது கடினம். அடைந்தால், அதைப் பெற்றவர்கள் செய்த பாக்கியம்.

பி.கு:

தர்ம யுகத்தில் திரேதா யுகம் எப்பொழுது ஆரம்பித்தது என்பதை வாயு புராணம், பிரம்மாண்ட புராணத்தில் படிக்கலாம். அவற்றை எனது வலைத்தளத்தில் எழுதியுள்ளேன். எனது மகாபாரதம் புத்தகத்திலும் எழுதியுள்ளேன். வரப்போகும் இராமாயண புத்தகத்திலும் இவை இடம் பெறப் போகின்றன.

அத்துடன், இராமாயண காலம் பற்றிப் புரிந்து கொள்ள சூரிய சித்தாந்தம் தரும் வானவியல் சாஸ்திர அறிவும், சிசுமாரத்தில் பொருந்தியுள்ள துருவ நக்ஷத்திரங்களைப் பற்றிய அறிவும் தேவை. இராமாயண கால துருவ நக்ஷத்திரத்தை வால்மீகி சொல்கிறார்.

அவையும் புத்தகத்தில் இடம் பெறும். இவற்றையெல்லாம் தெரிந்து கொள்ளாமல் இருந்தால், ரிஷிகள் தந்துள்ள ஞானத்தை ஒதுக்குகிறோம், இழக்கிறோம் என்று அர்த்தம்.