Finding the period of Lord Rama

[S_Ramakrishnan]

Hare Krishna,

 

Today I read an interesting article in Times of India http://www.timesofindia.com/180401/18edit5.htm

This talks about someone trying to find the period of Lord Rama. As per the article the date comes to around 9300 years ago.

I have a basic doubt, as per the scriptures Lord Rama's period is Tretha yuga, then comes Dvapara yuga and then Kali yuga. Kali yuga is for 4,32,000 yrs so the other yugas should be atleast that long. If that is the case is this date claimed, correct?.

 

[animesh]

Hi Ramakrishnan ji,

There are many examples in which the date found by archaeologists is far recent than that given by scriptures.

[shvu]

 

Traditioanlly Ramayana happened almost a million years back. Archaeology places the Ramayana period to less than 1000 BC, minus all the magic and the monkey-like humans.

 

This article relies on Astronomical positions to come up with dates that do not tally with the traditional dates nor the historical dates. This person should also be aware that astronomical positions are cyclic and recur periodically. In other words, it is highly probable that the same positions can be found during the end of the Treta-Yuga period and a few times in between as well.

 

Hence, I would not attach any importance to such theories.

 

Cheers

[shvu]

 

The same problem exists with the date given for the birth of kali-yuga. This date did not come up until 400 AD. It is assumed that it was calculated based on planetary positions mentioned in the Mahabharata and Harivamsha. But again, these positions repeat themselves periodically and there is no reason why the 3102 date is the right one. Besides, the Dwaraka that was discovered under the sea, was much more recent than 3102 BC.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

Basically archeology is very impregnated by Western concepts. Even if most of Western scientists deny their religious beliefs, they would have strong samskaras caused by the Biblical concept of the whole cosmic creation. Bible induces one to believe that the cosmic manifestation only has been manifested at that time, and never before. That the Earth is the sole place to human beings, that this is the first God's tentative of creation and therefore everything in this cosmos is in a kind of experimental stage.

 

They do not follow the Vedic understanding that the whole creation is a cyclical phenomena and that in one of Sri Brahma's day there are 1,000 cycles of yugas, and that Sri Brahma lives 100 years composed of such days.

 

Therefore the aim of these archeologists is very limited, as they would never expect to find any evidence of human activities dated from 2,000,000 ago, when the last Sri Rama-avarata had appeared in this world.

 

Besides that fact, itihasas such as Ramayana, and smrtis such as Puranas that describes Sri Rama's avatara and His pastimes were written in samadhi state. In spite of samadhi state may be attained by scientific way, as a reproducible phenomena following the precepts of yoga, unfortunately ordinary people have too much faith in argument and logic caused by their attachment to their own mind, intelligence and senses, and disdain the natural samadhi as something superstitious and unnatural. They prefer to find some artificial methods to evaluate the veracity of ancient narratives.

 

But sages and saints form all the phases of the time may describe exactly the same events described in Ramayana in their trances, or samadhi state.

 

Even some sound proofs of Sri Rama's pastimes such as the remnants of His bridge, His enormous foot prints in stone labs founded at Citrakutt, and many other evidences founded everywhere in India, are completely rejected by scientists. Monkey-like humanoids whose fossils were founded in this world and dated from 2,000,000 ago are not related with Sri Rama's vanara army according the official science.

 

So, we hope that in future some archeologists inspirited by the Vedic point of view may show some material evidence of Sri Rama's pastimes dated from 2,000,000 ago.

 

 

[xvi000]

If someone asks me about KriSNa's period, I will say it might be about 5000 years ago, & let alone Rama's period. Don't be content with the knowledge of time you own. By Jesus' words, we know that time is a secret of God. And in Manava Dharmashastra, the text on 4 yugas is hard to understand.

 

Let's choose anth. way. In view of the period of aryan's entering into North India & the content of Ramayana, I conclude with my intuition that Raama's period is later than Vedas' & close to KriSNa's.

 

 

[This message has been edited by xvi000 (edited 11-19-2001).]

[Krsnacandra dasa]

Originally posted by shvu:

The same problem exists with the date given for the birth of kali-yuga. This date did not come up until 400 AD. It is assumed that it was calculated based on planetary positions mentioned in the Mahabharata and Harivamsha. But again, these positions repeat themselves periodically and there is no reason why the 3102 date is the right one. Besides, the Dwaraka that was discovered under the sea, was much more recent than 3102 BC.

 

Cheers

Somebody here mentioned that we cannot take westerner's estimates as canon and they are correct. Carbon 14 dating, for example, is at best, a rough estimate. Now if Dvarka was Krsna's enchanted city, perhaps each and every molecule of the structures had a much longer molecular half-like than other structures of that era ... difficult to say.

[karthik_v]

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

Therefore the aim of these archeologists is very limited, as they would never expect to find any evidence of human activities dated from 2,000,000 ago, when the last Sri Rama-avarata had appeared in this world.

 

A good one from Satyaraja. A good book in this context would be Forbidden Archeology. It is a fact that 99% of the fossil has been lost due to natural forces. So, when we search for remnants from very distant past, we won't find any. That doesn't mean that the past didn't exist.

 

Next, C-14 is by no means a reliable technique. It can be effective only in isolated samples. Real life samples are hardly isolated. They are covered by deposits from layers of many ages. So, the test may not reveal an accurate picture.

 

Someone spoke of Aryan invasion theory. This theory was originally propounded by the prejudiced Max Mueller without any basis. When confronted later in his career, he retracted it. But, the academia still retains vestiges of that theory.

 

Much of the age assigned to our scriptures (both Shruti and Smriti) was the outcome of 18th and 19th century British and European missionaries and historians. They had an agenda. That was to topple Hinduism and introduce Christianity. Hence, the dates they assigned were purely a matter of conjecture. Max Mueller himself admitted to it.

 

So, whenever you are told anything about our scriptures being just a few thousand years old, don't buy into that theory. Go to google.com and type the words

 

"Boden chair Oxford Max Mueller"

 

You will know what motivated them and why they are wrong.

[mahak]

Rama? Approx 800,000 years ago.

 

Cremo makes very important point recently, that if Darwin is the premise, all scientific research MUST follow the premise. But Darwin produced theory which has almost been thoroughly defeated by scientific research. Evolution is only true to the micro sense, macro-evolution has no scintilla of backing via scientidfic research.

 

Bad science is when one presents hypothesis, and research is done with only the intent to back the hypothesis. The research should be done to present reality, otherwise, the whole process is flawed.

 

Not unlike the OJ trial. Criminology is a science which the PROTOCOL is "investigation and collection of evidence which points to suspect". Abandonment of such protocol, such as making all evidence point to a particular person who is prejudged, this makes the justice system have no option but to throw away the entire matter, regardless of innocence or guilt.

 

So, as Cremo very nicely points out, if all scientific research in the 20th century is geared toward propping up the ill-conceived ideas of Darwin, all such science is greatly flawed, especially in regard to carbon dating (which has been adequately disproved long ago anyway).

[Avinash]

Dear Aaj,

You may be interested in this thread?

[shvu]

 

A good one from Satyaraja. A good book in this context would be Forbidden Archeology. It is a fact that 99% of the fossil has been lost due to natural forces. So, when we search for remnants from very distant past, we won't find any. That doesn't mean that the past didn't exist.

With due respect, I would take the material in Forbidden archaeology with a lot of salt. Tha author has an ISKCON background, which means, to him the Bhagavatam is a source of history and facts. Using the Bhagavatam, he has come up with a lot of ideas about how history and archaeology must be flawed. Why? Because current history and archaeological discoveries do not tally with the SB. To know more about what I am saying, read Vedic cosmogony or a similar title by the same author, where he discusses moon landing, gravitation, etc among other things.

 

While 99% of fossils may never be found, it does not mean we can reconstruct the missing paast using sources like the Bible or Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

Cheers

 

[shvu]

 

Read this review of FA.

http://www.skeptic.com/04.1.lepper-review.html

 

A sample from the review :

 

Cremo and Thompson have little understanding of history and almost no understanding of the disciplines of paleoanthropology and archaeology. In the introduction, Thompson is identified as a generic "scientist" and "a mathematician," while Cremo is "a writer and editor for books and magazines published by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust" (p. xix).

 

In the first place, RT is not an archaeologist nor a historian, having never investigated anything or dug at any site. Insteead, he has collected second-hand information, stressed on whatever suits his agenda and criticized the rest. Not a difficult job vis-a-vis spending years in foreign lands, digging, researching and analyzing.

 

Being familiar with the kind of material RT has come up with, in Vedic cosmogony and also being aware of his iskcon background, I can safely make a guess about the worth of FA. The motive is a big giveaway. Similarly there exist a group of people who are very sure that Egyptian Archaeologists are *hiding* facts.

 

Why do they think so?

Because they like to think the pyramids were built bt Atlanteans or even better by someone from outer space. Anything sounds interesting so long as it is not rational.

 

Why are the scholars *hiding* facts?

Because they are biased, prejudiced and don't want to to take away the glory of the Egyptian civilzation by acknowledging that the GP was built earlier than the rise of Egyptian civilzation.

 

How do these critics know this?

They don't, of course. They are just guessing this is what must be going on. After all, how can the GP be only 4000 years old? It sounds so dull and boring. That is how.

 

There will always be a group of people to criticize science and it's findings, but almost in all cases, it is based on fancy with the critics not having a shred of evidence and relying on half-baked claims. Just like John Anthony West who roped in a geologist from the US (I forget his name) and set out to show the Sphynx is older than believed. The geologist stated he observed erosion patterns on the Sphynx making it older than believed, but he never did convince anyone. What finally happened was while this geologist says the Sphynx must be a 1000 years older than believed, John Anthony West believes it is atleast 10000-25000 years older ! And all this with absolutely no evidence. And yet, he has his own fan following who agree with him. Apparently they require no evidence and are content enough, believing in fanciful claims.

 

Cheers

 

[shvu]

 

A description of this book...

 

ISKCON researchers have compiled evidence supporting the Vedic picture of the age of the human species.

 

by Michael Cremo (Drutakarma Dasa)

 

Modern science tells us that anatomically modern man has been around for only about 100,000 years. The Vedic writings say he has been here a lot longer. Now a book from the Bhaktivedanta Institute takes a new look at the scientific evidence. That evidence, says the book, has been fudged.

 

The motive of this book is quite clear. And of course, in true Gaudiya fashion, what the gentleman means by Vedic is not the Vedas of course, but the Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

Cheers

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

I think it would be fair to ask if you have read the book. If not, I think you would agree it appropriate to withhold most of your comments on it. You are the one who likes to criticize people for speaking about topics they have not read or studied.

 

On another note, you quote a review from "skeptic.com". Certainly not a source for nonbiased opinions. Just as a review by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust would be irrelevant, same is the case with that of "skeptic.com". This is just common sense.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

From the review:

 

The following article is copyright ©1996 by the Skeptics Society, P.O. Box 338, Altadena, CA 91001

[shvu]

 

You are back ! I was actually missing you on these forums.

 

I quoted a couple of lines from the review to show (as mentioned in FA), neither of the 2 gentlemen are historians or achaeologists, but are actually Sadaputa Dasa and Dhrutakarma Dasa from iskcon (Point 1).

 

Now have I read FA? No. Will I read it in future? Certainly not. In the past, right on these forums, there were Iskcon folks who were complaining about scientists who supported evolution and archaeology, about how they were wasting their time, etc. Obviously this view is taught in iskcon and is not the outcome of 8 years of research by the authors (Point 2).

 

Based on Point 1 and Point 2, isn't there enough Information to say whatever I said?

 

Yours respectfully,

(No offense to anyone)

 

[Rati]

Originally posted by shvu:

A description of this book...

 

ISKCON researchers have compiled evidence supporting the Vedic picture of the age of the human species.

 

by Michael Cremo (Drutakarma Dasa)

 

Modern science tells us that anatomically modern man has been around for only about 100,000 years.

 

 

Cheers

 

I searched a couple websites that put the estimates for the appearnce of homo sapiens at 130,000 years ago. I thought I read about other earlier estimates recently made by paleontologists. Anyone have any info. on this?

 

 

[This message has been edited by Rati (edited 04-25-2002).]

[Rati]

This URL gives an estimate of 200,000 to 300,000 years ago.

http://park.org/Canada/Museum/man/sapiens.html

[Rati]

This site dates the first humans (although not homo sapiens) at 3 million B.C.

 

http://members.aol.com/Donnpages/EarlyMan.html

[Rati]

This mentions fossil evidence 3.6 million years old:

http://www.sciam.com/explorations/121696explorations.html

[karthik_v]

Shvu:

 

You are right that neither RT nor MC are archeologists, but archeologists alone cannot determine the age of homo sapiens are pass judgement on the theory of evolution. It is an interdisciplinary function that depends heavily on Mathematical biology and RT is an expert in that area, having worked for NASA and having taught at Cambridge.

 

Let me assure you that FA doesn't speak one line about ISKCON/Hinduism/SB etc.. None of the things that are written in FA are ever taught in ISKCON. I am yet to come across one criticism of FA that refutes any observation there. Virtually all criticisms are directed at the religious leanings of the authors.

 

Whether you want to read it or not is your choice. To criticize something as bogus without reading it is unscholarly and I wouldn't expect you to do that.

 

Do you consider Scientific American, US Journal of Geological Survey etc., also to be ISKCON publications? FA references a lot of papers from these sources too. I had the oppurtunity of cross checking 2 of them from SA and found them to be accurate.

[karthik_v]

Originally posted by shvu:

With due respect, I would take the material in Forbidden archaeology with a lot of salt. Tha author has an ISKCON background, which means, to him the Bhagavatam is a source of history and facts. Using the Bhagavatam, he has come up with a lot of ideas about how history and archaeology must be flawed. Why? Because current history and archaeological discoveries do not tally with the SB. To know more about what I am saying, read Vedic cosmogony or a similar title by the same author, where he discusses moon landing, gravitation, etc among other things.

 

While 99% of fossils may never be found, it does not mean we can reconstruct the missing paast using sources like the Bible or Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

Cheers

Shvu, I don't think that you have read forbidden archeology. There is not one line in FA about SB or any Hidu book for that matter. If at all there is any reference to Hinduism or religion, it is in the first page where the authors dedicate the book to Srila Prabhupad. Beyond that the book is very academic and systematic. It discusses the whole issue from a highly technical perspective covering such areas as archeology, anthropological biology, geology etc.. It doesn't invent any evidence on its own. It only cites the evidences presented by mainstream scientists and analyses them threadbare.

 

Not one scientist has been able to show one fault in that book. I have attended a couple of those lectures in the universities in WA and most young scientists accept them. It doesn't present any creationist viewpoint, as you seem to think. In the extreme

its detractors just abused the authors on personal lines calling them "Hindoo". I would suggest that you read that work before forming an opinion.

 

The authors are Michael Cremo a specialist writer in the history of archeology and Richard Thompson, a Ph.D. in Mathematics from Cornell who worked for NASA and Cambridge university specializing in Mathematical biology. They are no novices.

 

RT's book Vedic cosmography relies heavily on SB. You are right. But, what relevance does it have on FA?