A new book by Dr. Raja Ram Mohan Roy debunking Nilesh Oak’s date for the Rāmāyaṇa | English
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 03. 2023
- Book by Dr. Roy: www.amazon.in/gp/product/B0BR...
Book by Nilesh Oak: www.amazon.in/gp/product/8194...
My first article debunking the claims by Nilesh Oak: / debunking-nilesh-oak-c...
My second article debunking the claims by Nilesh Oak: / debunking-nilesh-oak-t...
Nilesh Oak is a gem. I don't necessarily agree with him on some of the dates. But he is truly a gem.
Well this video just proves he may be a Pseudoscientist or more worryingly a fraud scholar,if proved.
He has zero credibility, zero background and refuted and debunked many times by members of ASI
How can u come to this conclusion?
A gem made of paste.
Mishra ji while I have some of your videos and have found them quite convincing and absorbing, this time I am quite surprised by your love for Roy and utter hate for Nilesh. I have seen some of his videos but don't know whether they are right or wrong. But some of your observations are quite interesting. You say he has no knowledge of Sanskrit. Ok. What about you? Are you trained in scientific aspects of discovery? How do you know that Roy is right?. You say that Oak is far extreme in dating Mahabharat. What about the submerged Dwarika in ocean? Is not it an evidence or atleast an indicator?
Then you frequently talk about peer review. Don't you think that that these so called 'Peer reviewers' still believe in the Aryan invasion theory and also 'out of India theory of Aryans' . You mention that modern history has fixed the date for Mahabharat sometime before Christ because it's so convincing and so scientific and peer reviewed?
So my suggestion to you is don't fall in these traps. If you think that you must speak don't take sides and just present the facts and remain neutral. And please don't talk about peer review because we know the facts about these peer review. Don't you know what happened to these 'peers' during Ram janmbhoomi case. The famous ancient Indian historians don't know Sanskrit and the famous Persian historians don't know Persian or Arabic.
Then you talk about right and left leaning people. And it seems you are the most reasonable and rationalist and the so called right leaning people are dumbs and narrow minded so they believe in everything un- scientific and unreasonable. And lastly but not the least are you a trained scientific personnel who has the authority to label others as unscientific.
Exactly
💯 Exactly 💯
You are right!
You are right. Mr Mishra is biased in his analysis. He has not proved any of the observations of Mr Nilesh Oak wrong in a scientific manner. Also, his narrative on peer review suggests that he is trying to shoot down Mr Nilesh Oak by shouting and not by being able to counter scientifically. Mishra Ji, you are exposing yourself as one from Romila Thapar club.
Misraji .. has completely missed the track... you have to devote your next 20 years of life into research before sharing mental bile here before even commenting on Nilesh Oak's research.
I find Nilesh jis arguments and much much more logical than this , try debunking his geological and oceanographic data that coincides with the finding of Randal Carson
czcams.com/video/DKjPHJ4kqRc/video.html 4 min n 11 sec... Where Rupa Bhaty ji exposes this Self proclaimed Sanskrit guru Mishra....
Its literally the opposite..Most of his dating is very illogical...His dates are very ancient about when there is no archaeological evidence of existence of civilization anywhere in the world..Its ridiculous ,mythical and legendary.
..No solid Archaeological evidence..
Simple reason is that nityanand is jealous of his work and he cant prove him astronomically wrong... bcz proving someone wrong also need to study a lot😂... which is simply impossible for him😂
@@dr.praneshpawaskar1868yes, Nityanand clearly exposed himself
@@dr.praneshpawaskar1868
Mahabharat is an iron age text
Problem is that All these IIT prof who drinks Tax payers money , Keep quiet when a western scholar comes up with some type of theory to demean vedas, Ramayan, Mahabharat or geeta. but not their fault just like all academics in India they like loyal Logo of HMV music company. IIT needs to actual show up their worth by creating technology solution for bharat instead of bragging about what is science and what is not science.
Mr Oak has also dated the Mahabharat to 5000 BCE. Rishi parshuram appears in bothe Ramayana and MB. So did Prshuram live for 7000 years?
@@ajayjo1 I have similar question when Mr.Oak quoted Vibhikshana, who according to him was quoted in Mahabharatha as well. I am a bit confused with the whole timeline. But some of the things he mentioned is indeed fascinating. I hope people keep investigate these things.
I believe that..Nilesh oak debunk any one any time...he is a gem💎
💯💯💯💯 agreed 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
1. Contradiction is fine but real question is "what is the alternative theory presented by one who is contradicting?" They should provide scientific evidences for their theory along with their contradictions Otherwise contradiction becomes just difference of opinion and all differences of opinion should be welcomed. 2. Nilesh Oakji's work is based on scientific methodology ... He has his theory on dating of Ramayana and Mahabharata and he proves his theories by astronomical and other large number of coroborative scientific evidences. Scientific research papers he uses are published by people absolutely not related to Hindu faith/mythologies or political related.. they are purely scientific. 3. This brings me to think how smart and futuristic our rishis were back then ... They new then that any king can just start his own calender which will make dating of historical events very difficult so they used astronomical observations which no one can manipulate so when time comes that our knowledge of astronomy is advance enough... We will be able to accurately date these historical events. 4. Lastly let me ask again "what is your theory" and let's prove it with scientific methods and evidence else let's support man who dedicatedly working on it.
Nilesh Oak Sir's response 😉
czcams.com/video/G_TMhtrp2ec/video.html
mythology????
@@user-gk4cw6zt8y watch videos of Mr Nilesh oak
Not convincing.
A.The LGP (Last Glacial period or Ice Age) lasted till 9700 BCE. This is a well researched and agreed upon date. SO in 12209 BCE we are still in the Ice Age of which there is no mention in the Ramayana.
B.The descripion of flora in certain months is not reliable because in ancient India calendars were based on the Lunar cycle (354 days to the year) and were not "true" to the seasons. the correctionsto make the calendar true was (by introdcing an extra month after every 32 months) was applied only in the 2nd Century CE.
C. Mr Oak has also dated the Mahabharat to 5000 BCE. Rishi parshuram appears in bothe ramayana and MB. So did he live for 7000 years?
@@ajayjo1ice age is not for whole world....some part of world is under ice
First of all, Dr Roy & speaker need to debunk & harshly condemn distorted history of India & it’s culture presented during colonial as well as Congress era !
Right 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
This is all left propaganda as usual. They think being eloquent in English gives them superior power
Ok
But what's your problem if they debunked oak?😂
U want to listen lies only by Indians?
If some theory is peer- reviewed that doesn't mean it is right.. look at Aryan Invasion theory which is proved totally mythical
But a theory that is not peer reviewed can not be claimed as true for sure. Mr. Oak always takes time to explain his logic and approach, so he must be open to review and critique of the same.
@@SusheelKumarRavinuthala he has no PEER 🤣
@@SusheelKumarRavinuthala takes time to explain?? Or u take time to understand what he is explaining... 🤣🤣🤣
Show me a single peer reviewed study which upholds the aryan invasion theory, there isn't any. I think you're confusing it with Indo Aryan Migration Hypothesis which is certainly supported by a wide amount of genetic, archaeological, linguistic and historical evidence.
Show me a single peer reviewed study which upholds the aryan invasion theory, there isn't any. I think you're confusing it with Indo Aryan Migration Hypothesis which is certainly supported by a wide amount of genetic, archaeological, linguistic and historical evidence.
This Śastrārtha (शास्त्रार्थ) that is happening among various chronologists (such as Dr. Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Nilesh Oak) can be very healthy and fruitful in the cause of Sanātana Dharma. Hopefully, we will be able to zero-in on our actual hindu chronology, someday.
True. Only through such back and forth can we arrive closer to the truth
Debate with neelesh oak.
NO is popular because his analysis is detailed, and it makes sense. It's not a right-wing conspiracy.
We would like whatever mohan Roy to come on YT and debate.
Yes
Yes true. But this here is left oriented rant
And also refuted and debunked many times
@@DeepakPSHwhat the fuck is this?
Since when debate became the parameter to decide? It's like who is better india or Pakistan? Let's have a debate
Simply research and evidence publishing is the only way to judge...debates restricts the plethora of evidence
The best way to resolve such issues is through a one to one debate. It appears that one was set up and it did not happen because one of the protagonists had chickened out. As regards to peer reviews we know that it is a private club and the club won't deviate by guidance given by their funders. Also, Rajiv Malhotra has shown that there are a lot of so called "eminent" people have sold out and become anti-India agitators, both within and outside India. I believe that we should listen to everyone who has something to say but need to be mindful and think critically. I have read Nilesh books in which he help the readers to understand Astronomy as a lay person in order the understand his research and discoveries.
This RajaRam never comes for face to face debate with Nilesh ji😂 . Just throws stones and runs off like this!
@@SJ-zo3lzlol, it's that Nilesh Oak who is running from the open debate which Dr Roy has thrown as an open challenge
The best way to resolve such issues is by growing a brain and actually applying critical thinking while reading/watching anything. Debate culture sacrifices critical thinking for articulation.
The best way to resolve this is for Nilesh Oak to publish his research in a peer reviewed journal. Why wouldn’t he do that? Because सब बकवास है।
@@SJ-zo3lzwhat's the point of debates when you can come up with research to disprove?
The time line given by Nilesh oak, is the most accurate the time line.
Jai srhee ram for nilesh oak 🙏 🙏🙏
👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
Mr Oak has also dated the Mahabharat to 5000 BCE. Rishi parshuram appears in bothe Ramayana and MB. So did Prshuram live for 7000 years?
Vagaban parshuram is one of the chiranjivi , means immortal @@ajayjo1
@@arijoymodak if you can believe that Parshuram is immortal and can live for 6000 years.. why do you need Mr Oaks "scientific" stuff ? Pick any date for the Ramayana and MB.. 12000BCE, 5000 BCe 1 million BCE and you can believe them to be true.
Anybody who stands up for Hindu rights, fights for Hindu rights, fights against Hinduphobia, or likes Nilesh Oak's date like Jeffrey Armstrong (translator of Bhagavadgita) of Canada and Pt. Satish K. Sharma (author of Caste, Conversion A Colonial Conspiracy: What Every Hindu and Christian must know about Caste) of UK, or Salvatore Babones (American in Australia, fighting intellectual class of "anti-India, anti-Hindu, and anti-Modi " forces) is NOT so-called member of right-wing BJP. There is no such party in the US, UK and Canada, but there are many terr0r1st organizations of Abrahamic Iconoclastic Desert Sects (AIDS) who attack and infect on a daily basis India, Modi, Hindus, and BJP with Dismantling of Global Hinduism (DGH) like Rana Ayyub, Audracious Tucchaki, Suita Vishwanath, Soros, etc!
Please name these 'Abrahamic Iconoclastic Desert Sects'. Come on now, don't be scared...
Nilesh oak had placed his point of view in full public domain through his numerous upload. He had put forward his theory based on " All the astronomical refferances are actual factual data of that time '
Barring few blatant misinterpretations, all the rest of his hundreds of observations are analogies. Check my 2 part refutation on Sangam Talks. czcams.com/video/2S0PO3SzqBc/video.html
👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
Mr Oak has also dated the Mahabharat to 5000 BCE. Rishi parshuram appears in bothe Ramayana and MB. So did Prshuram live for 7000 years?
@@ajayjo1he was alive during satyug also, so even if you find any dates or years, it's quite observant that he is alive for thousands of years, which makes it not impossible for him to be alive for 7000 years
@@jaishreeram125 if we can believe that Parshuram lived for 7000 years, we don't need Mr Oak to put time/ effort in logic and science to get the dates of MB and Ramayana. he can jusr say Dwapar and treta yug and any number of people like you will readily believe. But what Mr Oak is offering is a "science backed" answer. So he must also provide a "science-backed" answer for Parshuram's lifespan.
Now coming to "chiranjivi's". I am making a claim that 1000s of soldiers from the Kurukshetra war are still alive today. So, where are they? They are in the same place as Parshuram. Can you disprove my claim?
Will be interesting to see Nilesh oaks take on this. My belief is that Nilesh will come out sounding more plausible.
It's already out . Titled " Dudh ko dudh .." Nilesh ji being Nilesh ji, put the title in such a way that CZcams algorithm is not leading us to it sadly after watching this video , which should have been the case ideally! He should have mentioned response to RRMR or Nityananda Mishra!
@@SJ-zo3lzNilesh Oak Ji has come out with a new video last week.
Nilesh ji speaking of this man will be an insult to his work. Gully mey bahut kutte bhukte. Do we care?
We consider musa, Christ, Muhammad and Alexander historical.
Ramayan and mahabharat as fictional
Just because british had said that.
Even Buddha & Mahaveer have no contemporary evidence.
@@atheist8890 yes they were not contemporary but indeed they are actual historical figures
Hey, Alexander is a historical figure if not the other abrahamics cult figures you mentioned about
@@descendantofbharatbharatva7155
There's not a single evidence of Buddha before Ashoka. Megasthenes Indica has no mention of Buddha. Buddha's first statue was built during Kushan era(1st century BCE) i.e 4-5 centuries after his believed time period. Buddha and Mahaveer have a very similar story. Even characters associated with these two have similar names. Seems like, one is a copy of other.
@@atheist8890Buddha is the most dynamic and mesmerizing personality from ancient India.
Jain historians inadvertently identified Ujjain King Chandragupta, a disciple of Bhadrabahu with the Maurya King Chandragupta which made Mahavira, a contemporary of Buddha. In reality, Buddha attained nirvana 675 years before the year of Mahavira nirvana. Puranas and the Burmese inscriptions clearly indicate that Buddha attained nirvana in 1864 BCE. Recent excavations at Lumbini and the radiocarbon samples collected from the Trench C5 at the center of the Buddhist shrine at Lumbini indicate an earliest date of 1681 BCE. Thus, there is a chronological error of 1380 years in dating of Buddha nirvana due to mixing up of two different epochs of Saka and Sakanta eras and the mistaken identification of Chandragupta, the disciple of Bhadrabahu. The dating of Buddha nirvana in 1864 BCE also validates the traditional date of Adi Sankaracharya in the 6th century BCE.
The currently accepted version of Indian history starts in the sixth century BCE and places a number of historical personalities where they do not belong chronologically. In the revised chronological framework our age old traditions find validations and our heroes, who nourished and protected our civilization, find their true places in history. We will begin by finding the time period when Buddha really lived. Due to his central position in ancient Indian history, it is of paramount importance to correctly fix his date.
There is hardly any convincing point in your video, except blaming Nilesh oak.
Although I don't had much respect for Mr. Nityānanda, but after watching this video the minimal amount of respect I had for him vanished instantly.
Arrogant beyond belief. This is why i don't spend time around Indians. Too much ego and not enough life experience.
Not sure about the absolute veracity of Nilesh Oak’s proposed date, but the way these ‘ I scratch your back,you scratch mine’ intellectuals are mushrooming with their targeted rebuttals,the lack of recognition of their own condescension,the constant insistence that anyone who likes Oak’s books are right leaning,the constant demand for peer reviews( as if the random dates given by Christian orientalists based on the Bible were peer reviewed 🙄) and personal attacks actually gives more credence to his work. Honestly never seen so many people singularly go after one person with such vengeance.Why not just publish one’s own independent research?There are so many books one does not agree with.Does his popularity bother them?This video actually makes one want to go and read his books with more interest.Good job! please keep it up!
The very name Raja ram mohun Roy,raises my hackles- that Unitarian Christian allowed himself to become the flag bearer of colonial mindset and single-handedly nearly brought about the end of sanatana dharma in if not india at least in Bengal
True... this nityanand himself has not read and understand nilesh oaks work, which require a lot of efforts 😂 sadly he is not of that category😂... he simply beleives what his colonial masters have taught him since his schooling... simply ignore these peoples... ultimately truth ll only win
@@dr.praneshpawaskar1868 Agree ..Mr. Raja Ram clearly has very high professional jealousy for Mr. Oak that gets manifested many times including as even CZcams comments! Also agree that Mr. Roy's allegations ( like similies considered reflection of seasons) just touch upon some of the confirmatory evidence Mr. Oak quotes and not the central evidences like Arundhati Vasishta , Saraswati hydrology etc. which remain unchallenged by any researcher so far!
Problem is , Mr. Nilesh Oak can dispel all these allegations by a single (growing) listing of his scientific evidences and publication in peer reviewed journals and he is not doing it!
His articulation methodology is not systematic and is a huge disservice to the Magnum opus content that he has ! Wish he hired someone to organise his findings and present! He is unarguably the Graham Hancock of Hindu civilization and is game for a superhit Netflix series like the Ancient Apocalypse! Hope our civilization and mankind be blessed with someone who can organise and promote his content effectively !
Personal targets
This shows uur maturity
In indian shastra no body was allowed to say anything personal
Today's gen Z r like this only, they will read few shastras and feel intellect and will miss the true essence of vedic shastras
Dude, this Ram Mohan Roy is different from the 19th century one. This one is an IITan.
very rightly said ..
That's the basis of Nilesh Oak's scientific theory. What is terrestrial is celestial. And what is seen and described in the text is actual representation of the sky at that time.
I heard there is mention in ramayan about four-tusked elephant guarding Ravan's palace. That four tusked elephant is also called as Gomphotheres. And they went extinct atleast 12000 years ago. How can we explain this sir?
Link that particular sloka here or you are lying.
@@slowdown7276 o you know about airavata
He can not bcz these ppl do not study they just try to fit their own date which has been told to them by their colonial masters so that the real date will not come in front of world and at same time their aryan migration myth will not get exposed...😂
@@slowdown7276 त्रिविष्टप निभम् दिव्यम् दिव्य नाद विनादितम् |
वाजि हेषित सम्घुष्टम् नादितम् भूषणैः तथा || ५-४-२६
रथैः यानैः विमानैः च तथा गज हयैः शुभैः |
वारणैः च चतुः दन्तैः श्वेत अभ्र निचय उपमैः || ५-४-२७
भूषितम् रुचिर द्वारम् मत्तैः च मृग पक्षिभिः |
राक्षस अधिपतेः गुप्तम् आविवेश गृहम् कपिः || ५-४-२८
26;27;28.. mahaakapiH = The great Hanuma; aavivesha = entered; guptam = secretly; raakshasaadhipateeH = Ravana's inner city; trivishhTapaHnibham = (which was like a) paradise; divyam = best one; vaajighoshhitasangushhTam = resonating with neighing of horses; tadhaa = and; naaditam = made noisy; bhuushhanaiH = with ornaments; radhaiH = by chariots; yaanaiH = by vehicles; vimaanaishca = and by aerial-cars; tadhaa = and; bhuushhitam = decorated by;; subhaiHhayagajaiH = by auspicious horses and elephants; swetaabranicayopamaiH = equalling a group of white clouds; vaaraNaishca = by great elephants; caturdantaiH = with four tusks; mR^igapakshibhiH = by animals and birds; mattaiH = in heat; ruciradvaaram = with a beautiful entrance; rakshitam = protected; yaatudhaanaiH = by raksasas; sumahaaviiraiH = with great strength; shahasrasheH = in thousands.
The great Hanuma entered secretly Ravana's inner city which was equal to paradise, rendered noisy by neighing of horses and tinkling of ornaments, by chariots, vehicles and aerial-cars and decorated by auspicious elephants and horses and great elephants with four tusks and by birds and animals in heat. It had beautiful entrances and was protected by thousands of rakshasas with great strength.
@@slowdown7276 Sundar kaand sarg 4 sloka 26 and 27.
I love the fact that you encouraged people to read both books and decide for themselves. True sanaatani style!!
Yes !
I thought it is gangnam style
czcams.com/video/DKjPHJ4kqRc/video.html 4 min n 11 sec... Where Rupa Bhaty ji exposes this Self proclaimed Sanskrit guru Mishra.... Ask Mishra on this n he will run away with his tail between his legs... 🤣🤣🤣 he sud STOP TRYING to become expert on everything under the sun...
He(Mr Misra ) is clearly supporting Leftist Raja Ram Mohan Roy's book and by degrading Nilesh oak book even though I too disagree with Nilesh oaks dates . By the way leftist people like Mr Misra also call Ayurveda as "Pseudo Science ".if u don't believe see what wikipedia says about Ayurveda.
This is the same mindset which helped few Europeans to colonized Bharat for 200 years 😢😢
Nilesh oak gives evidence from geological data as well which has not been reviewed by Roy. Also, Roy was talking in a very derogatory manner about evidence of Agastya Arundhati evidence without giving any evidence against it.
Yes , I'm with Nilesh
@@EkaSanatani ok I'll consider it , i commented that four hours ago , i found sth fishy in Nilesh too
@Eka Sanatani yes true Nityanand ji following Raja Roy ji , RRR
How dare u criticize Mishra's scientific person Roy..... 🤣🤣🤣 after all he has PHD in material science == which makes him expert on Ramayan dating... 🤣🤣🤣 that Roy is a worse fraud than his Namesake who peddled Opium for British... 🤣🤣🤣
yep very much true and i always support nilesh ji
While healthy debate is an intrinsic way of Sanatana Dharma, one should be very careful of one's demeanor while presenting one's position on any topic. Use of words such as "debunking" should never be used as a matter of prudence and maturity. 'Alternative view' could perhaps be a respectful way.
How do we explain observations about the Saraswati and comparisons with geological findings?
Should have just given us Dr Roys proposed date whilst you were at it sir.
Although Sir, you are much respected and really well learned, using Right Leaning verbiage does not become you, we are Vedic Leaning and as we move forward to rediscovering, reclaiming and restoring out Glorious heritage, we remain Open to many possibilities of of our Itihasa.
A very well spoken and pleasant video but fully devoted to counter the theory of Nilesh Oak. It reeks of bias and to some extent masked dislike for his popularity.
Nilesh Oak is more logical. You are opposing him just to prove him wrong. He has given geological, oceanography, astronomical references.
Astronomy point of view may be wrong many times why does all the researchers have different dates because the software they're using is different ask oak when will kaliyuga end according to him 😅
I am not sure about Nityananda Ji's background in science, but dismissing the whole branch of archeoastronomical research tells me he is not well versed with modern scientific advancements. It's specially useful for our culture given the long written evidence of Astronomy (Surya Sidhanta, Vedanga Jotish...) by our Rishis. Regarding Nilesh Ji's limitation in Sanskrit, please mind he works with Jeofry Armstrong (Kavindra Rishi) who is an expert in Sanskrit and in the filed of linguist. Nilesh Ji not only uses archeoastronomy evidence, he uses geological evidence as well. These are very well established fields in modern science.
In a nutshell, this review is totally outside of your domain of expertise, unwarranted. Please focus on brining the glories of Sanatana texts to the masses and leave the dating of the historical events to the experts.
Earlier I thought this Misra was an authentic guy !
But now 🤔
Nilesh Oak is a Gem for us. I’ve cross checked his references and found them to be true to my senses
Your basic premise about accepting the old dates given by Max Muller is wrong. He himself admitted that he had straitjacketed all Hindu texts within the Biblical Creationism framework and it had no scientific basis. And the Sanskrit journals are under the hegemony of the Anglo-saxons who don't even know Sanskrit. It is a select boys club and they scratch each others' backs. It would be great if a Sanskrit scholar with a very good knowledge of Maths and Jyotisha would do the rebuttal
I am reading the complete life of Rama , hard copy by Author who simply calls herself Vanamali. She also goes by name Mataji Devi Vanamali. Now on page 122, she writes "Lakshmana had never seen him like this. He pleaded with him, JUST AS KRISHNA PLEADED WITH ARJUNA ON THE BATTLEFIELD OF KURUKSHETRA, begging him to shake off his unmanly and ignoble grief, but it was all in vain". I have highlighted this in the book. Out of shock. Because so far, i have heard it repeatedly that Ramayana is a history and not a mythological story for us, and Ram ji was a 7th avatar and this was in Satyug, and before Mahabharat times. This infact, with some variations on what is stated , is broadly repeated by believers and even scholars. I am now really puzzled and not sure if the author has made a mistake in her translation or deliberately (being a well paid leftist, to insert so many lies into wvery translation and muddy the waters). Well that will be something I shall investigate. However this podcaster, is 100% a leftist pretending to be a Indic isn't he. In other words he is trying to be another Devdutt Patnaik and Romila Thapar. He reminds me of the cunning Yogendra Yadav from AAP and now that sleazy floater is a free radical for hire. I suspect similarly about this Nithyanad Misra. He talks a lot....A LOT...in a pleasant droning manner. Obviously well trained by JNU to make the listener dose off. But there are those fools, who fall for appearances and will absorb opinions with a gaping mouth. His monologue even in the first 10 minutes is just about strawmanning. He cannot attack the logic presented by Nilesh Oak. All he is doing is attacking Nilesh Oak's 'credentials and credibility'. Typical leftist method. Dont prove facts. Just slander. So disappointed!
For Mahabharata dating, can any one challange 'the timing of Epoch of Arundhti' as proposed by Nilesh oak
Part 1 of 3 of my refutation of 5561 BCE dating of MB on Sangam Talks deals comprehensively with AV epoch. Link here: czcams.com/video/W2YuGQRmZ9c/video.html
Yes, Jaysree Saranathan has done so
@@forest3064 When any one put forward about pendulous motion of celestial bodies in space as proposed by her, regarding earth axis between some Nakshastra space one simply stops following.
@@aswinimajumder1553 The pendulous motion could simply be gravitational wobble with a paralax error, due to the large distances between earth and other stars.
@@forest3064 she , as I understand had catagorically stated that earth axis wobbels between few Nakshtra space.
Peer reviews are problematic in the case of Linguistics, astro archaeological dating. Srikanth Talageri has already disproven linguistic arguments of established scholars. He is heavily outnumbered.
Well, I did not expect Jingle bell music on your doorbell for a staunch Sanatani like you!
Aatha hai Aatha hai santa aatha hai
😂😂😂@@sanmod734
By offering this book as a free download, Dr Roy needs to be complimented. It shows he is not after royalty but cares for bringing out his version of the truth to as many readers
From where can we get this book?
Bullshit is typically free.... As no one sane will pay for that.... 🤣🤣🤣 enjoy reading the garbage n waste ur time....
@@descendantofbharatbharatva7155 the link is in the Description.
There are no free things. I would take this with a pinch of salt. Am sure they are gaining somewhere and something they want. So all this freebies. There is more than what meets the eye.
No he is backed by Marxist distorians who are funding him
TRUTH CAN BE TOLD WITHOUT COMMUNICATION SKILLS...in the same way Scientifically proven things doesn't need Peer reviews..
Nilesh Oak has reference to events and don't require judgemental reviews. Any person having common sense would understand his research.
Check his references. Those are analogies after analogies, not actual observations.
As always, a to-the-point and objective analysis.
I am sure Koenraad, too, is going to write an article soon! He and Oak have been having these enriching debates on dating of the Ramayana and the Mbh.
Koenrad has no argument to present... His stance is that we Indians must simply believe the date he claims as HE IS SAYING SO... 🤣🤣🤣
Vedveer arya is most accep
@@Chanakya831 I have listened to Vedveer Arya.... He may have substance but lacks Coherence..... Unless he works on making his stuff coherent, he will remain peripheral..
thumbs down
Has Dr.Roy proposed his dates in this book? It looks like Dr. Roy has taken Nilesh Oak personally.
That fraud Roy has no date of his own.... He is just doing "VITANDA" .... 🤣🤣🤣 as JEALOUSY burns...
@@Sanatan_Rishikaeven I felt so even though I am not fan of Nilesh oak
@@messengeroflove365 see my view is simple... Oak has done original research n proposed a date.... If one doesn't agree then she/he sud do original research and provide their date... No point in doing "VITANDA" - Which is typical of Abrahamic folks n Western aping Indians...
@@Sanatan_Rishika I agree with you
@@messengeroflove365 another thing is that one has to take evidence in Ramayana n Mahabharata as primary... Rest can be supporting evidences.... But if one refutes the evidence from Ramayana n Mahabharata then they are also questioning that they are genuine..then they are in same boat as Abrahamics who force fit everything within last 6000 years n promote AIT propaganda...
Another weak rebuttal of Nilesh Oak's deep analysis for the dating. You are too general, randomly picking up points. Would like to see a detailed, categorized, and structured analysis. "The whole thing is baseless" is jumping the gun in the midst of your rebuttal.
The sad part is Sanskrit texts have commentaries in English.
I am working on the subject and studying the language and hope to deal with the lacuna as far as I am concerned.
I do not have the intellectual wherewithal to deal with the contentious parts.
I repeat my earlier observations in the comments of other of his videos, that Misra ji is a closet libtard, this is based on my watching tens of his videos and the little bits he throws here and there, one example the use of the term "South India".
Regarding Oak, I disagree with Misra ji on one count atleast, entertainability, no they are not so, Oak's books are unreadable.
I have copies of all three of his books.
ऐसी किताबें हिंदी में भी आनी चाहिए जिससे कि ज्यादा से ज्यादा लोग इसे पढ़ सके और ज्ञान अर्जित कर सके।
Kannada aur Marathi me nahi?
@@akshaysinha1993 nahi hindi 75% log samjhte hai desh me
@@akshaysinha1993bilkul aani chahiye
Saar please make video on Vedveer Arya He changing all time line is that correct ?
Mishra babu... Is it ETHICAL TO peddle a book where one has written a foreword while demeaning the opponent's work.. Just asking? 🤔🤔🤔
9:00 We are not finding pattern by picking up the claim dates to give up our guesses. Therefore we have no basis why to see something as outlier. For me those saying 1700 BC are outlier as then when we will place Gautam Buddha time ( 700 BC ?) and when we place Maurya and Gupta periods? ( 200 BC? and 300 AD? ). This seems in line with earlier leftist claims which are lacking evidence.
First let us agree that we approach every issue connected with our itihasa with a colonized mind set .Until such time we are washed off completely of our inferiority complex and lowself esteem,let the experts continue to dig for and establish the correct time frame for the various events that took place in the past which we rightfully call itihasa.We will not find the right answers if we keep wasting our time and energy in trying to prove the other wrong.
This was an expert trying to correct another instead of blindly accepting a scientific claim. This should be taken in a positive spirit and an opportunity to make ammends because it's not a baseless criticism.
@@SusheelKumarRavinuthala There is a video on sangam talks channel in which Nilesh and a doctor from UK are debating their findings. Finally they agree to disagree as they stick to their findings respectively .Just as AIT has been debunked efforts should be made by all those who are continuously researching on this issue to come together ,collate their findings and if possible take this issue head on with the anti India forces with the same zeal to establish the correct time line for these epics.
@@hanumanthji agreed
There is difference between a colonial mindset and a scientific mindset. One can argue that an approach is colonial if it's premise itself relies on the assumption of western superiority against the orient. However, every criticism of an oriental work cannot be deemed as a colonial mindset. Even Shankara, or reverentially Bhagwan Bhagvatpaad Aadi Shankaracharya had to debate with his peers relying on Pramanas to establish in points. The problem is Nilesh Oak just works in a silo and declares his work superior without even bothering to consider any of his peers criticism, sounds to me like a bad loser.
Very true, I agree. Why don't we spend our energy to focus on all those best qualities of these two epics, Ramayana and Mahabharata. I think that would be more sensible for our budding generation.
Before buying the book, can you pls tell whether Mr. Roy has some dates on Ram and Ramayana than pointing fingers?
Raja Ram Mohan roy was a British implant like many others of the time. Nilesh oak is not doing anything wrong. Hindus laid the foundations of astronomy & had a model of 'interpreted astronomy' called as astrology which west used to mockery indian hindus. Astronomical positions of planets & galaxies in respect to earthern hamispheres is an intrinsic part of hinduism in dating & connecting it as causalilty of major events in history of mankind. So using astronomy to date really ancient events in modern context is not ridiculous but very scientific & obvious in hindu context. So, please be sensitive in your language. We appreciate your work also. But everyone is not a master of everything except Shiv & Vishnu. Dhanyawad 🙏
So Dr Roy has spent so much time and energy on refuting Nilesh Oak's theory but he has not done any work in identifying the correct dates. This itself creates a doubt that his aim seems just to muddy the waters and keep us confused. A normal person would try and further the research and provide alternative theory but Roy's aim seems to be simply negative. Just a thought. I have read both books and in my opinion the second book smells of an agenda. If first one is not perfect science then the second is also not providing any alternative science either 🙏
Sorry sir. I have great objection on "Peer Review".
Peer can review anything which he/she already knows. And they have their own prejudices. If someone has discovered something new which peer doesn't know about, he (peer) will reject it.
There are different opinions about dating of Ramayan and Mahabharat. No one is absolutely correct. But we have to see who is maximally correct. Language of Mr Ram Mohan Roy is very arrogant and heavily smells of personal jealousy.
I am a scientist (a senior medical doctor) and I also criticize many other doctors but my language is never as harsh as Mr Roy.
It would have been better if Dr Roy had presented his theory first and then humbly compared his findings with Mr Oak.
We must discount those who claim to profess themselves as the arbitrators of SCIENCE.
you cant say him not knowing sanskrit doesnt mean he cant discuss the issue of dating the ramayan. you dont have to know how the entire car works in order to change the tires. one can do just fine. mr. oak uses the descriptions of the position of the moon and timing of the day based on descriptions in the ramayan. so the positions of the stars as described in the ramayan us used to find out when such position had to have happened..
Naah
U must know sanskrit otherwise u will do false interpretation which actually he did
If we contradict one another so bluntly then the rest of the world will always have an upper hand and ridicule us and our history, our rich culture. How very sad. Have a healthy debate.. support one another. Live and let live..
It will be great if मिश्रा जी invites नीलेश जी for a friendly discussion. He is scientific in his methodology and uses ine among the top software.
It will be greatly appreciated
Just blabbering about dates without explaining the science behind it doesn't lead you anywhere.
Show the proofs and compare...show it us why it's not those dates. Just quoting different dates given by different people doesn't prove anything. Extremely unscientific.
Just don't tag Nilesh sir in your videos to get more views.
Thank you for making the ebook free until tomorrow. I got my copy!
Where is the link?
@@santoshkumarsabat7246 description
If the review sticks to scientific data, I was fine. This sounds a little personal grudge..and also the inference of right wing couple of times.
Writing a big book just to prove someone wrong is hardly something a smart person would do. Not supporting Nilesh, but can't support stupidity at the same time.
Anyone should arrange a healthy debate between both.otherwise people will be in doubt.
Could not get free download option
So what's the date according to you? Thanks to Nilesh Oak we have many experts come out to debunk them.
Can you say anything about vadeveer arya
To understand Nilesh oak work is not a piece of cake
His master's voice... British went but there dogs are still roaming on the streets of BHARAT😂
Right
I think your focus on the very use of words "scientific", peer-reviewed" and "credentials" gives away your position about your bias.
By calling Mr Roy 's book an "antidote" for Shri Nilesh Oaks book, you are naming Shri Nilesh Oak's book a "poison".
Possibly many of your followers will part from you for this behaviour of yours. If you present yourself in this manner, it does show a lot more than your words.
The vast expanse of various disciplines of research used by Shri Nilesh Oak for corroboration is absolutely mindblowing.
A charachter valuation of a person should be done through assessment of persons actions. To ridicule someone in a "peer-review" cant be called scientific.
It would be great to see shastrarth or open discussions between Nilesh Oak and Mr. Roy to give each one an equal opportunity to counter their arguments.
Shri Nityanand Mishra ji, do you know if Mr Roy has open mind to participate in such open discussions? Or has Mr Roy actually invited Shri Nilesh Oak for such doscussion?
If Mr Roy has confidence in his work, it will be a fantastic opportunity for Mr Roy to publicly prove Shri Nilesh Oak wrong and "unscientific" in front of huge crowd. May be even broadcasting it "live" will be more effective.
I am sure you will support open un-edited discussions. 🙏
He is a grammarian, and it is not uncommon for grammarians to think that they know the knoweldge of the texts written in the language they have mastered. A common ego trap.
He does indeed have access to information in a way that the non-practitioners of Sanskrit and linguistics in general do not have.
However, his knoweldge is limited by the insight he has into the subject that he is translating or simply reading.
Just because I know English does not mean that I can understand a textbook on quantum physics.
Nityananda Ji is great though, he deserves great respect for his nobility and vision.
He is one of the best grammarians and linguists of Sanskrit in India at the moment.
Can someone clarify if those who mentioned 3000 some years as Bce ? And whether nilesh oak mentioned 5500 including the CE?
This is why, learned people need to be very vocal... otherwise half knowledge people will put forward what ever gets to their minds.
Very interesting. Thanks to both autors.
Sir, your knowledge of Sanskrit is amazing but please don't extend your advice to areas which you don't know anything of. Nilesh Oak has done amazing work in astronomy and tested and validated it with astronomy evidence in our ancient texts. Please read his books again so that you understand it better.
Wow, so by the same standards a comment on this video would be.
A self proclaimed Sanskrit scholar who has no background on research and has not even a bachelors degree in any scientific study has foreword a book by a self proclaimed Vedic researcher who has studied in material sciences thinks that peer review is mandatory because out of the box thinking with data points and logic has to be approved by Saahebs who left and remaining stayed here.
Also by the same standards because his children still study a fake date in the book and believe in it. We should not revise NCERT books and teach our children that Columbus discovered America and Vasco da gama discovered India.
Also by the same standards, He is leftist because if someone approved Nilesh Oak’s theories is a right winger. Also he has called Rajiv Malhotra Ji and Jaipur Dialogues etc. also right winger who offered Courtesy to host this self proclaimed Sanskrit Scholar. Who has no research experience on Sanskrit itself. The best I have seen is reading from different Dictionaries and translating words. That’s not a research. Take this as a challenge:- “Are you saying that you have correct translations available for the Sanskrit written orated by Maharishi Valmiki? “
So what expert of Sanskrit is saying by quoting is it is unacceptable by Linguistic point of view. Now for dharmik readers I do not have to explain what Saaheb who stayed is saying. ( Linguistics and it’s accuracy is covered by Rajiv Malhotra ji in details) if this leftist expert says it is unacceptable because saahebs who defined linguistic Dont agree and his interpretation is only truth then again let me say he has never done “research” . Also is he really claiming that Maharishi Valmiki has written a poem and it is factless!!!! Wow what a claim.
I mean it is waste of time in responding to a revengeful Video review.
For Dr. Roy, such efforts should be encouraged but not in pulling leg but by coming up with your own logic and dates. I would not comment on his book yet because I have logical reason by which I will weight and see if he has any competitive edge with facts over Nilesh Oak Ji. So far no one has.
But I am ashamed of following Mr. Mishra and subscribing his channel. He has used his platform for personal agenda to influence against a fellow Indic researcher just because he has no capacity to understand logic and research.
But I am not so shallow minded and still appreciate Mr. Mishra’s contribution for which he does good. And responded with this message where he has damaged his own image.
If pear review paper is scientific than why two different date for same mahabharat war
I have repeatedly stressed that the question is not of Oak's dating being wrong. The question is that of research fraud. Oak has made bogus claims of hundreds of corroborations, which simply don't exist. His hundreds of corroborations are all analogies, not astronomical observations. He refuses to list them even when he is being repeatedly asked. In a peer review this blatant research fraud would have been easily caught. Check my six talks on Sangam Talks where I demonstrate Oak's research fraud with exact references from his books and Ramayana and Mahabharata.
Have guts and call Shri. NILESH OAK for a debate..
Name calling is not working..I am yet to check the book of oak.
I Ignored this video after watching first few seconds..not the right attitude to critisize any work
so whaen did ramayan happen?
Nityanand ji with great respect, Do you have a hypothesis to counter Mr. Oak on dates ? also your point about peer review is invalid as left has a complete grip over academia and has been using to stifle the voices from right. The least you can do is not discourage dharmic authors
Misra ji I like your scholarly videos but this "book review" just sounds like you have an agenda to peddle. The fact that you wrote the foreword for this book automatically makes you prone to conflict of interest and not a neutral reviewer. Also, like others have said mere comparison of dates by the two authors without any substantiation does not lend this exercise any credibility.
You sound intellectual but Nilesh is intellectual. May God help you overcome this bias which is outcome of jealousy.
But Mr Oaj's timinhs are nearer to what some saints have said and archeological findings, astronomical calculations
The only issue about established academia is that they become established because you said so
a different perspective is always welcome, but why the mocking tone?
हिंदी में होता तो हम भी सुनते , भ्राता श्री
I have two points:
1. How peer review is the only parameter of correctness?
2. Who said Ramayan is a poetic creation? Ramcharitmanas can be a poetic work based on real historical work of Shri Valmiki!
You too don't have any degree in Sanskrit, so as per your logic your are also a self proclaimed scholar. In this case, how can you say anything to anyone!
Technically astronomical data is much more correct then any peer review. Peer review always sufffer from someone's thought process and prejudices!
And how does any judgement given in USA is milestone for Bharat? It has no significance and should not be even looked upon!
What about Manish pandits , findings .
Guys chill it just a marketing of a book
Okay ! What is your alternative theory ?
I did not hear you refute or contradict or talk about about NO's reference to a Sanskrit sloka on Earth's rotational angle being 24 degree at the time of Ramayana which as per astronomical calculation fixed the location of Polaris. Interested to hear your point of view. Also, note as per Indian Yuga system Ramayana period was somewhere in "Satya Yuga" - i.e., 12000 years ago.
Dear Shri Mishra ,
Pl elaborate what is peer review system?
Even Aryan Invasion theory is validated by peer review system.
Are we endorsing the Western supremacy and their privilege of gate keeping of knowledge by way of peer review system which is exclusively dominated by West?
Or
Do we have a peer review system which is fair?
Peer Review - System doctored by Christian West n India Haters to invent their own history.... Dating of Mahabharata and Ramayana has to be done basis Only ORIGINAL Mahabharata n Ramayana text by Vyasa ji n Valmiki ji... Rest all is farce....
A fair point to ask
Britishers were smart they created Indian side representatives by themselves who talk for British
Unfortunately you appeared unusually bitter and vindictive in this video. More facts would help also do not discourage others who may not be at same level of Sanskrit as you are. Exactly this type of elitist view made Sanskrit less popular.
Even Mishra's Sanskrit knowledge is Questionable!! czcams.com/video/DKjPHJ4kqRc/video.html 4 min n 11 sec... Where Rupa Bhaty ji exposes this Self proclaimed Sanskrit guru Mishra....
Please also tell about sea level rise and submergence of Poompuhar ancient port of Tamil nadu and city of Dwarka almost same time period. Also please tell about evidences about vanishing of Saraswati river. Nilesh has given various references on these evidences.
With Due Respect To Both Respected Contenders To Clarification Count Hope Dr Oak And You Make A Video To This Claims By You Or Give Substantial Evidence 😊
Very surprised by this video. Are you yourself an expert in the field ?
So, what according to both of u is the date of the Ramayana war or period?