Yuganta The Advent of Kali Yuga | Jeevan Rao | Nilesh Oak |
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 06. 2024
- Speaker Bio (Interviewee) : Jeevan Rao is a young researcher, writer, speaker and IT consultant with a BE degree in Electrical Engineering. He writes extensively on forgotten, least discussed aspects of ancient Indian history and present it comprehensively to create awareness.
Speaker Bio (Interviewer): Nilesh Oak is an author, researcher, speaker, and corporate consultant and he is adjunct faculty at the Institute of Advanced Sciences, Dartmouth, MA, USA. He has published 3 books and writes extensively helping Indians become aware of the deep antiquity of Indian civilization through scientific acumen and logical reasoning.
Talk Description : Shri Nilesh Oak interviews author Shri Jeevan Rao G S about the claims and evidence presented in his book ‘Yuganta - The Advent of Kali Yuga’. The book is exhaustively explores textual evidence to clear up the Yuga confusion and delusion of at least the last 1500 years. The insights in the book has serious implications for correcting the chronology of Indian civilization and for the truthful narrative of India’s contributions to the world civilizations.
Timestamps:
00:00 Introduction
1:33 Do you agree with Kaliyuga's dating as 3120 BCE?
2:48 Why is 3102 BCE not correct? Who created this myth?
5:12 What does Purana & Mahabharata have to say about Kaliyuga?
8:49 Under Vedic traditions, how do we correct the course and convince the community?
10:44 What about the dating by exemplaries like Samartha Ramdas Swami and Madhavacharya?
15:44 How does your work differ from existing works with regard to Kaliyuga?
20:09 What will you say about Indic researchers sometimes circumventing the Mahabharata posing interpolations as a reason?
23:01 Why is the determination of dating of Kaliyuga and Mahabharata important?
28:19 When is the Kaliyuga ending?
34:35 What is the best way to disseminate this to the layman?
37:24 What is the implication of your research?
Q&A Session:
38:16 Vedveer Arya ji's differing view on Yugas
39:56 Hierarchy of Indian Hindu Texts in terms of their credibility to date Kaliyuga's advent
41:32 Birth of Kalki (Assumption)
Join our newsletter for getting updates on upcoming lectures:
www.sangamtalks.com/subscribe
Join our CZcams video channel for learning about new video releases:
Hindi : / sangamhindi
English : / sangamtalks
Tamil : / @sangamtamizh
Punjabi : / @sangampunjabi
Bhojpuri : / @sangamtalksbhojpuri
Marathi : / @sangammarathi
Malayalam : / @sangammalayalam
Shorts : / @sangamtalkstv
Bangla : / @sangambangla
Facebook : / sangamtalks
Instagram : / sangamtalks
Telegram : t.me/sangamtalks
Twitter : / sangamtalks
Koo : www.kooapp.com/profile/sangam...
Website : www.sangamtalks.org
Donate : www.sangamtalks.org/donate
Nilesh ji your smile makes me instantly very happy as I know I am going to learn something amazing. We are grateful for your tapasya. I hope many more of us will follow your footsteps and develop scientific acumen to deep dive kshir sagar of Vedic science. Naman! 🙏🙏🙏
Thank you Nilesh Ji & Jeevan Rao🙏🙏🙏
Request to Sangam talks on behalf of the entire Hindu civilization and it's well wishers: Please host a series of talks to finalise based on scientific evidence,the broad timelines of the Hindu civilization. It may please include Mr. Nilesh Oak-Rupa Bhaty-Jeevan Rao, Raja Ram Roy etc. Sangam talks should spearhead a movement to settle this contentious issue for ever rather than hosting multiple authors randomly all with conflicting dating( That is what is happening now)and inflated egos! This will be the greatest favour to our civilization!
P.S: I am sure such a series would be a blockbuster on CZcams.
Totally agree.
(5561 BCE Team) Nilesh Oak, Jeevan Raj, Rupa Bhaty versus (3102 BCE team) Dr. Raja Ram, Dr. ML Raja, Dr. Jayashree Saranathan.
The problem is, the 5561 BCE team will always give lame excuses to avoid a debate. Dr. Raja Ram and Dr. ML Raja has publicly mentioned they are willing to debate anytime.
@@EkaSanatani Sorry, but you are wrong! I just watched Nikesh Oak's detailed debate with
Manish ji. I felt the other way. Only 5561 BCE will win in a well organised debate/ Vaada.
@@SJ-zo3lz You're free to believe whichever. For me, 5561 is fraud.
@@SJ-zo3lz who is this Manish
Good work 👏👏👏
Great job indeed. But does the book talk anything about the end of KALIYUGA?
Namaste, this book is on the beginning of Kaliyuga.
End of Kaliyuga would constitute a separate research and book
What is a good website or email to contact Mr. Rao?
Some statements by Pre-Fixing “We know that…….” make people pseudo-Wise. So they do not question other statements afterwards.
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण , कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे |
हरे राम हरे राम , राम राम हरे हरे ||
when will it end? is it going to get worse? can we skip it?
why can't some one connect surya siddhanta , siddhanta shiromani etc with mahabharata?🤔
Namaste,
Because they all are not Contemporary works. Therefore they talk of different epochs.
Equation of the Sun, in SS, was updated at the time of Mahabhart
I have connected Shadashiti Dr descriptions of SS with Mahabharata references of Shadashiti and 5561 BCE
@@jeevanraya correct.
@@NileshOakLet’s use information from Mahabharata and Surya Siddhanta to determine Dwapar Yuganta.
In Mahabharata Bhishmaparva within Bhumiparva you have Sanjaya telling us (starting चत्वारी भारते वर्षे …. In BORI critical this appears at 6.11.3 to 6.11.6) that Krita Yuga is 4000 years, Treta Yuga is 3000 years, Dwapar Yuga is 2000 years of which 100 years are remaining (शते तिष्ठति संप्रति).
Surya Siddhanta “mean motion of planets” chapter verse 57 tells us that at the end of Krita Yuga, Sun and all the planets were in Mesha Rashi. We will assume this was fact (or belief) was shared by people from Mahabharata also.
Sun and other planets in Mesha happened in February, 19, 6779 BCE (I.e. year -6778)
Adding 3000 of Treta Yuga we get 3779 BCE as end of Treta Yuga.
Add 2000 more years of Dwapar Yuga you get end of Dwapar Yuga around -1778. 1779 BCE.
Around this year winter solstice does happen in Magh Shukla Paksha. As an example January 9, 1876 BCE is Magh Pornima and January 5 this year is Uttarayana start (Winter solstice). This year of course does not satisfy any of the “omen observations“. But satisfies Bhishma Nirvana - and there will be many such years in second millennium BCE.
On the other hand you will not find ANY year between 2500 BCE and 25,000 BCE with winter solstice happening in Magh Shukla Paksha. They will all gain Bhisma Nirvana test.
For example in the year 5560 BCE (to find Winter solstice after your proposed war year) winter solstice occurs on 1/31/5560 BCE (aka -5561). On this date moon is already in Krishna Paksha. Full moon was between Uttara Phalguni and Hasta on January 21 making the Bhishma Nirvana in Phalgun Krishna Paksha. Magh Pornima was on December 22.
22:10 Mahabharata should reserve right ….. but previously author mentioned Mahabharata does not mention Kaliyuga start. When he asked others they told him references in Bhagavat Purana. If Mahabharata doesn’t mention anything about it then it can’t be an authority on it - unless author cooks up some obscure references and pounds them into Kaliyuga reference.
Namaste, please do consider rewatching the talk. I'm pretty sure I have not said "Mahabharata does not mention Kaliyuga start" anywhere. I'm asserting the exact opposite of what you are saying.
I stand corrected. I was confused by the statement at 6:55, but at 15:20 author has said that in Mahabharata specifically mentions that Kaliyuga begins on Pushya Nakshatra.
Now where in Mahabharata it says Kaliyuga (or Pushyayuga) starts on Pushya Nakshatra?
Here are some ready references from search (but you may have another version of Mahabharata with different numbers):
Mahābhārata
MBh, 1, 151, 25.95 puṣyamāse tu rohiṇyāṃ śuklapakṣe śubhe tithau /
MBh, 1, 168, 17.2 puṣyeṇa sahitaṃ kāle divākaram ivoditam //
MBh, 3, 91, 25.2 mārgaśīrṣyām atītāyāṃ puṣyeṇa prayayus tataḥ //
MBh, 3, 261, 15.1 adya puṣyo niśi brahman puṇyaṃ yogam upaiṣyati /
MBh, 5, 6, 17.1 sa bhavān puṣyayogena muhūrtena jayena ca /
MBh, 5, 148, 3.2 prayādhvaṃ vai kurukṣetraṃ puṣyo 'dyeti punaḥ punaḥ //
MBh, 6, 3, 12.2 dhūmaketur mahāghoraḥ puṣyam ākramya tiṣṭhati //
MBh, 6, 11, 3.3 kṛtaṃ tretā dvāparaṃ ca puṣyaṃ ca kuruvardhana //
MBh, 6, 11, 4.2 saṃkṣepād dvāparasyātha tataḥ puṣyaṃ pravartate //
MBh, 6, 11, 7.1 na pramāṇasthitir hyasti puṣye 'smin bharatarṣabha /
MBh, 6, 11, 12.2 lubdhāścānṛtakāścaiva puṣye jāyanti bhārata //
MBh, 6, 11, 13.2 puṣye bhavanti martyānāṃ rāgo lobhaśca bhārata //
MBh, 9, 33, 5.2 puṣyeṇa samprayāto 'smi śravaṇe punarāgataḥ /
MBh, 9, 34, 9.2 nirgacchadhvaṃ pāṇḍaveyāḥ puṣyeṇa sahitā mayā //
MBh, 9, 34, 14.1 rauhiṇeye gate śūre puṣyeṇa madhusūdanaḥ /
MBh, 13, 63, 10.1 puṣye tu kanakaṃ dattvā kṛtaṃ cākṛtam eva ca /
MBh, 13, 89, 4.2 puṣṭikāmo 'tha puṣyeṇa śrāddham īheta mānavaḥ //
Another line simply seems to mention “when Dvaparyuga ends, Kaliyuga starts”.
MBh, 12, 326, 82.1 dvāparasya kaleścaiva saṃdhau paryavasānike /
इस टॉक को हिंदी में बताए। कृपया
Jeevan Rao has set an example on how to properly answer queries on the dating while at the same time maintaining respect for other Indic researchers who have different opinion. Something his Guru, Nilesh should learn from him. For such a young age, so much of maturity and clarity. A star in the making. He'll be an asset for the future of Indic research if only he realizes how much of a fraud his Guru is. Congrats Jeevan on this interview, stop parroting your guru by using the term ' Indic folks'.
I'm not reading the book (knowing all too well how the young and gullible Jeevan will be manipulated to arrive to wrong conclusions by his guru).
Have felt that Nilesh ji is a bit self obsessed ( rightly so considering the extent and depth of his Tapasya so far) but cannnot agree a bit with your charge that he is a "fraud". Can you cite even a point to support your view? Anyone can call names to another on social media like you do ! Sheer jealousy and prejudice!
@@SJ-zo3lz 'self obsessed' is the wrong word, 'blind pride' is the right one. 'the extend and depth of Tapasya' is wrong, 'the extend of manipulation and cherry picking' is the proper word. A fraud he is, albeit a smart one, as he can take blind fool's like you with him for a ride. Sheer ignorance on your side! You believe what you want, time will prove whether he is fraud or not.
If there is no clarity on what a yuga is, what is the point of this? This sounds more about the Mahabharata dating. The book seems to be a premature effort pushed by the author's mentor. I am interested to see where Madhvacharya and Ramadas quote 3102 bc as the Mahabharata dating. Is this cited and analyzed in the book?
The point of the book is for the servant @Jeevanraya to praise the master's @NileshOak Mahabharata dating is the right one.
I'll tell you something interesting, Sir. Your surname Bhat is also a beej mantra from bringing about cessation of an event.
True to your name, your words elicit a cessation of intellectual engagement and dogmatic attachment.
May Bhairava lead you to the Vairagya necessary to digest these revelations as well as to respond in a more dispassionate fashion.
Hari Aum Tat Sat! 🙏🏻
@@EkaSanatani Aap ko leg Raha hai ki aap Eka Santani hun, woh moodtha ka ek pratheek hai aur ahankaar ka. You're not Sanatani, don't disgrace the ethos of Dharma.
18:45 what Mr. Oak says is very true. People do cherry-pick statements that match their claim, and ignore other statements.
For example Mr. Oak himself ignores Pitamah Bhishma Nirvan happened just after Uttarayana started when pushing his date of Mahabharata. He ignores the statement “sharadante himagame” which is consistent with Bhishma Nirvana at the start of Uttarayana. He ignores the definition of “vakra” motion of planets which is in Surya Siddhanta and makes up a never before seen definition. He makes up Halley’s Comet being seen in (or around) 5561 BCE when it was very far away at the time and wasn’t seen for a decade after. He ignores the common sense that Arundhati “observation “ is in other half dozen or so “impossible” narratives such as one animal species giving birth to other animal species and girls born starting singing and dancing right away - cherry-picking Arundhaati related verse from context. He ignores that Arundhati walking ahead of Vasishtha was happening for 6000+ years and was not a “omen” for the war. Coming to Ramayana he ignores specific mention of Chaitra being in Vasanta ritu in Ramayana. He ignores tens of translations which translate “Pushyaneeta” night as a night from Pushya month ( a night when which starts with Pushya rising and staying visible through most off it - Pushya leads it - therefore Pornima moon rises with Pushya) and based on one cherry-picked translation concludes pushyaneeta night is when Pushya is almost never seen as Sun is near Pushya.
Mr. Oak makes the statement about cherry-picking and illustrates quite clearly through his behavior.😜
Agree with Sir, same thoughts were going through my mind, I was asking whether the fraud was talking about himself.
So according to you when it begin
also it's actually 6 yugas based on dividing this dark beings/ energies to be vanquished over a time period for real peace to reign forever everywhere.Those created from this dark evil dread this bcuz they know they won't ever have a existence again.🕉️🙌🛐 Once this time frame is done to eliminate it
Also the ayyahvazhi texts explains how the yugas got started.Its linked with Shiva bcuz time became a duality light In darkness good in evil.The coming of Shiva existence was 2 Energies this why he is worshipper by left hand path Aghori,.The yugas got created to deal with the evil within a time span.Bcuz it was a massive evil energy.
It would be good to investigate the Jain text bcuz it's actually quite accurate concerning India Rana lineages.Pu-Rana =The services of the Ranas/Rajas to their subjects in the rishis who they consulted with.
First Jains need to come in the main stream. They do not consider Sanatan.
@@jyotivyas9286 ok but part of Indic civilization right 👍
Qutumb minar was built on destruction of jain temples! Such a sad part of history
@@jyotivyas9286 Whether or not the Jains consider themselves Sanatani, the Hindus can still consult the Jain texts to supplement their own. Doesn't matter what other people do or think; we do what's best for us. In fact, the non-violent Jains will need the Hindus to protect them against the "peacefuls". Whether or not they want us to or not, we should because they are a repository of great knowledge that we need.
Interestingly there are far too many interpretations of the number of years for each yuga. If you take into consideration the number of kalpas, manvantaras, number of yuga cycles in each manvantara it would be incorrect to state that the yuga sequence between Ramayana and Mahabharata is a transition from Treta to Dwapara directly and then to Kali. Ramayana is said to have happened 24th Treta yuga of Vaivasvata Manvantara, while Mahabharata in the 28th Dvapara Yuga of the same Manvantara. If as per the current research by Jeevan Rao one yuga cycle is 12000 years (I am yet to read the book, just understood during the presentation) then the timeline between Ramayana and Mahabharata should be more than 48000 years (assuming that there is a straight cycle Satya thru Kali and then again Satya and so on. The difference would be different if we consider a descending cycle and ascending cycle - Satya to Kali as one descending cycle and again Kali to Satya in ascending cycle each of 12000 years. How can this be reconciled with the current research that does not consider Ramayana as that far behind Mahabharata?
One explanation of the yuga cycle Descending and ascending is equivalency of the same with the axial precession that takes place approximately every 25920 years, in which case the number of years of each Yuga will be different.
Let’s use information from Mahabharata and Surya Siddhanta to determine Dwapar Yuganta.
In Mahabharata Bhishmaparva within Bhumiparva you have Sanjaya telling us (starting चत्वारी भारते वर्षे …. In BORI critical this appears at 6.11.3 to 6.11.6) that Krita Yuga is 4000 years, Treta Yuga is 3000 years, Dwapar Yuga is 2000 years of which 100 years are remaining (शते तिष्ठति संप्रति).
Surya Siddhanta “mean motion of planets” chapter verse 57 tells us that at the end of Krita Yuga, Sun and all the planets were in Mesha Rashi. We will assume this was fact (or belief) was shared by people from Mahabharata also.
Sun and other planets in Mesha happened in February, 19, 6779 BCE (I.e. year -6778)
Adding 3000 of Treta Yuga we get 3779 BCE as end of Treta Yuga.
Add 2000 more years of Dwapar Yuga you get end of Dwapar Yuga around -1778. 1779 BCE.
Around this year winter solstice does happen in Magh Shukla Paksha. As an example January 9, 1876 BCE is Magh Pornima and January 5 this year is Uttarayana start (Winter solstice). This year of course does not satisfy any of the “omen observations“. But satisfies Bhishma Nirvana - and there will be many such years in second millennium BCE.
On the other hand you will not find ANY year between 2500 BCE and 25,000 BCE with winter solstice happening in Magh Shukla Paksha. They will all gain Bhisma Nirvana test.
The Khazarian mafia definitely has something to do with this.
Language of महाभारत is supposed to be post पाणिनि, so it is an account describe an advantage for the events that occurred a millennium years ago ?
Although I don’t take these hard working but stuck in their hypothesis guys seriously, your statement needs some backing up also.
In the sutra 6.2. 38, it mentions both the Bharata and the Mahabharata. This would make Panini after composition of Bharata and Mahabharata.
Panini does not prescribe the language but merely observes it. There are many instances in Panini where he explains how things are said in Vedic language, some instances where he mentions how they are said in Far East, and other parts of Sanskrit speaking world, etc.
Just because language matches certain rules Panini mentioned does not make the treaties after Panini or before Panini.
Why do you pronounce all hindi words ending with A 😅
Most Sanskrit words end with the "a" sound, but many Hindi words do not pronounce them.
@@forest3064 salutations to your calm and benevolent response, given the disruptive intent by the commentor.
This Nilesh chap is a scammer . His research is super shallow ( I have read . Full of hyperbole) and has been refuted by Indic scholars such Dr Jayasree Saranathan etc.
Sangam talks is destroying its credibility by inviting him and giving him a platform
He is good. Why you feel
@@jyotivyas9286 read his books and articles. Go beyond the claims he is making and look at the data he is using to create his hypothesis. Then you will understand.
He has been exposed as a fraud
@@naveenn7591 Are you fake account of the likes of Dr. Jayasree ?Nilesh Ji's claims have never been refuted successfully yet. He has clearly won even the debate with Mr. Maneesh. Do you have a single technical claim against him ? Just sheer prejudice!
@@SJ-zo3lz czcams.com/video/7DiLSUFrTx8/video.html ask your idol @NIleshOak to reply or debate.
@@SJ-zo3lz are you a paid commentor of Nilesh then ?
Read the books by Dr Jayasree Saranathan .
Moreover, read the book by Nilesh and use critical thinking. This cap claims to use all astronomical observations.
In Mahabaharatha and every Indian epic and poems, there is constant comparison of people or actions to Sun , moon and the planets . It does not mean astronomical observation. This chap makes an audacious link without any grounding.
Don't believe in these guys ! First, both guys should debate with Dr Raja Ram Mohan Roy then I believe his robustness
That man is a man who is obsessed with nothing but मत्सर्य बुद्धि what are you going to say next? That Karna supercedes Arjun? Please think.
Hari Aum Tat Sat 🙏🏻