LIST OF MANIPULATIONS DONE BY NILESH OAK TO ‘CORROBORATE’ HIS

DATE OF MAHABHARATA.

(APPENDIX I FROM THE BOOK “MYTH OF THE EPOCH OF ARUNDHATI BY

NILESH NILKANTH OAK” AUTHORED BY JAYASREE SARANATHAN, PHD
(ASTROLOGY)

Very often one finds Nilesh Nilkanth Oak claiming in public platforms and social media that
he has successfully corroborated 300+ astronomy references of Mahabharata for his date of
Mahabharata War in the year 5561 BCE. Here I am giving the true picture of the nature of his
claim. Even before we venture to check his corroborations, the reader must be informed that
Nilesh Nilkanth Oak had not even corroborated the major highlights of Mahabharata –
despite claiming the text to be factual. In the 9 th chapter of his book, he has given “six
specific observations of Mahabharata and one traditional belief (Kali Yuga and the
Mahabharata War) conflicting” with his theory and / or proposed time line.1

Mahabharata observation Nilesh Oak Jayasree Saranathan

Balarama Tirtha Yatra starting on Pushya Not corroborated Corroborated
and ending on Shravana after 42 days
Late Moonrise on 14th day of War Not corroborated Corroborated
Bhishma passing away on Magha Shuddha Not corroborated Corroborated
Ashtami after 58 days with pain of arrows
Traditional date of Kali Yuga Not corroborated Corroborated
Bhishma compared with Full moon on 1 st Tried unsuccessfully Analogy, so didn’t
day of war to corroborate attempt to corroborate
Analogy of solar eclipse on 18th day of war
Tried unsuccessfully Analogy, so didn’t
to corroborate attempt to corroborate
Krishna left for peace mission at the end Not corroborated Corroborated
of Sharad season.

The above table raises a question how Nilesh Oak can claim success in his research when five
major events of Mahabharata were not corroborated by him for his timeline. While we
appreciate his openness in accepting that he had not corroborated these events, we are
constrained to express our doubts about his integrity and proficiency in the text for all the
other ‘corroborations’ he had done in his book. Let me first highlight the 7 th chapter of his
book titled “The planets were aligned.” There are 18 planetary observations he has dealt with
in this chapter by naming them as experiments numbered form 10 to 27. Let me show that all
of them are manipulated to fit-in with his date.

1
“When Did The Mahabharata War Happen?” Page 120-121.

1
(1) E XPERIMENT N O 10: “J UPITER AND S ATURN NEAR V ISAKHA ”. 2 (M AHABHARATA
REFERENCE N O 6 IN HIS BOOK )

“grahau tāmrāruṇa śikhau prajvalantāv iva sthitau

     saptarṣīṇām udārāṇāṃ samavacchādya vai prabhām”
 saṃvatsarasthāyinau ca grahau prajvalitāv ubhau
     viśākhayoḥ samīpasthau bṛhaspatiśanaiścarau”3

He has taken the last line of this verse and attempted to locate Jupiter and Saturn in the
Voyager Simulator by means of DVA (Direct Visual Astronomy which “involves simulating
movement of the object of interest, as seen from a specific location on the earth”)4 When he
checked for the 1st day of the war (when this observation was purported to be made) “Jupiter
stayed in the region of Mula- UttraAshada, Saturn stayed in the region of Chitra – Uttara
Phalguni”. But he “treated this as a satisfactory corroboration of this Mahabharata
observation”. How?

He reasons out that Jupiter and Saturn were equi-distant from Visakha, in nakshatra space,
east and west of Visakha respectively!! Jupiter was near Mula and Saturn was near Hasta,
each at a distance of more than 2 nakshatra space (>27˚) from Visakha!

The questions that arise are

 What is the extent of ‘sameepa’ in Vyasa’s astronomy in this verse? Without defining
this how could a scientific researcher proceed to locate a planet in ‘sameepa’ (near) of
some star?
 If Jupiter was in Mula, Vyasa could have written that it was in Mula. Why should he
write that it was nearing Visakha which is more than 2 nakshatras away?
 Similarly why should Vyasa say that Saturn was nearing Visakha while it was 2 stars
away from Visakha.
But Nilesh Nilkanth Oak finds the position of Jupiter and Saturn a corroboration of Vyasa’s
observation that they were near Visakha!! Anyway he has safely written earlier that the
“Determination of the Nakshatra of any given day based on visual observation can lead to an
error of +/-1day”5 This experiment shows more than 2 nakshatras in a given day. It doesn’t
matter as it can be added in the next edition of his book.

According to him Experiment 10 is successful corroboration of planetary alignment on his

date of Mahabharata – notwithstanding the fact that Jupiter can never come near Visakha
with Sun in Jyeshta (as it entails vakri motion) and it will take 11 to 12 years for Jupiter to
come near Visakha. In the case of Saturn, it will take more than one and a half years to come
near Vishaka!

2
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 79
3
Mahabharata: 6-3- 24 & 25 http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs06003.htm
4
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 77.
5
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 36.

2
This being the ‘scientific’ nature of corroborating the verse, whom does he want to satisfy by
making this experiment? For him “this was merely a verification of Vartak’s explanation”. So
the reader can rest assured he had not proved Vyasa’s verse!

(2) E XPERIMENT NUMBER 11: “S ATURN NEAR B HAGA ” (M AHABHARATA REFERENCE

N O 10 IN HIS BOOK ).

The verse runs as follows:

bhāgyaṃ nakṣatram ākramya sūryaputreṇa pīḍyate6

Nilesh Oak writes,

“Voyager simulation shows that Saturn is near Bhaga (Uttara Phalguni) for a period of more
than two years leading to the first day of Mahabharata War, when it began approaching
Chitra.”7

What is wrong with this?

The issues are:

 Nilesh Oak does not define the word ‘Pidyate’ in the verse. It is too essential to know
the meaning as it refers to Saturn in third case (Instrumental case - Surya putrena).
The dictionary meaning of ‘Pidyate’ is hurt or be pressed or afflicted. So ‘Surya
putrena Pidyate’ refers to an affliction or harm caused by Saturn (son of Surya). How
could ‘Pidyate’ be taken to mean “near”? Oak must explain why he interprets
‘Pidyate’ as ‘near’.
 Nilesh Oak has aligned Bhaga with Uttara Phalguni. But Bhaga is the presiding deity
of Purva Phalguni. For Uttara Phalguni the deity is Aryama. The Rig and Yajur
Vedanga Jyothishas give the list of the deities for stars in the sequence starting from
Krittika. Per that Bhaga was the presiding deity of Purva phalguni and Aryama was
for Uttara Phalguni. Earlier we proved in the context of the 5-year Yuga that the
Vedanga Jyothisha was in vogue in Mahabharata times. Therefore a reference to
Bhaga must align it with Purva Phalguni and not Uttara Phalguni.

6
Mahabharata: 6-3-14 http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs06003.htm
7
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 79.

3
  Long after he published his book, Oak makes a mention of the reversal of the two
deities Bhaga and Aryama for the two Phalguni stars in a different context in his blog
written on October 2016,8 quoting Taittriya Samhita and Taittriya Brahmana. But
there is no discussion in his book or anywhere else on the exact stellar rulership
followed at the time of Mahabharata war.
 Without giving any justification or explanation for which of the deities ruled the two
stars, he had written Bhaga and Aryama for both the phalguni stars in Table 3 on stars
and nakshatra devatas for the year 5561 BC. Since the text talks about “Bhagyam
nakshatram”, the star ruled by Bhaga assumes significance.

Nilesh Oak should have proved which of the two Phalguni stars were ruled by Bhaga
in Mahabharata astronomy. In the absence of that he stands to be accused of picking
up what suits him with his Simulator Nyaya.
 Nilesh Oak says that simulation shows Saturn near Uttara Phalguni for 2 years (to
justify the reference to Bhagyam nakshatram) and continues to say that Saturn began
approaching Chitra on the first day of his date of Mahabharata war! This means
Saturn was near or at the star Chitra on his date which is a clear contradiction to
Vyasa’s observation of Bhagyam nakshatram.
 Even if we assume that Saturn was near Uttara Phalguni as he initially claims from
the simulator, Saturn has to cross Hasta before reaching Chitra. This means it will
take nearly a year for Saturn to reach Chitra – the position on the day of Oak’s date of
Mahabharata war – from Uttara Phalguni. Then how could he claim that he has
successfully corroborated Vyasa’s verse on Saturn’s position near Bhaga?
 From Bhaga (lord of Purva Phalguni in 5 year Yuga calendar) it will take not less than
2 years to reach Chitra – on the first day of Mahabharata war (Oak’s date). This
means from Vyasa’s observation to Oak’s date of Mahabharata war, Saturn needs 2
full years to fill the gap. But in Nilesh Oak’s ‘scientific’ research this is possible!
(3) E XPERIMENT NUMBER 12: “M ERCURY TRAVELLING THROUGH ALL
NAKSHATRAS ”. 9 (M AHABHARATA REFERENCE N O 15 IN HIS BOOK )

The verse says,

8
“On the identification of Brahmarashi with nakshatra Abhijit”
https://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2016/10/07/on-the-identification-of-brahmarashi-with-nakshatra-abhijit/
9
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 79.

4
 triṣu pūrveṣu sarveṣu nakṣatreṣu viśāṃ pate
     budhaḥ saṃpatate 'bhīkṣṇaṃ janayan sumahad bhayam10

Nilesh Oak interprets this verse as a “trivially true observation” of Mercury travelling
through all the nakshatras over a period of one year and therefore “no verification is
required.” So “The observation certainly corroborates my conjecture for the time interval
over which astronomy observations were made during and after the Mahabharata War,” says
Nilesh Oak.

The issues are:

 The verse does not just say that Mercury travelled through all nakshatras. It says
“nakṣatreṣu viśāṃ pate” (नक्षत्रेषु विशां पते) There is a qualitative difference in the way
Mercury travelled through the stars. Or else why should Vyasa single out Mercury as
travelling through all stars when all planets travel through all nakshatras?
 There is another expression “budhaḥ saṃpatate” describing a collision or intersection
at the time of Mahabharata war. Without deducing what ‘sampatate’ means how can a
‘scientific researcher’ conduct his experiment and claim success?
 The success claimed by Oak is such that this verse corroborates his conjecture that the
astronomy observations given by Vyasa were actually made during, before and after
the war. This is based on the above verse on Mercury of travelling through all
nakshatras. If this can be claimed as corroboration, anyone can quote a year XXXX
and say the planets travelled through all the nakshatras and therefore his / her
conjecture is corroborated well!
 This corroboration is made in violation of the obvious fact that Vyasa made this
observation only before or on the first day of the war and certainly not after the war.
Perhaps Nilesh Oak thinks his readers are dullards.
(4) E XPERIMENT NUMBERED 13: V AKRI ’ MOTION OF M ARS . 11 (M AHABHARATA
REFERENCE N O : 11, 13, 14 IN HIS BOOK )

In the previous instances quoted on the manipulations done by Nilesh Oak to prove his date,
we faulted him for neglecting to define the terms in the verses. Here in this experiment he
attempts to define the term ‘Vakri’ in the verses on Mars. It was well established earlier how
Nilesh Oak demonstrated his utter lack of understanding of ‘Vakri’. In this experiment he
describes how he derived the meaning of the term Vakri through DVA – Direct Visual
Astronomy of the Simulator.

Nilesh Oak hopes to clinch something big in his discovery of the meaning of Vakri,
comparable with Kepler. He says,12

“There is indeed something intriguing about Mars. Small discrepancy (between prediction
and actual observation) in the measurement of Mars led Kepler to his marvellous theory of
10
Mahabharata:6-3-27
11
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 80 & 81.
12
Ibid. Page 81.

5
elliptical orbits of planets. Intriguing descriptions of Mars in the Mahabharata text and my
explanation provide high degree of corroboration to the proposed year of 5561 B.C.”

Oak has indeed made a break-through invention of Mars spending nearly 6 months in
retrogression in Chitra and Swati before it turned forward.13 This is against the current
scientific knowledge of Mars in retrogression that is possible for only 80 days at a stretch. All
glory to Voyager simulator that enabled him to see this through DVA.

Nilesh Oak can notify the developers of Voyager Simulator of this discovery to take
his name forward for recognition.
 Oak can also notify them of his innovative ways of deriving meaning for a Sanskrit
word like ‘vakri’ and the English word ‘retrogression’ by means of DVA so that they
can use his name and innovation as publicity material to promote their product.
 But Nilesh Oak must be careful not to take his discovery and innovation to the notice
of an astronomer to avoid getting his book tossed into a dustbin. No astronomer
would accept his explanation without first establishing them conceptually and
mathematically.
Sadly Nilesh Oak’s book is a series of ideas never established conceptually or mathematically
but ‘seen’ and ‘proven’ in the DVA of the Voyager Simulator.

(5) E XPERIMENT N O 14: “J UPITER GOING VAKRI NEAR S HRAVANA ” 14

(M AHABHARATA REFERENCE NO 11 IN HIS BOOK )

Once having convinced himself about the meaning of vakri in Mahabharata text through his
own derivation using the simulator, Nilesh Oak confidently describes the verse “maghāsv
aṅgārako vakraḥ śravaṇe ca bṛhaspatiḥ” as refering to the vakri motion of Mars and Jupiter.
Having ‘established’ the vakri motion of Mars in the previous experiment, he is concentrating
on Jupiter’s vakri motion in this experiment. He says, “DVA simulation of Jupiter
corroborated ‘vakri’ motion of Jupiter as it travelled obliquely across the ecliptic near
Shravana.”

Crossing the ecliptic obliquely is Oak’s definition for ‘vakri’ motion. He looked for such
motion in the simulator and created Figure 9 and Table 7 to give additional details to prove
this.

13
Ibid. Page 81
14
Ibid. Page 82

6
This figure is fine but where is Sun’s position in this figure? Any vakri motion is caused
when the superior planet is away from the Sun. For Jupiter, vakri motion starts when it
reaches 245˚ from the Sun and ends that motion on reaching 115˚ from the Sun.

Computing the distance on the first day of the War, the gap between Jupiter in Shravana
(according to Nilesh Oak) and Sun in Jyeshtha (assuming it to be in the last degree of
Jyeshtha) was anywhere between 41˚to 54˚ only and not sufficient enough to make Jupiter
appear to be in vakri for an observer on the earth.

This means that Jupiter was not in Vakri motion at Shravana when the Sun was in
Jyeshtha in the 1st day of the War in Nilesh Oak’s timeline.
 If Vyasa had said that Jupiter was in vakri at Shravana on that day, then it means that
Nilesh Oak’s date of Mahabharata is wrong.
Any astronomy simulator would show vakri movement of a planet. But in the absence of that
for Jupiter for his date, Nilesh Oak had simply manipulated the entire concept of vakri which
I exposed in the 4th chapter of this book.

The best to way to falsify Oak’s definition of vakri (that it refers to crossing the ecliptic) is to
present the declination graph of planets. The following figure is the declination graph for
April 201915 that shows two planets Mercury and Venus crossing the ecliptic on 21 st and 23rd
April respectively from south to north. But no vakri or retrograde motion is detected along
with or after this crossing.

15
Source: https://cafeastrology.com/declinations.html

7
Common sense dictates that a researcher cross-checks these positions with testable periods as
done above. This is too much for the asking as far as Nilesh Nilkanth Oak is concerned. He
lives in his own world of ‘scientific research’.

(6) E XPERIMENT N O 15: “V ENUS NEAR P URVA B HADRAPADA . 16 (M AHABHARATA

REFERENCE N O 18 IN HIS BOOK )

The next experiment numbered 15 can be clubbed with Experiment No 21 as they are about
the location of Venus on the 1st and 18th day of the war respectively. The two locations
deduced by Nilesh Oak using DVA and Voyager simulation stands out as a classic example
of misuse and manipulation of the so-called Falsification theory of Popper besides getting
stamped as the “Mother of all Manipulations”

Let us see the first location given in experiment 15. In this, Oak attempts to corroborate the
location of Venus near Purva Bhadrapada in Voyager Simulator. The following verse of
Mahabharata is the basis for this derivation.17

śukraḥ proṣṭhapade pūrve samāruhya viśāṃ pate

     uttare tu parikramya sahitaḥ pratyudīkṣate

Nilesh Oak declares, “There was no need to guess through, not when you have DVA and
Voyager 4.5.”

16
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 82.
17
Mahabharata: 6-3-14 http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs06003.htm

8
He simulated the journey of Venus beginning the 1st of the War and found that Venus turned
north and did a circular journey (parikrama) around Neptune near Purva Bhadrapada –
Neptune, the planet never even once recognised in any literature of India.

“The simulator corroborated Venus turning north as if to do parikrama (around Neptune)

near Purva Bhadrapada.” Remember this is on the 1st day of the War noticed in the
simulator.

In 21st experiment Nilesh Oak wants to corroborate another verse (Reference no 17 in his
book) that says that Mars, Venus and Mercury appeared behind the Pandavas on the 18 th
day.18 Oak finds that “Voyager simulation confirmed positions of these planets in the western
part of the sky after sunset.”

From the simulator Oak gives the separation angle of Venus from the Sun as 43.1˚.

Organising the two positions at 1st and 18th day of the War:

1st day position of Venus = Venus was near Purva Bhadrapada. Purva Bhadrapada starts
from 20 degrees of Aquarius. Sun was in Jyeshtha in Scorpio on the first day of the War.
Assuming that the Sun was at the last degree of Jyeshtha on the 1 st day of the War, Venus at
Purva Bhadrapada can be located at more than 81˚ from the Sun. This is an IMPOSSIBLE
location because Venus cannot be sighted 47 degrees away from the Sun – forward or
backward. Venus is an inner planet and can be seen only within 3 signs (at the most) of the
sun. When the Sun is in Scorpio, Venus cannot be in Pisces or even Aquarius where Purva
Bhadrapada is located.

Only a person who does not have any basic knowledge about planetary position from the sun
in geo-centric view will be able to go ahead ‘deducing’ the location as Oak has done.

18th day position of Venus = Venus was sighted in the western sky after sunset at a distance
of 43.1˚ from the Sun. This was also “confirmed” from Voyager simulator.

The issue is within a matter of 18 days Venus has travelled backwards from Purva
Bhadrapada at more than 81˚ away from the sun to its east to 43.1˚ to the west of the Sun.
This means covering a distance of 124.1˚ in 18 days!!! This is also an IMPOSSIBLE
situation.

Who has gone wrong?

 Was Vyasa wrong?

 Was Voyager wrong?
 Was Nilesh Oak wrong?
Vyasa could not have been wrong. He had given an observation using the tradition and
terminology of his times and may not have meant that Venus was near Purva Bhadrapada on
the 1st day of the War (also explained in the 12th chapter of this book).

18
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 86.

9
But Nilesh Oak went ahead with that and even found it in the simulation! How could the
simulator give a wrong reading?

There can be only one deduction from this: Nilesh Oak had seen Venus in the simulator on
some day when it was actually transiting that location but linked it with the 1 st day of the war!
All for corroborating his date of Mahabharata War!

The same simulator gives the location of Venus on the 18 th day at a distance reasonably
within limits. But between the two dates, the ‘corroboration’ done by Oak to align the
position of Venus with his date of Mahabharata smacks of all the following:

 Hypocrisy
 Lack of integrity in research
 Lack of astronomy knowledge
 Lack of understanding of how to use the simulator
 Lack of knowledge that scientific research calls for exactness and not approximations
and manipulations.
All these put together is the negative outcome of what Popper’s theory of Falsificationist
criteria does to scientific spirit. Nilesh Nilkanth Oak enters the pages of history as a classic
example of misuse of Falsificationist methodology.

(7) E XPERIMENT N O 16: “T IVRA OR T IKSHNA , P LANET OR NAKSHATRA NEAR

K RITTIKA ” 19 (M AHABHARATA REFERENCE N O 21 IN HIS BOOK )

The reference verse is from Bhishma parva.

kṛttikāsu grahas tīvro nakṣatre prathame jvalan

     vapūṃṣy apaharan bhāsā dhūmaketur iva sthitaḥ20

Nilesh Oak doesn’t know what Tivro nakshatra means in this verse. He doesn’t care to search
for the true meaning from traditional texts. His “task was then simply to re-confirm what
Vartak has already figured out. Pluto is seen between Rohini and Krittika, rather closer to
Rohini on the first day of War. This is sufficient corroboration of this Mahabharata
observation.”

The verse refers to Tivro Nakshatra, but Oak identifies it as Pluto! It is because he is only re-
confirming Vartak’s observation that Nakshatra could mean ‘extremely slow moving planet’
(Pluto). Pluto is not even a planet in current standards, but Oak thinks Vyasa had meant that
in his observation! “This observation demands telescopic ability, i.e. access to such
instruments in Mahabharata times. This ability is also required to explain few other
Mahabharata observations.” By saying this Oak keeps the door open for further
manipulation – with the sole aim of corroborating his date of Mahabharata War.

19
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 83.
20
Mahabharata: 6-3-26 http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs06003.htm

10
(8) E XPERIMENT NUMBER 17: “T HE SUN AND THE M OON TOGETHER AFFLICTING
R OHINI ” 21 (M AHABHARATA REFERENCE NO 26 AND ALSO 8, 9, 12 IN HIS BOOK )

In this experiment Nilesh Oak claims to explain 4 Mahabharata references (numbered 8, 9,

12, 26) – all pointing to a term Pidayate. This terms means afflicting – a case of one planet
afflicting another or a planet afflicting a star. This term is used in astrology but scientific
minded Oak does not accept astrology as an empirical science. With the simulator at hand he
‘discovers’ the meaning of pidayate as a situation of one planet rising and another setting
simultaneously by which the rays of one afflicts the other. He uses this conjecture to describe
the Sun and the Moon on the Amawasya day setting on the west while Rohini was rising on
the east.

He extends this rationale to three other Mahabharata references too (8, 9 and 12) and claims
that his conjecture allowed him to explain those references too. The fact is he did not explain
those verses with the meaning he deduced from the simulator. Nor do those verses give any
description of the entities mentioned in those verses to be in opposite ends (180˚) as with Sun
and Moon opposite to Rohini.

How then could one interpret that those verses also refer to the rays of one fall on the
other?
 Does it sound logical that only the entities at two ends of the sky afflict the other (or
each other)?
 Why not the planets at any location send their rays on others in any other part of the
sky?
 Should a scientific minded Oak propose this kind of theory of rays of one afflicting
the other for a word “Pidyate”?
 By offering such an explanation, is he not acceding to astrology?
(9) E XPERIMENT N O 18: “J UPITER , SIMILAR TO THE S UN AND THE M OON ,
AFFLICTING R OHINI AFTER THE SUNSET ON THE 17 TH DAY OF W AR ”. 22
(M AHABHARATA REFERENCE N O 12 IN HIS BOOK )

This again is a reference to ‘Pidayate’. This experiment is aimed at explaining the verse
“Brhaspati rohinim samprapidaya”.23 The verse refers to Jupiter afflicting Rohini. The verse
is being told on the 17th day of the war. The simulator based meaning of ‘Pidyate’ deduced by
Oak is such that the one afflicting must be on one side of the horizon while the afflicted one
must be in the opposite horizon. That is, if one is in the western horizon, the other must be in
the eastern horizon. They must be at a distance of 180˚.

The previous experiment showed that Rohini was in the eastern horizon when it was afflicted
by the Sun and the Moon that were setting in the western horizon. But on the 17 th day, Jupiter
comes in the picture as one afflicting Rohini. Oak conjectures that Jupiter must be in the
western horizon to make this affliction on Rohini. The Voyager simulator confirms the

21
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 83 & 84
22
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 84.
23
Ibid. Reference no 12.

11
presence of Jupiter in the western sky in the same position occupied by the Sun and the Moon
in the 1st day. So the ‘pidayate’ happens on Rohini.

Now the questions in our mind are


We found the location of Jupiter in experiment numbered 14 at Shravana on the 1st
day of the war. This was to the east of the Sun at a distance of 41˚ to 54˚. In 17 days,
how far Jupiter had moved to be at the same location of Sun on the 1st day?
 Each day the point of horizon rises early by 1˚ approximately (for 360˚ to be covered
in a year) and so in 17 days the part of the sky where Jupiter is located rises 17˚
earlier. In the same period the Sun had progressed by 17˚ resulting in reduction in the
gap between the Sun and Jupiter. On the 17th day Jupiter would be seen at a distance
of 24˚to 37 ˚ from the Sun. This is not the exact location of the Sun on the 1st day of
the war.
 From Jupiter at 24˚to 37˚ range from the Sun, Rohini will be anywhere between 107˚
to 130˚ distance from Jupiter. This is not exact 180˚ gap or anywhere close to it to
enable Jupiter to afflict Rohini by its rays by “pidayate.”
 But Oak claims that the simulator shows Jupiter in the western horizon. This is
possible at more than 2 hours after sunset and definitely not at the time of sun set
when the Sun was afflicting Rohini on the 1st day of the War.
 At a distance of minimum 50˚ short of 180˚ Oak uses the description of Pidyate which
he originally theorised for 180˚ distance. He wants us to accept such descriptions as
scientific!
 If affliction is what happens at 180˚, he cannot claim it to happen at 130˚. If it
happens so, then his explanation for pidayate is not correct.
(10) E XPERIMENT N O 19: “S ATURN AFFLICTS R OHINI ”. 24 (M AHABHARATA
REFERENCE N O 8, 9 IN HIS BOOK )

Affliction is “Pīdana” and so there is no problem in explaining away this reference in the
same lines that Nilesh Oak explained for the Sun and the moon afflicting Rohini, and Jupiter
afflicting Rohini. Oak does concede that having explained the observation of affliction of
Rohini in previous experiments, “it is easy to understand Mahabharata observation(s) of
Saturn.”

Rohini was in the western horizon and “Saturn being the only other planet in the eastern part
of the sky”, “this observation is then described as Saturn afflicting Rohini,” so concludes
Nilesh Oak.25 However he is tempted to use other terms known to him such “Rohini Shakat
Bheda”. The underlying feature of his research is such that one must get together the terms
known to oneself and say that the observations are corroborated.

24
“When did the Mahabharata war happen?” Page 85.
25
Ibid. Page 85

12
(11) E XPERIMENT N O 20: “U NUSUAL (T IRYAK ) RISING OF M ERCURY ON THE 17 TH
DAY OF THE W AR ( AFTER THE SUNSET ) 26 (M AHABHARATA REFERENCE N O 16 IN HIS
BOOK )

Nilesh Oak has picked out a verse expressed at the fall of Karna that is analogous to
mourning the death of Karna. In a bid to express that all animate and inanimate, terrestrial
and celestial beings were sad, the appearance of Mercury was also quoted in that context. The
rivers had stood still. The sun had become pale and Mercury appeared to move in ‘tiryak’
way! Here Tiryak means slanting or horizontal and not unusual that Oak thinks. As if to bow
before the fallen Karna, Mercury had moved obliquely or in slanting angle. This is what the
verse says.

This verse does not qualify to be a testable astronomy observation, for Mercury is always
seen close to the sun within 28 degrees on either side of the sun for the observer on earth.
Take any year in the simulator; one can spot Mercury crossing the sun from one side or
another in horizontal or slanting angle or just moving in the sky to the east or west of the Sun.
This is not unique to Nilesh Oak’s date of Mahabharata or any other date. Just to count his
numbers corroborated, Nilesh Oak has taken this regular feature of Mercury.

(12) E XPERIMENT N O 21: “M ARS , V ENUS & M ERCURY IN THE WESTERN SKY AFTER
SUNSET , 18 TH DAY OF THE WAR ” 27 (M AHABHARATA REFERENCE N O 17 IN HIS BOOK )

After locating Venus in Purva Bhadrapada (experiment 15) Nilesh Oak is able to see it 124
degrees backward within 18 days – an impossible situation. Mars located closely behind the
Sun in this reference was aligned with Abhijit on the first day of the war according to his
blog-entry. Abhijit is at Capricorn but in this experiment he sees Mars after sunset on the 18 th
day of the war in the western sky at 46.6˚ from the sun. This super-fast movement by these
planets have been objectively tested, claims Nilesh Oak, the master manipulator.

From his blog-post dated 20th April 201928

(13) E XPERIMENT N O 22: “S EVEN PLANETS SEEN NEAR THE S UN ” 29 (M AHABHARATA

REFERENCE N O 24 IN HIS BOOK )

This phoney nature of the corroboration done by Nilesh Oak was already explained in the 4th
chapter. To re-cap it, the verse doesn’t say that the planets were near. Nilesh Oak
‘corroborates’ seven planets by including Neptune and Uranus. I have established the import
of this verse in the 12th chapter.
26
Ibid, Page 85
27
Ibid, Page 86
28
“Balancing Reciprocity” https://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2019/04/20/%e0%a4%b8%e0%a4%be
%e0%a4%a7%e0%a5%8d%e0%a4%af-%e0%a4%b8%e0%a4%ae-balancing-the-reciprocity/
29
“When Did The Mahabharata War Happen?” Page 87

13
(14) E XPERIMENT N O 23: “S EVEN PLANETS ATTACKING THE MOON ” 30
(M AHABHARATA REFERENCE N O 23 IN HIS BOOK .

This is an analogy to “describe the war scene of seven Kaurava brothers attacking Bhima”,
admits Oak. Only Nilesh Oak has the temerity to test analogies in astronomy simulator and
claim that he has successfully corroborated astronomy references of Mahabharata.

(15) E XPERIMENT N O 24: “S EVEN PLANETS GOING AWAY FROM THE S UN .” 31

(M AHABHARATA REFERENCE N O 25 IN HIS BOOK )

Already I exposed the bogus nature of the explanation by Nilesh Oak for this verse in the 4 th
chapter. I am reproducing here to remind the readers the nature of his “corroboration”.

“Without saying whether his simulator showed them in retrograde motion,32,33 Nilesh Oak
simply states that the “Voyager simulation showed that all planets were going away from
(towards east) the Sun, with the exception of Pluto. Pluto was retrograde.” This means
except Pluto none of the other planets (he mentions only five apart from Pluto – viz. Neptune,
Mars, Venus, Mercury and Jupiter) were retrograde at that time. But Voyager shows them
moving towards east! And his planetary list of the seven planets includes Mars which he
locates at 46.6 ̊ behind the sun34 on the very next day– a distance at which Mars can never go
retrograde. I leave it to the reader to judge the merit of Nilesh Oak’s claim of these non-
retrograde planets (except Pluto which he treats as stationary due to its slow movement)
moving towards east and the inclusion of two outer most planets in this list.”

(16) E XPERIMENT N O 25: “B RIGHTLY SHINING COMETS (!) IN THE SKY ”

Nothing is corroborated here as his Simulator does not show any comets in his time line. So
he rejects the comet theories of others and repeats the same manipulations of planetary
positions that I exposed above. That a comet or asteroid hit the earth at that time is beyond
his power of comprehension.

(17) E XPERIMENT N O 26: “S HWETA ( NEAR C HITRA ) & S HYAMA ( NEAR J YESHTHA )”
(M AHABHARATA REFERENCE N O 19, 20)

Mere speculations and he himself does not claim any corroboration by stating that he had
‘presented multiple scenarios to emphasize the point that unless we have additional
information, we should consider the identification (and consequently corroboration) of the
planets described in these Mahabharata observations as unresolved.”35

However the names of these planets were resolved by me in the 4th chapter.

30
Ibid.
31
Ibid.
32
Ibid. Page 88
33
Ibid. Page 169
34
Ibid. Page 86
35
Ibid. Page 93

14
(18) E XPERIMENT N O 27: “C OMET ATTACKING P USHYA ” (M AHABHARATA
REFERENCES N O 21, 22)

Nilesh Oak conjectures that this was Haley’s comet. It was not in the vicinity of visibility.
However this was “corroborated” by him on the basis of the assumption that Mahabharata
people had the “ability to see objects far smaller and distant in the sky, the ability as such
already assumed during the discussion of Uranus, Neptune and Pluto.”36

So far we have seen all the ‘Corroborations” that Nilesh Oak has given to ‘establish’ that the
planets were aligned for his date of Mahabharata war. These are boasted off as 300+
references corroborated by him. In reality none of what he had ‘corroborated’ stand scrutiny
and can at best be branded as manipulations.

Similar trend is seen in the 8th chapter on corroborating the astronomy events on the first day
of the war in his timeline. As there is no substance in any of the features he explained, I am
producing them in a table with a remark alongside. Nilesh Oak believes that there was a solar
eclipse on the 1st day of the war and hence collected all possible verses to corroborate his
timeline. He completely disregards the late moon-rise on the 14 th day of the war which pre-
supposes that the war started in waxing phase and waning phase was running for most of the
days of the war.

Mahabharata
Ex
references in Feature Nilesh Oak Remarks
No
his book

Wrong. War
started in waxing
Solar eclipse on 1st phase. Late
day of war & Lunar Moonrise on 14th
28 9,27,28,29,64 Lunar eclipses
eclipse on the 15th day day of war
of war indicates
Amawasya
nearing.

Two eclipses
Two eclipses
29 29 separated by 13 Wrong.
separated by 23 days
days

30 34,35 Solar eclipse on Solar eclipse on the Wrong.

the
1st day of war

36
Ibid. Page 95

15
 1st day of war

Sun appeared in
31 34 Proposes eclipse Wrong.
split parts.

Flames of the
32 34 Proposes eclipse Wrong.
sun visible.

Morning sun
33 35 Proposes eclipse Wrong.
splendour lost.

Disappearance
34 36 of the sun in the Proposes eclipse Wrong.
middle of battle.

Analogy for
Sun and the Satyaki and
35 38 moon seen on Proposes Amawasya Abhimanyu
Amawasya joining together
to fight.

Moon references
40,41,43,47, Proposes waxing
36 in first 11 days All are analogies.
49,37, phase
of war

Warriors Can happen on

37, 40, 42, 45, Proof for Amawasya
fighting late at any day of the
46 on 1st day.
night, exhausted war

Moon rising
Supports Amawasya
37 48 with pointed Lunar eclipse.
on 1st day
heads down

51, 52, 53,

55,56, Moon appears All are analogies.
60,61,62,63,65 like Full Moon Supports Amawasya Oak admits “rich
38
, 66,71, last 7 days of on 1st day in full moon
72,67,68, 69, war analogies”
70

39 50 Full Moon near Full Moon on 12th day Analogy of

Krittika Bhagadatta

16
 described as
similar to full
moon near
Krittika

Analogy of how
16th day of war. Moon Pandyaraj’s head
in Punarvasu. But was split by
Moon between proof for Full Moon, Aswatthama’s
40 57
two Vishakhas. thereby corroborating weapon as though
Amawasya on the 1st moon was split
day between 2
Vishakhas

Sons of
Draupadi 5 stars protected the
41 58 Analogy
protecting moon (simulation)
Dhrishtadyumna

2 Panchal
2 Punarvasus behind
42 59 warriors behind Analogy
Moon
Yudhishthir

Yudhishthir free
43 64 Moon free from Rahu Analogy
from misery

Insertion of To complete
Ad hoc, arbitrary,
44 - additional Balarama’s Tirtha
manipulative
month Yatra in simulator

Meaning of Manipulates as Ad hoc, arbitrary,

45 73
Yojayet ‘Yojante’ manipulative

Amawasya in
Jyeshtha Suits his modified
46 73 Jyeshtha occurs
Amawasya timeline
every year

Krishna leaving
Interprets Maitri as Maitri here refers
47 74 on Revati
Anuradha to Muhurta
nakshatra

17
 Balarama left
48 75 Pandava camp Nothing corroborated -
on Anuradha

Secret meeting
of Yudhishthir Proposes Full Moon
49 76 Analogy
near Full Moon nearing
day

Both armies
Every month
leaving for Fixes the date in
50 77, 78, 79 Pushya day
Kuruskhetra on simulator
comes.
Pushya day

Both armies
Every month
arrive at Fixes the date in
51 80 Magha day
Kurukshetra on simulator
comes.
Magha day

Mahabharata tells
about only
Cites 2 eclipses within
52 81,82, 83 Krishna Nirvana Amawasya
13 days
coming on the
13th day

The other experiments such as those pertaining to Abhijit and conflicting observations in
Mahabharata were already discussed in previous chapters. In all, only around 100
Mahabharata references are ‘corroborated’, nay ‘manipulated’ by Nilesh Nilkanth Oak. None
of the so-called corroborations are found valid. But what has Nilesh Oak got to say? His
recent tweet says that his book contains stuff worth 5+ award winning Ph.D theses!

18
This ‘revolutionary’ discoverer waiting for recognition as a Kepler or Newton, when finding
nothing of that kind coming along knows how to ‘manipulate’ – a trait that he has well
demonstrated in his book. The Master Manipulator was seen at his Best Form when he
tweeted about “Hot from the Press” of SC deciding to test his results on AV observation, and
scores of people congratulating him thinking that the Supreme Court of India had sought to
validate his research!

In reality ‘SC’ turned out to be an abbreviation of a person who had commented in his blog.37

He deliberately created hype by this tweet and had no shame in accepting the accolades
pouring on him from unsuspecting readers. For once he revealed in a reply that SC was the
abbreviation of a person, but that was lost in the thread that others did not expand and read.
The result was excitement over ‘SC’ decision to test his A-V observation. One of the readers
even wondered why there aren’t more than 10,000 re-tweets for this revelation!!

37
https://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/arundhati-vasistha-av-observation-of-
mahabharata/#comment-3539

19
A-V observation or the so-called Epoch of Arundhati being central to both the date of
Mahabharata and Ramayana deduced by Nilesh Nilkanth Oak, he is found to be rigourously
promoting his theme hoping for claim and acclaim as a Newton or Galileo or Kepler. At best
these tricks can help him promote the sales of his books. But this theme being a high risk one,
a rebuttal of it destroys Oak’s date of Mahabharata and also Ramayana.What he characterised
as a Mystery in his book on dating Mahabharata had turned out to be a myth!

We are in an age when people easily fall prey to deceitful and manipulative works. This book
is meant for them. People must be on guard against attempts to distort established traditions
in the name of scientific research. Arundhati’s continuing relevance as an icon of pativratā
must stir-up the Dharmic conscience in us in the current context. People of this great country
having a rich tradition must seek and also be fed with right knowledge. Let them move from
untruth to truth, from darkness to Light.

20