Scientific truth is a provisional truth- it changes when a better evidence or explanation comes along to replace the previous one.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 63645.html

...Researchers analysed some six lakh bits of genetic information in the form of SNPs drawn from DNA of over 1,300 individuals from 112 populations including 30 ethnic groups in India.

The comparison of this data with genetic data of other populations showed that South Asia harbours two major ancestry components. One is spread in populations of South and West Asia, Middle East, Near East and the Caucasus. The second component is more restricted to South Asia and accounts for more than 50 per cent of the ancestry in Indian populations.

"Both the ancestry components that dominate genetic variation in South Asia demonstrate much greater diversity than those that predominate West Eurasia. This is indicative of a more ancient demographic history and a higher long-term effective population size underlying South Asian genome variation compared to that of West Eurasia," researchers said.

"The genetic component which spread beyond India is significantly higher in India than in any other part of world. This implies that this genetic component originated in India and then spread to West Asia and Caucasus," said Gyaneshwar Chaube of University of Tartu, Estonia.

If any migration from Central Asia to South Asia took place, the study says, it should have introduced apparent signals of East Asian ancestry into India. "Because this ancestry component is absent from the region, we have to conclude that if such an event indeed took place, it occurred before the East Asian ancestry component reached central Asia," it said.

So, I could be happy that I could not be one of the others and it could be mutual
PD

pankajdubey wrote:Scientific truth is a provisional truth- it changes when a better evidence or explanation comes along to replace the previous one.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 63645.html

A big triumph for indocentrists, it may seem.

But I think, your statement is quite true also for this study and the conclusions that are drawn from it.

Dieter

I own the book Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy by Richard Thompson.

I am afraid I concluded the author is a Vaishnavite fundamentalist determined to prove the inerrancy of the Vaishnavite scriptues in particular and Indian culture in general over anything else. He lacks any of the detachment necessary for serious scholarship. You dont need a knowledge of Sanskrit to spot that kind of blinkered approach.

Mark

Hi Dieter,

Welcome back.

I was not aware you were still following this thread, therefore I was not accusing you personally of ethnocentrism. It is very difficult not to be ethnocentric when one broadens the definition of the term, because ethnocentrism becomes the lenses we view the world through, and this necessarily includes our prior training and education. You are probably no more ethnocentric than I am. I was using the term ?ethnocentric? as a propaganda tool, to cause other people to doubt certain aspects of what is currently taught in some places, concerning things which I am interested in.

I have heard there are over 300 versions [-not translations] of the Ramayana, and so I would be surprised if there are not also many versions of the Srimad Bhagavatam as well. I believe the particular version I quoted is from the Swami Prabhupada translation, which consists of over 30 volumes.

I would like to demonstrate certain similarities in ancient teachings from wide-ranging geographical cultures. This does not necessarily prove they are referring to the same things, but it is strongly suggestive of such in some cases. It will also suggest to you that I am not one who looks on everything from India as superior and older than other things.

?Again there comes a humiliation, destruction, and demolition. The manikins, woodcarvings were killed when the Heart of Sky devised a flood for them. A great flood was made; it came down on the heads of the manikins, woodcarvings? (Popol Vuh Book 1).

?I will tell thee, Gilgamesh,
Of a mournful mystery of the Gods:
How once, having met together,
They resolved to flood the land of Shuruppak.
Clear-eyed Ea, saying nothing to his father, Anu,
Nor to the Lord, the great Enlil,
Nor to the spreader of happiness, Nemeru,
Nor even to the underworld prince, Enua,
Called to him his son Ubara-Tut;
Said to him: 'Build thyself a ship;
Take with thee thy near ones,
And what birds and beasts thou wilt;
Irrevocably have the Gods resolved
To flood the land of Shuruppak? (Gilgamesh 21).

?And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth? (Book of Genesis 7.6).


?And One Monkey and One Artisan were great flautists and singers, and as they grew up they went through great suffering and pain. It had cost them suffering to become great knowers? (Popol Vuh Book 1).

The above quote is a recurring sentiment in various cultures? ancient teachings concerning the path of seekers of knowledge.


?Thoughts came into existence and they gazed; their vision came all at once. Perfectly they saw, perfectly they knew everything under the sky, whenever they looked. The moment they turned around and looked around in the sky, on the earth, everything was seen without any obstruction. They didn?t have to walk around before they could see what was under the sky; they just stayed where they were? (Popol Vuh Book 4).

The above quote sounds strangely like Satya yuga.

?Yet they?ll become as great as gods, unless they procreate, proliferate at the sowing, the dawning, unless they increase?Their deeds would become equal to ours, just because their knowledge reaches so far?They were blinded as the face of a mirror is breathed upon?And such was the loss of the means of understanding, along with the means of knowing everything? (Popol Vuh Book 4).

?But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die?For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil?And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken? (Book of Genesis 2.17, 3.5 & 22-3).


??their language became differentiated. They could no longer understand one another clearly? (Popol Vuh Book 4).

?And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another?s speech? (Book of Genesis 11.6-7).


?The visible sun is not the real one? (Popol Vuh Book 4). This kind of statement is often found in Indian or Hindu literature as well.


?They were of just one mind: there was no evil for them, nor were there difficulties. Their reign was all in calm: there were no quarrels for them, and no disturbances. Their hearts were filled with a steady light: there was nothing of stupidity and nothing of envy in what they did. Their splendor was modest: they caused no amazement, nor had they grown great? (Popol Vuh Book 5).

?In the age when life on earth was full, no one paid any special attention to worthy men, nor did they single out the man of ability. Rulers were simply the highest branches on the tree, and the people were like deer in the woods. They were honest and righteous without realizing that they were ?doing their duty.? They loved each other and did not know that this was ?love of neighbor.? They deceived no one yet they did not know that they were ?men to be trusted.? They were reliable and did not know that this was ?good faith.? They lived freely together giving and taking, and did not know that they were generous. For this reason their deeds have not been narrated. They made no history? (Chuang tzu xii. 13).


The yugas are not unique to Indian or Hindu thought:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_Man

?The Mahanirvana Tantra (1.37-50) has more information to offer in this regard. It states that as dharma or religion and responsible duty are destroyed, Kali yuga will be an age of evil ways, customs, and deceit. The Vedas will be forgotten and the Puranas will be destroyed. The brahmanas, priests, and religious leaders will be without faith or devotion, averse to all austerities, deceitful, ignorant, and will neglect their own prayers or fail to chant the mantras?the Ganges River will be broken in some places and at others it will be diverted from its course? (The Vedic Prophecies by Stephen Knapp).

?The Srimad Bhagavatam starting at 12.3.18, states that in Satya yuga there is virtue, wisdom, and religion, with no ignorance or vice. These are the four legs of [dharma] religion and the universal aspects of pious life as found in any true spiritual process? (The Vedic Prophecies by Stephen Knapp).

The Lakota Native American tribe teaches of the Buffalo which stands on 4 legs and with the passing of each Age, one leg is lost [of dharma]. This does not demonstrate the superiority of Hindu or Indian thought, rather this suggests to me that some teachings are so hoary with age that the common root of these teachings makes Ptolemy look like a post-post-modern fellow.

?2:31 Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.

2:32 This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,

2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.

2:34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.

2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

2:36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.

2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.

2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.

2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.

2:41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.

2:42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.

2:43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure? (Book of Daniel).

I would not call myself an Indocentric or ethnocentric student. I try to learn what I can from each tradition. It is true that I am more knowledgeable of some jyotish teachings concerning astrology, but that is because I approached astrology through jyotish vedanga. Prior to this I did not even know astrology consisted of more than one?s Sun sign.

The Vedanga Jyotish is found at the end of a Yajur Veda, therefore it is appropriate for jyotishis to link their astrology to the Vedas in my current world-view and understanding which is always subject to revision ? of such is the fate of seekers of knowledge.

There are so many anomalies in the archeological and anthropological record that entire books have been written on this topic; I have read a few of these books. I will not take quotes from them, because it would require this post to become excessively long and tedious. Current scholars hide the anomalies and ignore them, and many of them are probably not even aware of the existence of these anomalies because of unwillingness to read unorthodox texts. If historians would begin to review the anomalies, it would require an entire revision of their speculative theories of history. One example of this is the swastika found in Hopewell Native American mounds and in Hopi rock writings and various other places.

I agree with you that sometimes the Indian texts refer to Seasonal based (Tropical zodiac) phenomenon as well as nakshatra star-based information. I am not trying to pretend these seasonal based observations and ceremonial information do not exist in Indian texts. I would rather see Siderealists and Tropicalists work together. I would like for astrology programmers to consider adding one or two layers to the outside of basic natal charts in the manner in which was suggested in my last post on the previous page of this thread. There would be so much benefit from this, in my view.

I am on your side in not believing the oldest and most spiritual phenomenon is India. I believe the origins of the Egyptians and Sumerians are similarily as old, but the problem is the destruction of the Library of Alexandria, so this gives the appearance of such, when we listen to the puranas and the claims of Indians ? and this indeed gives the appearance of it being older.

If everything human has a common root then it doesn?t even make sense to proclaim one tribe to be older than another tribe. But some tribes kept their ancient teachings longer than other ones did.

I will reread your article again at some point.

I do not know how you can state with confidence that the oldest reference to kaliyuga is from Aryabhata. Based on my own studies, the kali yuga idea is far older than 500 a.d. and it is not unique to Hindu or Indian thought.

Om, shanti, shanti, shanti

Mark,

I agree with you that the book by Thompson is complete propaganda, it even admits it in the introduction. The value in it is that it mentions things you will never find in a typical Western written text on Indian astronomy trying to prove alternative Western biased viewpoints.

Quote from the very first text in the introduction of Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy:

"'Now our Ph.D.'s must collaborate and study the Fifth Canto to make a model for building the Vedic planetarium. My final decision is that the universe is just like a tree, with root upwards. Just as a tree has branches and leaves, so the universe is also composed of planets which are fixed up in the tree like the leaves, flowers, fruits, etc...So now all you Ph.D.s must carefully study the details of the Fifth Canto and make a working model of the universe. If we can explain the passing seasons, eclipses, phases of the moon, passing of day and night, etc., then it will be very powerful propaganda' (letter from Srila Prabhupada to Svarupa Damodara dasa, April 27, 1976)."

The difference between Richard Thompson, and other scholars, is that Thompson is forthright and honest about what he is doing. Every piece of scholarly work is ultimately propaganda at the end of the day. Maybe there is such a thing as objective criticism but I am not sure of this. Thompson wanted to give us propaganda to use against the post-modern Western propaganda.

The Western alternative theorists on Indian history are just as guilty of what you said Thompson is guilty of, but the Western alternative theorists try to hide it.

So who is worse, Thompson or the others?

pankajdubey,

Thank you for informing of that genetic study.

om indraya namaha

I am growing weary of trying to discuss and inform and learn jyotish from a different perspective, and having everyone tell me that their own views are more informed and correct than mine.

Everyone quotes second-hand knowledge as though it were the gospel truth. It seems like the only responses I get here are designed to eradicate my own viewpoints or submissions to the forum.

I do not plan on continuing at this forum.

I do not blame any one of you for this; I understand why and how this works. I certainly cannot claim to be innocent of this myself. It only teaches me one thing. Hermit is a more appealing life.

om

I am growing weary of trying to discuss and inform and learn jyotish from a different perspective, and having everyone tell me that their own views are more informed and correct than mine.

Everyone quotes second-hand knowledge as though it were the gospel truth. It seems like the only responses I get here are designed to eradicate my own viewpoints or submissions to the forum.

A forum is not a democracy in the sense that every opinion put forth is of equal value. Every member deserves a respectful response but some views may simply be incorrect or in fact total nonsense. Better informed people are inevitably going to challenge such views. Its good that they do as otherwise a thread could be very misleading to the public reading it. The idea of the intellectual dialectic is hopefully a way to refine our understanding. We need to have the detachment to see the difference between a criticism of a particular view and a personal attack. Of course sometimes forums do deteriorate that way. However, I dont think that has happened on this thread.

Here on this thread we have had two people: Martin and Dieter who are conversant in Sanskrit and highly knowledgeable on Indian astrology. They have studied much of the astrological literature. This doesn't make them infallible but it does mean they are coming to to this subject with a lot more knowledge than you or I are. Rather than see this as a threat and get hurt or resentful why not see this a valuable opportunity to learn?

I was certainly, amazed at Dieter's comment on the Kali Yuga. Fascinating! It makes me wonder if the Brahmins originally got this idea from the Shramana groups like the Buddhists and Jains as both have long taught the world was entering a very long period of moral decline after the passing away of their teachers. As I cited earlier there is some research suggesting Aryabhata was a Jain or at least influenced by Jain ideas.

Mark

Mark wrote:

A forum is not a democracy in the sense that every opinion put forth is of equal value. Every member deserves a respectful response but some views may simply be incorrect or in fact total nonsense. Better informed people are inevitably going to challenge such views. Its good that they do as otherwise a thread could be very misleading to the public reading it. The idea of the intellectual dialectic is hopefully a way to refine our understanding. We need to have the detachment to see the difference between a criticism of a particular view and a personal attack. Of course sometimes forums do deteriorate that way. However, I dont think that has happened on this thread.

Thank you. No one has attacked me personally; I don't feel that anyone has done this either. Dieter has been more than courteous with me, for example.

I agree that knowledge is not a democracy when it comes to 1+1=2. However, my concern about discussion and the appearance of "better informed people" is exactly the same as yours, that people can easily be misled and it would be good to straighten the matter out. The problem in my view, is that these "better informed people" have this title attached to their names and this gives their opinions more weight, thus the potential to be misled is far greater from them.

Let me give you an example: I once went to a university (i.e. a place where they teach you what to think, not how to think), to investigate whether I wanted to attend this school to learn Sanskrit. I was conversing with a professor who had a P.iled h.igh and D.eep degree as an Indologist. I mentioned that my goal was to learn Sanskrit and translate obscure texts from within India. He laughed at me and said something to the effect that most (or maybe he said all) of the important texts have already been translated. I walked out of that place and never went back. I didn't have any degrees and I knew more about the state of affairs than he did.

I also had a professor at another university who laughed at the mythology of India while he taught it, because it didn't fit his Western-trained, so-called rational, world views. It made me sad. There was not even an attempt to try and understand the other culture by immersing oneself into it and erasing one's own prejudices and feeling the vibe and living the myths from the POINT OF VIEW of Indians. I left that university as well, for more than one reason.

There is not one Indologist who can claim they know that the Kaliyuga is an invention from later years. Not one Indologist was present in bharata 5000 years ago. But innocent people will believe what they say about this. In this case, the "knowledge is not a democracy" statement does not apply. I have already presented evidence in a prior post which suggests that this later invention of the kaliyuga story just doesn't add up.

The idea of genetic manipulation of apes by aliens, is just as valid of a creation story as the theory of Darwin evolution. No one knows this either way. But people will listen to someone who has a P.iled h.igh and D.eep degree in biology. The potential for being misled is much greater in these kind of cases.

Mark wrote:

Here on this thread we have had two people: Martin and Dieter who are conversant in Sanskrit and highly knowledgeable on Indian astrology. They have studied much of the astrological literature. This doesn't make them infallible but it does mean they are coming to to this subject with a lot more knowledge than you or I are. Rather than see this as a threat and get hurt or resentful why not see this a valuable opportunity to learn?

Knowledge of a language does not give anyone a deeper insight into a culture. I know English but that doesn't mean I know the origins of Britain. One thing I have learned in my studies of numerous ancient texts from a wide range of cultures, is that one needs to purchase several translations and then compare them with each other. The translations are so varied. For example, purchase 10 copies of the Tao Te Ching and read each section from each one at the same time. You would think you were reading 10 different books at times. The benefit of reading ancient texts through several translations is that one will see what the original text was actually stating and not what the particular translator thought it was stating.

With that being said, I still respect both Martin and Dieter and what they have committed their lives to. I do not have any personal grudges or complaints towards them as people and what they do. Martin and Dieter both have to know more about astrology than I do, I agree, because they have studied the subject in-depth for years, and I have not. This is a world-class forum with experts and I was not pretending that I know more about astrology than certain others here, and I stated as much more than once.

I should clarify that I am not hurt or resentful, nor am I so attached to my current viewpoints that I confuse intellectual discussion with personal attacks. I am actually very much at peace right now. One of the reasons I wanted to leave is because people consider their own viewpoint as the truth, when it is really a matter of the unknown, and then they tell you that you are "wrong."

If Martin or Dieter or Mark, want to present an alternative Western Indologist scholarly viewpoint to something I state, that is perfectly fine. But it is not fine when someone states that I am "wrong" about matters concerning history, i.e. the unknown and often the unknowable.

I will show you one example of the dirty lens of the mind which obscures ones vision: You stated that the text by Richard Thompson is blinkered ideology, but then you believed Dieter when he stated that the Kaliyuga was invented by Aryabhata in 499 a.d. Dieter's viewpoint is just as much a blinkered ideology as Thompsons! (No offense intended to either of you) Richard Thompson didn't know, and neither does Dieter, nor do I. But I have the right to choose which story I will hold to, and so do you, and so does Dieter. But for you to believe the story of Dieter's and not Thompson's or my own, and state that Dieter's story has more validity because "knowledge is not a democracy," is a case of not discriminating between different types of knowledge, i.e. direct knowledge, second-hand knowledge, speculation, unknown, and unknowable situations.

You said that Thompson's book was a blinkered ideology because he set out to achieve the purpose of advocating the srimad bhagavatam worldview over other worldviews, and Thompson was not about to accept Pingree or any other scholar who advocates something different. But Dieter will not accept the viewpoints from India which I and others have been pointing out to him, and he calls what I say wrong as well.

Every viewpoint is an ideology and when we don't like them or when they appear to be inflexible, or when they appear to be unwilling to accommodate different viewpoints, then we call them blinkered ideology. I have never met a person who did not hold blinkered ideologies. A scholar can give well-thought out reasons for their blinkered ideology, based on their studies and based on other person's studies piled on top of other person's studies, but at the end of the day it is just as much a blinkered ideology as any other less sophisticated ideology.

Western trained Indologists have very different views on India from various schools of thought within India. Some of my teachers were from India, this is how I know.

When you told me about the Buddha saying there are 3 kinds of people we will meet in life: the friendly, the indifferent, and the hostile, you were one of the friendly ones for me. I have returned the favor in my own ways.

It is finished.

Shine on you crazy diamonds!

Peace

Varuna,

varuna wrote: It will also suggest to you that I am not one who looks on everything from India as superior and older than other things.

I see that and I appreciate that, besides the Vedic texts, you have read the Popol Vuh, the Gilgamesh Epic etc. I also see the parallels you mention, but I am not sure about the conclusions that should be drawn from them.

Let me also tell you that in my personal opinion the Gita is the best spiritual book on earth, and I really adore India for it. Still, I do not like indocentric ideologies.

May be I am a bit to apodictic or dogmatic when I say that a theory is "wrong". I am sorry for that. But I have given my reasons for such statements, haven?t I?

I do not know how you can state with confidence that the oldest reference to kaliyuga is from Aryabhata. Based on my own studies, the kali yuga idea is far older than 500 a.d. and it is not unique to Hindu or Indian thought.

It is a known fact that there is no reference to 3102 BC before Aryabhata. No Hindu or Western scholar will be able to show you one. So the question is, what is more likely:
Was there a 3600-year long oral tradition which preserved that date?
Or was it invented as an initial point for planetary theories in the first centuries AD?
Before taking a decision, consider the following facts:
- Those planetary theories teach that on 17/18 February 3102 BC the planets were all at sidereal 0 Aries, but that is not true at all.
- Those planetary theories were obviously created in the first centuries AD, because that is the period for which they work best.
- Chronological clues in the Puranas and in Varahamihira do not confirm it at all but show that in their time there was a big confusion about Indian chronology.

Of course, nobody can exclude that there was a 3600-year long oral tradition. But considering these facts, it looks extremely unlikely. Actually, it is nothing but speculation.

Important: I am talking only about the date 3102 BC. The teaching of the yugas itself must be a lot older. I did not attack this teaching at all.

The difference between Richard Thompson, and other scholars, is that Thompson is forthright and honest about what he is doing. Every piece of scholarly work is ultimately propaganda at the end of the day. Maybe there is such a thing as objective criticism but I am not sure of this. Thompson wanted to give us propaganda to use against the post-modern Western propaganda.
The Western alternative theorists on Indian history are just as guilty of what you said Thompson is guilty of, but the Western alternative theorists try to hide it.

I do not agree, this looks a bit too simplistic. But even if you were right and everything were propaganda: It should be very easy to refute something that is mere propaganda and not based on historical and textual facts. But this does not happen. Why?

I have heard there are over 300 versions [-not translations] of the Ramayana, and so I would be surprised if there are not also many versions of the Srimad Bhagavatam as well. I believe the particular version I quoted is from the Swami Prabhupada translation, which consists of over 30 volumes.

I do not have Swami Prabhupada?s translation fo the Shrimadbhagavatam, but I do not believe that he use a different Sanskrit text. You can compare yourself the Sanskrit text he quotes with the one I quoted.

Dieter

dieterkoch wrote:Dear Varuna:

........Some more facts:
The oldest reference to the Kaliyuga era is found in Aryabhata around 500 AD.
The planetary theory of the Suryasiddhanta, as I described it above, gives best results around 500 AD with an increasing error for the more remote past and for more recent times. Thus, there can be hardly a doubt that the Kaliyuga era was invented only in late antiquity.

Perhaps you should have another look into my article and study its details.

.....Dieter

"Kaliyuga is mentioned in "Manu Smriti"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu01.htm

85. One set of duties (is prescribed) for men in the Krita age, different ones in the Treta and in the Dvapara, and (again) another (set) in the Kali, in a proportion as (those) ages decrease in length.

86. In the Krita age the chief (virtue) is declared to be (the performance of) austerities, in the Treta (divine) knowledge, in the Dvapara (the performance of) sacrifices, in the Kali liberality alone.

This text is dated to be around 500 BC and latest around 200 BC to 200AD.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_ ... ws_of_Manu

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... anu-smriti

You probably know Sanskrit more than I do but I am getting worried now about all this dating and opinions.Being a Brahmin, I need to do some salvaging for the Manu-smriti

PD
-------------------------
The Indological link
http://sanskritdocuments.org/tfic/

PD,

I am sorry, but I think you completely missed my point. This is what I said in my last post:

The oldest reference to the Kaliyuga era is found in Aryabhata around 500 AD.

Kindly note, I said "era", meaning the date of the beginning of the Kaliyuga.
Besides, I said:

Important: I am talking only about the date 3102 BC. The teaching of the yugas itself must be a lot older. I did not attack this teaching at all.

The only thing I questioned was the correctness of the date 17/18 February 3102 BC for the beginning of the Kaliyuga. E.g. other scholars believe the Kaliyuga started later. E.g. P.C. Sengupta assumes its beginning on 10 January 2454 BC. ("Ancient Indian Chronology", p. 59)

I did *not* question the teaching of the four yugas.

I did *not* say anything against the Manusmriti so that it would need to be saved.

To my knowledge, the Manusmriti does not give the slightest clue about the date of the beginning of the Kaliyuga.

Dieter