Late Pushkar Bhatnagar proposed 10 January 5114 BCE as the day of Rama Janma. the Proposal is wrong for too many reasons, however I wanted to post this image that was created by Ms. Saroj Bala who recently published a book (Histroricity of Vedic and Ramayana eras), supposedly showing the positions of planets at the time of Rama Janma aka 10 January 5114 BCE.
When I checked for this date, first thing I realized that the day is 7th day (and NOT 9th day). The month could be possibly off by a month, i.e. Chaitra Shudda 9 would rather be on 9 Feb 5114 BCE. The gap of 2 days could be due to ‘Delta T’ correction error (all astronomy software do not correct for this error).
—————
In any case, the picture shows ‘Planetary positions’ claimed by Late Pushkar Bhatnagar and Saroj Bala. I have shown positions of planets per Voyager simulation for this date with red arrows.
Quick verbal summary of planetary positions is as follows (per Voyager simulation):
On this day Sun was on the border of Aquarius and Pisces – still in zone of Aquarius, Mars was at the border of Taurus and Aries – still in zone of Aries , Jupiter was in Leo, but closer to Virgo, Venus was in Pisces and closer to Aquarius, and Saturn was in Scorpius and close to zone of Libra. Moon is only 7 day old as opposed to desired (9 days old).
In effect, planetary positions shown by Pushkar Bhatnagar/Saroj Bala are erroneous for Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. Only positions of Uranus and Neptune, which ARE NOT RELEVANT to dating of Rama Janma are correct.
——————-
I would requests readers who have astronomy software to check these positions and comment.
Link to Saroj Bala’s blog is below
Nilesh Nilkanth Oak 
Indus valley civilization started around2500 bc how could rama born at 5000 bc
While ~5000 BCE date of Ramayana is incorrect for numerous reasons, Ramayana is much earlier than ‘so called’ IVC time period.
Hi Nilesh Sir,
I check the date in astronomical software. You are correct that it is 7th lunar day not 9th lunar day but I also checked the placement of other planets which I found correct as per Saroj ji s description. Sun is Aries, Jupiter in Cancer, Saturn in Libra, Mars is Caprocorn and Venus is Pisces. Can you please lets us know what is the planetary alignments on the date which is suggested by you for Ram birth?
Dear Ankit,
You are correct that positions of various planets “Sun is Aries, Jupiter in Cancer, Saturn in Libra, Mars is Caprocorn and Venus is Pisces.” as stated by Late Shri Pushkar Bhatnagar ji (Saroj Bala ji is simply re-iterating what Pushkar Bhatnagar ji has stated) indeed match for the date he (Pushkar Bhatnagar) proposed.
Depending on astronomy software used, there could be difference of 1 year (some software count 0 AD/BC as year, other’s don’t).
The fact the day is 7th lunar day and not 9th is also not a big deal. There is something called ‘Delta-T’ correction. Some softwares automatically make the correction, others don’t and still some others leave it to the user to make the correction. The delta of 2 days in lunar tithi is thus not unusual either.
—
The proposal of Late Shri Pushkar Bhatnagar ji is wrong for many other obvious reason.
I will post two links in my next responses. Please go through them and let me know your thoughts.
Thanks for getting into the details of this, testing it with the help of software and for your keen interest.
Regards,
Nilesh
Ankit
have a look at this (Late Shir Pushkar B assumes Rama was 25 years old at the time of his leaving for Vanavas. This is problematic).
https://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/age-of-rama-17-or-25-and-why-does-it-matter/
Ankit,
Also, Late Shri Pushkar Bhatnagar ji made a blunder when he was adjusting for ‘precession of equinoxes’ while going backwards in time. He did recognize the changes with respect to Gregorian calendar (extended in antiquity) but failed to recognize the changes in season with respect to Indian lunar months.
Have a look at this
Finally , my proposed date for Rama’s birth is 29 November 12240 BCE (Julian calendar extended in antiquity. Note, NOT Gregorian calendar)
Hi Nilesh,
i have understood your point and the reason why it contradicts with the date of Shri Pushkar Bhatnagar. But my only query is what are planetary alignments that you are getting on the day which you proposed. Because I checked all the four dates proposed, I even checked your proposed date but the planetary alignments stated in Valmiki Ramayan and proposed by Shri Pushkar Bhatnagar is closest for 5110 BCE. I am not saying that everything matches as stated in Valmiki Ramayan but a overall structure resembles most closely to this proposed date. I also wonder one thing that if Ramayan occured atleast 7000 years ago then for these many years isn’t it prone to fabrication. It might be possible that some of khands might have altered with time. Also in the Valmiki Ramayan the Sloke says: “Swa – Ucch Panchshu” which some of the scholars interpret that 4 planets were exalted and one planet in own sign (1 own sign + 4 exalted sign = 5). In this way many assume that moon might have been in cancer and rest 4 planets(Jup, Sat, Ven and Mars) were exalted. This view is also logical from some perspective because if moon is considered to be in Punarvasu Nakshtra then for Navami tithi there should be a difference of at least 96.5 degrees between sun and moon. Which puts sun in Pisces(because punarvasu nakshatra is only till 3 degree 20 min in Cancer and Pushya starts after that).I am happy that you replied to me. I had the same query regarding tithi and mailed my query to Saroj ji but did not receive any response. Thanks for responding to me :).
Ankit
Thanks for your response. It appears that you have not read my book. If you send me email at NileshOak@gmail.com, I will send you PDF copies of both of my books.
It is critical that you understand them both, to understand the context of Ramayana.
—
What you are discussing is one of the many (about 575) astronomy/chronology/seasons observations from the Valmiki Ramayana.
Regards,
Nilesh
The argument of interpolation/fabrication and other errors is a valid one. The big problem with such an argument is it is made by many without going through the effort of testing each observation and only when an observation conflicts with their ‘apriori’ agenda.
Arguments for interpolation and fabrication can be made, justifiably, after lot of work and anyone making a case for interpolation/fabrication has to still make a case why a specific observation appears to be interpolated/fabricated/modified…etc.