[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Literature, language and dating](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature) › [The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893) › c6 # The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas c6: Chapter II. Sacrifice alias the Year The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas c6 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [c6.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.6) — 4 parts - [c6.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.13) — 4 parts - [c6.54](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.54) — 4 parts ### Chapter II. Sacrifice alias the Year ### [c6.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.2) Primitive calendar co-eval with the sacrificial system—Prajâpati = Yajna = \*Samvatsara\*—Civil or \*sâvana\* days—\*Sâyana\* and lunar months—Lunar and solar years—Intercalary days and months in Vedic times—Solar year was siderial and not tropical—Old beginning of the year and the sacrifice.—The Vishuvân day—Vernal equinox and winter solstice—Uttarâyana and Dakshinâyana—Devayâna and Pitriyâna—Their original meaning—Bhâskarâchârya’s mistake about the day of the Devas—The two year beginnings were subsequently utilised for different purposes. ### [c6.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.3) It is necessary, in the first place, to see what contrivances were adopted by the ancient Aryas for the measurement and division of time. The present Indian system has been thus described by Professor Whitney in his notes to the Sûrya Siddhânta (I. 13, notes):— ### [c6.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.4) “In the ordinary reckoning of time, these elements are variously combined. Throughout Southern India (see Warren’s Kâla Sankalita, Madras, 1825, p. 4, etc.), the year and month made use of are the solar, and the day the civil; the beginning of each month and year being counted, in practice, from the sunrise nearest to the moment of their actual commencement. In all Northern India the year is luni-solar; the month is lunar and is divided into both lunar and civil days; the year is composed of a variable number of months, either twelve or thirteen, beginning always with the lunar month, of which the commencement next precedes the true commencement of the sidereal year. But underneath this division, the division of the actual sidereal year into twelve solar months ### [c6.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.5) is likewise kept up, and to maintain the concurrence of the civil and lunar days, and the lunar and solar months, is a process of great complexity, into the details of which we need not enter here." ### [c6.6.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.6.1) But the complications here referred to are evidently the growth of later times. The four ways of reckoning time, the Sâvana, the Chândra, the Nakshatra and the Saura, are not all referred to in the early works, and even in later days all these measures of time do not appear to have been fully and systematically utilised. There is, as I have said before, no early work extant on Vedic calendar, except the small tract on Jyotisha, and our information about the oldest calendar must, therefore, be gathered either from stray references in the Vedic works or from the early traditions or practices recorded in the old sacrificial literature of India. There are several sacrificial hymns in the Rigveda, which show that the sacrificial ceremonies must then have been considerably developed; and as no sacrificial system could be developed without the knowledge of months, seasons, and the year, it will not be too much to presume that in Vedic times there must have existed a calendar to regulate the sacrifices. It is difficult to determine the exact nature of this calender, but a study of the sacrificial literature would show that the phases of the moon, the changes in the seasons, and the southern and northern courses of the sun were the principal land-marks in the measurement of time in these early days. What is still more interesting, however, is that the leading features in the early sacrifices are the same as those in the year. The late Dr. ### [c6.6.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.6.2) Haug, in his introduction to the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, has observed that "the satras, which lasted for one year, were nothing but an imitation of the sun's yearly course. They were divided into two distinct parts, each consisting of six months of 30 days each. In the midst of both was the \*Viṣhûvân\*, \*i. e.\*, the equator or the central day, cutting the whole \*satra\* into two halves.'\* This clearly shows that the ancient \*Ṛiṣhis\* prepared their calendar mainly for sacrificial purposes, and the performance of various sacrifices facilitated, in its turn, the keeping up of the calendar. Offerings were made every morning and evening, on every new and full moon, and at the commencement of every season and \*ayana\*.† When this course of sacrifices was thus completed, it was naturally found that the year also had run its course, and the sacrifice and the year, therefore, seem to have early become synonymous terms. There are many passages in the \*Brâhmaṇas\* and \*Saṃhitâs\*, where \*Saṃvatsara\* and \*Yajña\* are declared to be convertible terms,‡ and no other theory has yet been suggested on which this may be accounted for. I am therefore inclined to believe that the Vedic \*Ṛiṣhis\* kept up their calendar by performing the corresponding round of sacrifices on the sacred fire that constantly burnt in their houses, like the fire of the Parsi priest in modern times. ### [c6.6.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.6.3) The numerous sacrificial details, which we find so fully described in the \*Brâhmaṇas\*, might be later innovations, But the main idea of the yearly sacrifice appears to be an old one. The etymology of the word \*ritvij\* (\*ritu\* + \*yaj\* = season sacrificer) shows that even in the oldest days there existed a certain correspondence between the sacrifices and the seasons, and what is true of the seasons is true of the year which according to one derivation of \*samvatsara\* (\*vas\* = to dwell) is nothing but a period where seasons dwell, or a cycle of seasons.\* The priests were not only the sacrificers of the community, but were also its time-keepers,† and these two functions they appear to have blended into one by assigning the commencement of the several sacrifices to the leading days of the year, on the natural ground that if the sacrifices were to be performed they must be performed on the principal days of the year.‡ Some scholars have suggested that the yearly \*satras\* might have been subsequently invented by the priests. But the hypothesis derives little support from the oldest records and traditions of all the sections of the Aryan race. Without a yearly \*satra\* regularly kept up a Vedic Ṛiṣhi could hardly have been able to ascertain and measure the course of time in the way he did. ### [c6.6.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.6.4) When better contrivances were subsequently discovered the sacrifice might naturally become divested of their time-keeping function and the differentiation so caused might have ultimately led to an independent development of both the sacrifices and the calendar. It is to this stage that we must assign the introduction of the numerous details of the yearly sacrifice mentioned in later works; and thus understood, the idea of a sacrifice extending over the whole year, may be safely supposed to have originated in the oldest days of the history of the Aryan race.\* In fact, it may be regarded as coeval with, if not antecedent to, the very beginning of the calendar itself. ### [c6.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.7) ∗ Ait. Br. Intr., p. 48. ### [c6.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.8) † Cf. Baudhayana Sutras, ii. 4.23, which describes the continuous round of sacrifices as follows :—अग्न्याधेयप्रभृत्येमान्यजज्ञाणि भवन्ति यथैतदग्न्याधेयमग्निहोत्रं दर्शपूर्णमासावाग्रयणमुदगयनदक्षिणायनयोः पशु-चातुर्मास्यान्त्यतुमुखे षड्ढोता वसंते ज्योतिष्टोम इत्येवं क्षमप्रापणम्। Also compare Manu iv. 25 26, and Yâjnavalkya i, 125, ### [c6.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.9) ‡ See Ait, Br, ii. 17, which says संवत्सरः प्रजापतिः। प्रजापतिर्यज्ञः। Also Ait. Br. iv. 22; Shatapatha Br. xi. 1. 1. 1; 2. 7. 1. In Taitt. San, ii. 5. 7. 3; vii. 5. 7. 4 we have यज्ञो वै प्रजापतिः, and again in vii. 2. 10. 3 संवत्सरः प्रजापतिः। ### [c6.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.10) ∗ Cf, Bhânu Dikshita's Com. on Amar a i, 4, 20, Dr. Schrader, in his Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples, Part iv., Ch. vi. (p. 305) also makes a similar observation. He holds, on philological grounds, that the conception of the year was already formed in the primeval period by combining into one whole the conception of winter and summer, which he believes to be the two primeval seasons. ### [c6.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.11) † "In Rome the care of the calendar was considered a religious function, and it had from earliest times been placed in the hands of the pontiffs," Lewis's Historical Survey of the Astronomy of the Ancients, p. 24. ### [c6.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.12) ‡ "Plato states that the months and years are regulated in order that the sacrifices and festivals may correspond with the natural seasons; and Cicero remarks that the system of intercalation was introduced with this object." Lewis's His. Astr. Anc., p. 19. ### [c6.13.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.13.1) We have now to examine the principal parts of the year, alias the sacrifice. The \*sâvana\* or the civil day appears to have been, as its etymology shows,† selected in such cases as the natural unit of time. 30 such days made a month and 12 such months or 360 \*sâvana\* days made a year.‡ Comparative Philology, however, shews that the names for the month and the moon coincide, with occasional small differences of suffix,\* in most of the Indo-European languages, and we may therefore conclude that in the primitive Aryan times the month was determined by the moon. Now a month of thirty civil or sâvana days cannot correspond with a lunar synodical month, and the Brahmavâdins had therefore to omit a day in some of the sâvana months to secure the concurrence of the civil and the lunar months.† The year of 360 sâvana days was thus practically reduced to a lunar year of 354 civil days or 360 tithis. But a further correction was necessary to adjust the lunar with the solar reckoning of time. The zodiac was not yet divided into twelve equal parts, and the solar month, as we now understand it, was unknown. The commencement of the cycle of seasons was, therefore, the only means to correct the calendar, and the ancient Aryas appeared to have early hit upon the device of the intercalary days or month for that purpose. ### [c6.13.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.13.2) There are many passages in the Taittirîya and Vâjasaneyi Sanhitâs and also one in the Rigveda‡ wherein the intercalary month is mentioned, and though opinions may differ as to when and how it was inserted, we may, for the purpose of our present inquiry, regard it as undisputed that in the old Vedic days means were devised and adopted to secure the correspondence of the lunar with the solar year. The occurrence of the twelve hallowed nights amongst the Teutons points to the same conclusion. They were in fact the supplementary days (366-354 = 12) required to balance the lunar with the solar year,—a period when the Ribhus, or the genii of the seasons, slackened their course and enjoyed the hospitality of the sun after toiling for a whole year (Rig. i. 33. 7.),\* and when Prajâpati, the God of sacrifices, after finishing the old year's sacrifice, prepared himself for the new year's work (Atharva Veda iv. 11. 11.). The sacrificial literature of India still preserves the memory of these days by ordaining that a person wishing to perform a yearly sacrifice should devote 12 days (dvâdashâha) before its commencement to the preparatory rites. These facts, in my opinion, conclusively establish that the primitive Aryans had solved the problem involved in balancing the solar with the lunar year. ### [c6.13.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.13.3) There may be some doubt as to whether the concurrence of the two years was at first secured by intercalating twelve days at the end of every lunar year, or whether the days were allowed to accumulate until an intercalary month could be inserted. The former appears to have been the older method, especially as it has been utilised and retained in the performance of yearly sacrifices; but whichsoever may be the older method, one thing is certain, that primitive Aryas had contrived means for adjusting the lunar with the solar year. Prof. Weber and Dr. Schrader† appear to doubt the conclusion on the sole ground that we cannot suppose the primitive Aryans to have so far advanced in civilization as to correctly comprehend such problems. This means that we must refuse to draw legitimate inferences from plain facts when such inferences conflict with our preconceived notions about the primitive Aryan civilization. I am not disposed to follow this method, nor do I think that people, who knew and worked in metals, made clothing of wool, constructed boats, built houses and chariots, performed sacrifices, and had made some advance in agriculture,\[\*\] were incapable of ascertaining the solar and the lunar year. They could not have determined it correct to a fraction of a second as modern astronomers have done; but a rough practical estimate was, certainly, not beyond their powers of comprehension. Dr. ### [c6.13.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.13.4) Schrader has himself observed that the conception of the year in the primeval period was formed by combining the conceptions of the seasons\[†\] If so, it would not be difficult, even for these primitive Aryans, to perceive that the period of twelve full moons fell short of their seasonal year by twelve days. Dr. Schrader again forgets the fact that it is more convenient, and hence easier and more natural, to make the year begin with a particular season or a fixed position of the sun in the heavens, than to have an ever-varying measure of time like the lunar year. Lewis, in his Historical Survey of the Astronomy of the Ancients, quotes Geminus to shew that "the system pursued by the ancient Greeks was to determine their months by the moon and their years by the sun,"\[‡\] and this appears to me to have been the system in force in the Indo-Germanic, or at any rate in the primitive Vedic period. There is no other conclusion that we can fairly draw from the facts and passages noted above. ### [c6.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.14) ∗ Comparative Philology also points to the same conclusion; Cf. Sanskrit \*yaj\*, Zand \*yaj\*, Greek \*āgos\*. It is well-known that the sacrificial system obtained amongst the Greeks, the Romans and the Iranians. ### [c6.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.15) † \*Sâvana\* is derived from \*su\* to sacrifice, and means literally a sacrificial day, ### [c6.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.16) ‡ Ait. Br. ii. 17; Taitt, San. ii, 5, 8. 3; Rig, i. 164. 48. Prof. Whitney (Sur. Sid, 13,\*n\*) observes, "The civil (\*sâvana\*) day is the natural day......A month of 30 and a year of 360 days are supposed to have formed the basis of the earliest Hindu Chronology, an intercala ry month being added once in five years." ### [c6.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.17) ∗ See Dr. Schrader's Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples, Part iv., Chap. vi. Translation by Jevons, p. 206. Also Max Müller's Biographies of Words, p. 193. ### [c6.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.18) † उत्सृज्यान् नोत्सृज्यान् इति मीमांसंते ब्रह्मवादिनः । Taitt. San. vii. 5. 7. 1., and Tâṇdya Br. v. 10. See also Kâla-Mâdhava Chap. on Month, Cal. Ed. p. 63. ### [c6.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.19) ‡ Taitt. San. i 4, 14; Vaj. San. 7. 70; Rig. i. 25, 8. As regards the twelve hallowed (intercalary) nights Cf. Rig. iv, 33. 7; Atha Veda iv. 11. 11; Taitt. Br. i, 1. 9. 10. ### [c6.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.20) ∗ See Zimmer's Life in Ancient India, p. 366; Kaegi's Rigveda (translation by Arrowsmith), pp. 20, 37. ### [c6.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.21) † See Indische Studien, xviii, 224, and Dr. Schrader's observations thereon in his Prehistoric Antiquities of Aryan Peoples, Part iv., Chap. vi, pp. 308-10. ### [c6.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.22) ∗ For a short summary of the primitive Aryan civilization, see Peile's Primer of Philology, pp. 66, 67; also Kaegi's Rigveda, translated by Arrowsmith, pp. 11-20. ### [c6.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.23) † See Preh. Ant. Ary. Peoples translated by Jevons, p. 305. ### [c6.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.24) ‡ Lewis, Hist. Surv. Astron. Anc., p. 18. ### [c6.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.25) There is, however, a further question, as to whether the solar year, with reference to which these corrections were made, was tropical or sidereal. It is true that the great object of the calender was to ascertain the proper time of the seasons. But the change in the seasons consequent upon the precession of the equinoxes is so exceedingly minute as to become appreciable only after hundreds of years, and it is more probable than not that it must have escaped the notice of the early observers of the heavens, whose only method of determining the position of the sun in the ecliptic was to observe every morning the fixed stars nearest that luminary.\* Under such a system the year would naturally be said to be complete when the sun returned to the same fixed star. Prof. Whitney has pointed out that the same system is followed in the Sûrya Siddhânta, though the motion of the equinoxes was then discovered.† It is, therefore, natural to presume that the early Vedic priests were ignorant of the motion of the equinoxes. No early work makes any mention of or refers to it either expressly or otherwise, and the solar year mentioned in the Vedic works must, therefore, be considered as sidereal and not tropical. This would necessitate a change in the beginning of the year, every two thousand years or so, to make it correspond with the cycle of natural seasons, and the fact that such changes were introduced twice or thrice is a further proof of the old year being a sidereal one.\* The difference between the sidereal and the tropical year is 20·4 minutes, which causes the seasons to fall back nearly one lunar month in about every two thousand years, if the sidereal solar year be taken as the standard of measurement. When these changes and corrections came to be noticed for the first time, they must have created a great surprise, and it was not till after one or two adjustments on this account were made that their true reason, the motion of the equinoxes, could have been discovered. Garga tells us that if the sun were to turn to the north without reaching Dhanishthâ,† it foretold great calamity, and I am disposed to put a similar interpretation upon the story of Prajâpati alias Yajna alias the year, who, contrary to all expectations, moved backwards to his daughter Rohinî.‡ But as I wish to examine the tradition more fully hereafter, it is not necessary to dilate on the point here. My object at present is to show that the Vedic solar year was sidereal and not tropical, and what has been said above is, I believe, sufficient to justify such a presumption, at least for the present, though it may afterwards be either retained or discarded, according as it tallies or jars with other facts. ### [c6.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.26) ∗ \*Tait. Br. 5. 2. 1. यत्पुण्यं नक्षत्रं तद्‌दकुर्वीतोपव्युषम् । यदा वै सूर्य उदेति । अथ नक्षत्रं नेति । यावति तत्र सूर्यो गच्छेत् । यत्र जघन्यं पश्येत् । तावत्कुर्वीत यत्कारी स्यात् । पुण्याह एव कुरुते ।\* This is still recited at the Punyaha-vochana ceremony. ### [c6.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.27) † \*Sur Sid. i 13.\* 'It is, however, not the tropical solar year which we employ, but the sidereal, no account being made of the precession of the equinoxes.' ### [c6.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.28) ∗ The Krittikâs once headed the list of the Nakshatras, which now begins with Ashvinî. Other changes are discussed in the following chapters of this work. ### [c6.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.29) † Garga quoted by Bhattotpala on Brihat. San. iii. 1:— यदा निवर्ततेऽप्राप्तः श्रविष्ठामुत्तरायणे । आश्लेषां दक्षिणेप्राप्तस्तदा विद्यान्महाभयम् ॥ ### [c6.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.30) ‡ Ait. Br. iii. ### [c6.31](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.31) ³³ The passage is discussed in this light further on in Chapter VIII. See also Shat. Br. i. 7. 4. 1. ### [c6.32](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.32) Opinions differ as to whether the lunar month began with the full or the new moon,\[\*\] and whether the original number of Nakshatras was 27 or 28.\[†\] But I pass over these and similar other points as not very relevant to my purpose, and take up next the question of the commencement of the year. I have already stated that the sacrifice and the year were treated as synonymous in old days, and we may, therefore, naturally expect to find that the beginning of the one was also the beginning of the other. The Vedânga Jyotisha makes the year commence with the winter solstice, and there are passages, in the Shrauta Sûtras which lay down that the annual sacrifices like \*gavâm-ayanu\*, should be begun at the same time.\[‡\] A tradition has also been recorded by Jaimini and others that all \*Deva\* ceremonies should be performed§ only during the Uttarâyaṇa; and the Uttarâyaṇa, according to the several Jyotisha works,\[||\] is the period of the year from the winter to the summer solstice, that is, from the time when the sun turns towards the north till it returns towards the south. This leads one to suppose that the winter solstice was the beginning of the year and also of the Uttarāyaṇa at the time when the annual sacrifices were established, and therefore in the old Vedic days. But a closer consideration of the ceremonies performed in the yearly satras will show that the winter solstice could not have been the original beginning of these satras. The middle day of the annual satra is called the Viṣhuvân day, and it is expressly stated that this central day divides the satra into two equal halves, in the same way as the Viṣhuvân or the equinoctial day divides the year.\[\*\] The satra was thus the imitation of the year in every respect, and originally it must have corresponded exactly with the course of the year. Now, as Viṣhuvân literally means the time when day and night are of equal length, if we suppose the year to have at the time commenced with the winter solstice, the Viṣhuvân or the equinoctial day could never have been its central day, and the middle day of the satra would correspond, not with the equinoctial, as it should, but with the summer solstice. It might be urged that Viṣhuvân as referring to the satra should be supposed to be used in a secondary sense. But this does not solve the difficulty. It presupposes that Viṣhuvân must have been used at one time in the primary sense (i. e., denoting the time when day and night are equal), and if in its primary sense it was not used with reference to the satra, it must have been so used at least with reference to the year. But if Viṣhuvân was thus the central day of the year, the year must have once commenced with the equinoxes. The word \*uttarāyaṇa\* is again susceptible of two interpretations. It may mean "turning towards the north from the southernmost point," or it may indicate "the passage of the sun into the northern hemisphere, \*i. e.\*, to the north of the equator." If we adopt the first meaning, the Uttarāyaṇa and the year must be held to commence from the winter solstice, while if the second interpretation be correct, the Uttarāyaṇa and the year must have once commenced with the vernal equinox. The facts, that the central day of the annual \*satra\* was called \*viṣuvān\*, that Vasanta or spring was considered to be the \*first of the seasons\*,\* and that the \*āgrayaneṣṭis\* or the half-yearly sacrifices were required to be performed every Vasanta (spring) and Sharad (autumn)† clearly shew that the second of the two interpretations given above is more likely to be the older one. Let us, however, examine the point more fully. ### [c6.33](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.33) ∗ See Kâla Mâdhava, Chapter on Month, Cal. Ed., p. 63; पौर्णमास्यं-तत्वे श्रुतेः कटाक्षो भूयान् । We can thus explain why the \*full moon\* night of a month was described as the \*first\* night of the year. See infra\[\*\] ### [c6.34](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.34) † Pref. to Rig., Vol. IV., and Whitney's Essay on the Hindu and Chinese Asterisms. ### [c6.35](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.35) ‡ See Ved. Jy. 5; Ashvalâyana Shr. Su. i, 2, 14, 1; ii, 2, 14, 3 and 22; Kât. Shr. Su. v. 1. 1. ### [c6.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.36) § Mîmânsâ Darshana, vi. 8. 5. Ashvalâyana, Gr. Su. i. 4. 1, Shatapatha, Br. xiv. 9. 3.1 The last quoted in Kâla Mâdhava, Chapter on \*Ayana\*, Cal. Ed., p. 57, but from the Kânva recension thus: उदगयने आपूर्यमाणपक्षस्य पुण्याहे द्वादशाहमुपसहती भूत्वा । ### [c6.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.37) || Sur. Sid, xiv. 10; Ved. Jy. 5. ### [c6.38](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.38) ∗ Ait. Br. iv. 22 ; Taitt. Br. i. 2. 3. 1 ; Tâṇ. Br. iv. 7. 1. ### [c6.39](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.39) † Āśvalāyana Shr. Sut. i. 2. 9. 3-4. ### [c6.40](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.40) The only passages where \*uttarāyaṇa\* is mentioned in the Vedic works are those wherein the white and the black paths for the souls of the deceased, the Devayāna and the Pitṛyāna, are described. The words \*devayāna\* and \*pitṛyāna\* occur several times in the Rigveda. Agni is said to know both these;‡ while in the Vājasaneyi Saṃhitā 19. 47, these are said to be the two paths to mortals. In the Rigveda x. 18, 1, the path of the god of Death is said to be the reverse of \*devayāna\*, and in the Rigveda x. 98. 11, Agni is said to know \*devayāna\* by seasons.§ There is, however, no passage in the Rigveda where \*devayāna\* is fully defined and we have consequently to refer to the passages in the Bṛihadāraṇyaka and the Chhāndogya Upanishad \* for a fuller explanation of these terms. Before the idea was recorded in these works it must undoubtedly have received considerable additions, but nevertheless the original sense cannot be supposed to have been completely lost in these later additions. It is therefore extremely important to see how these two paths are described in the Brāhmaṇas and Upanishads. Bṛih. vi, 2, 15 and Chh. iv. 15.5 state that "flame, day, the increasing moon, the six months when the sun is towards the north, the \*devaloka\* (Chh. \*devapatha\*) or the abode (Chh. \*patha\*) of gods, &c.," † is the way never to return; while "smoke, night, the decreasing moon, and the six months when the sun is towards the south, the \*pitṛiloka\* or the abode of Pitṛis" is the reverse. In the Bhagavad Gītā viii. 24, 25 we find the same sentiments in modern phraseology, and the question is, what is meant by the phrase "the six months when the sun is towards the north" or, as Yāska and the Gītā have it, "the six months † of the Uttarâyana." Almost all the commentators have interpreted the expression to mean the six months from the winter to the summer solstice.\* Bnt notwithstanding their high authority it will be found that their interpretation, though in consonance with the later astronomical views, is directly opposed to the passages in the Vedic works. In the Taittiriya Sanhitâ vi. 5. 3, we are told "the sun, therefore, goes by the south for six months and six by the north." But this does not help us in ascertaining the correct meaning of the phrase "by the north." As it stands it may mean either the solstitial or the equinoctial six months. We must therefore look for another passage, and this we find in the Shatapatha Brâhmana (ii. 1. 3, 1-3), where in describing the two aforesaid paths it lays down in distinct terms that Vasanta, Grishma and Varshâ are the seasons of the Devas; Sharad, Hemanta and Shishira those of the Pitris; the increasing fortnight is of the Devas; the decreasing one of the Pitris; the day is of the Devas; the night of the Pitris; again the first part of the day is of the Deva; the latter of the Pitris.......... When he (the sun) turns to the north, he is amongst the Devas and protects them; when he turns to the south he is amongst the Pitris and protects them."† ### [c6.41](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.41) ∗ Taitt. Br. i. 1. 2. 6. मुखं वा एतदृतूनां यद्वसंतः | Upon this the author of Kāla Mādhava observes संवत्सरोपक्रमरूपत्वेन वसंतस्य प्राथम्यं द्रष्टव्यम् | Cal. Ed., p. 59. ### [c6.42](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.42) ‡ See Rig. i. 72. 7. and x 2. 7. ### [c6.43](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.43) § विद्वानपथ ऋतुशो देवयानान् | Sāyaṇa, however, takes ऋतुशः with the very घेहि. But query? ### [c6.44](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.44) ∗ See also Yāskas Nirukta 14. 9; Mahānārāyaṇopanishad 25. 1; and Shaṅkarāchārya's Bhāshya on Brahma Sutras iv 2. 18—21, where all such passages are collected and discussed ### [c6.45](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.45) † अर्चिषोऽहन्ह आपूर्यमाणपक्षादापूर्यमाणपक्षाद्यान्षण्मासानुदङ्ङादित्य एति मासेभ्यो देवलोकं...तेषां न पुनरावृत्तिः । धूमाद्रात्रिं रात्रेरपक्षीयमाणपक्ष-मपक्षीयमाणपक्षाद्यान्षण्मासान् दक्षिणदित्य एति मासेभ्यः पितृलोकम्...। Bṛihadār. vi. 2. ### [c6.46](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.46) ¹⁵ Instead of "six months when sun goes north and south," Yāska and Mahānā use the words उदगयन and दक्षिणायन while in Chh. we have देवपथ instead of देवलोक in Bṛihad. In Kaus. i. 3, it is called देवयान. ### [c6.47](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.47) ‡ अग्नियोंतिरहः शुक्लः षण्मासा उत्तरायणम् । Gītā viii. 24. ### [c6.48](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.48) \*Shankarâchârya is not explicit; yet his reference to the death of Bhîshma shows that he takes the same view. Anandgiri on Prashnopanishad i. 9, says ज्येष्ठादिर्दक्षिणायनम् । ### [c6.49](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.49) †As the passage is important I give it here in full:— ### [c6.50](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.50) वसंतो ग्रीष्मो वर्षा । ते देवा ऋतवः शरद्धेमंतः शिशिरस्ते पितरो य एवापूर्यतेऽर्धमासः स देवा योऽपक्षीयते स पितरोऽहरेव देवा रात्रिः पितरः पुनरहः पूर्वाण्हो देवा अपरान्हः पितरः । ...... । स यत्र उदगावर्तते देवेषु तर्हि भवति देवास्तर्ह्यभिगोपायत्यथ यत्र दक्षिणावर्तते पितृषु तर्हि भवति पितृस्तर्ह्यभिगोपायति । ### [c6.51](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.51) This removes all doubts as to what we are to understand by \*devayâna\*, \*devapâtha\*, or \*devaloka\* and \*uttarâyana\* as connected with it. The Brihadâranyaka Upanishad is a part of the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa, and we shall not be violating any rule of interpretation if we interpret the passage in the one in the light of a similar passage in the other. Now if Vasanta (spring), Grīshma (summer) and Varṣhâ (rains) were the seasons of the Devas and the sun moved amongst the Devas when he turned to the north, it is impossible to maintain that the Devayâna or the Uttarâyana ever commenced with the winter solstice, for in neither hemisphere the winter solstice marks the beginning of spring, the first of the Deva seasons. The seasons in Central Asia and India differ. Thus the rains in India commence about or after the summer solstice, while in the plains of Asia the season occurs about the autumnal equinox. But in neither case Vasanta (spring) commences with the winter solstice or Varṣhâ (rains) ends at the summer solstice. We must therefore hold that \*Devayâna\* in those days was understood to extend over the six months of the year, which comprised the three seasons of spring, summer, and rains, \*i. e.\*, from the vernal to the autumnal equinox, when the sun was in the northern hemisphere or to the north of the equator. This shows further that the oldest order of seasons did not place Varṣhâ (rains) at the summer solstice, when the chief Indian monsoon commences; but at the autumnal equinox. The winter solstice, according to this order, falls in the middle of Hemanta. In the modern astronomical works, the winter solstice is, however, placed at the end and not in the middle of Hemanta, while the vernal equinox is said to fall in the middle of Vasanta. When the Vedic Aryas became settled in India, such a change in the old order of seasons was necessary to make them correspond with the real aspect of nature. But it is difficult to determine exactly when this change was made.\* The old order of seasons given in the passage above quoted, however, clearly states that Vasanta in old days commenced with the vernal equinox. We can now understand why Vasanta has been spoken of as the first season and why the Nakshatras have been divided into two groups called the Deva Nakshatras and the Yama Nakshatras.† I am aware of the theory which attempts to explain away the passages above cited as metaphorical to avoid the appearance of superstition.‡ But the method is neither sound nor necessary. The path of the Devas and the path of the Pitṛis are several times referred to in the Ṛigveda, and though we might suppose the Brahmavādins to have developed the two ideas to their utmost extent, it cannot be denied that the original idea is an old one, suggested by the passage of the sun in the northern and southern hemispheres. ### [c6.52](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.52) † Taitt. Br. i. 1, 2, 6 and i, 5. 2. 6. ### [c6.53](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.53) ‡ See Thomson's Bhagavad Gītā, p. 60. ### [c6.54.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.54.1) In the absence of anything to the contrary we might therefore take it as established that in the early Vedic days the year began when the sun was in the vernal equinox; and as the sun then passed from the south to the north of the equator it was also the commencement of his northern passage. In other words, the Uttarāyaṇa (if such a word was then used), Vasanta, the year and the Satras all commenced together at the vernal equinox. The autumnal equinox which came after the rains was the central day of the year; and the latter half of the year was named the Pitṛyāṇa or what we would now call the Dakṣiṇāyana. It is difficult to definitely ascertain the time when the commencement of the year was changed from the vernal equinox to the winter solstice. But the change must have been introduced long before the vernal equinox was in the Kṛttikās, and when this change was made uttarāyaṇa must have gradually come to denote the first half of the new year, i. e., the period from the winter to the summer solstice, especially as the word itself was capable of being understood in the sense of "turning towards the north from the southernmost point," I am of opinion, however, that devayāna and pitṛyāna, or devaloka and pitṛloka were the only terms used in the oldest times. It is a natural inference from the fact that the word uttarāyaṇa, as such, does not occur in the Rigveda. ### [c6.54.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.54.2) The fact, that Viṣuvān was the central day of the yearly satra, further shows that the sacrificial system was coeval with the division of the year into the paths of Devas and Pitṛs. After a certain period the beginning of the year was changed to the winter solstice, and it was sometime after this change was made that the words uttarāyaṇa and dakṣiṇāyana came to be used to denote the solstitial divisions of the year. But devayāna and pitṛyāna could not be at once divested of the ideas which had already become associated with them. Thus while new feasts and sacrifices came to be regulated according to uttarāyaṇa and dakṣiṇāyana, devayāna and pitṛyāna with all the associated ideas continued to exist by the side of the new system, until they became either gradually assimilated with the new system or the priests reconciled the new and the old systems by allowing option to individuals to follow whichever they deemed best. We must therefore take great care not to allow the idea of \*uttarâyaṇa\*, as we now understand it, to obscure our vision in interpreting the early Vedic traditions, and that too much care can never be taken is evident from the fact that even so acute an astronomer as Bhâskarâchârya was at a loss to correctly understand the tradition that the Uttarâyaṇa was the day of the Devas. In his Siddhânta Shiromaṇi he raises the question how the Uttarâyaṇa, as it was generally understood in his day, could be the day of the Devas. ### [c6.54.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.54.3) He admits that the celestial beings on Meru at the North Pole behold the sun (during all the six months) when he is in the northern hemisphere (vii. 9) and these six months may therefore be properly called their day.\* But the word \*uttarâyaṇa\* was then used to denote the period of six months from the winter to the summer solstice; and Bhâskarâchârya was unable to understand how such an Uttarâyaṇa could be called the day of the Devas by the writers of the astronomical Sanhitâs. If the sun is visible to the Gods at Meru from the vernal equinox to the summer solstice, its passage back to the autumnal equinox lies through the same latitudes and in that passage, \*i. e.\*, during three months after the summer solstice, the sun must, says Bhâskarâchârya, be visible to the Gods. But according to the Sanhitâ-writers the day of the Devas ended with the Uttarâyaṇa, that is, as Bhâskara understood the word, at the summer solstice. How is this conflict to be reconciled? ### [c6.54.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.54.4) Bhâskarâchârya could give no satisfactory solution of the difficulty, and asks his readers to reconcile the conflicting statements on the supposition that the doctrine may be regarded as referring to "judicial astrology and the fruits it foretells."\* Had Bhâskarâchârya however known that the word uttarâyana was sometimes used for devayâna to denote the passage of the sun from the vernal to the autumnal equinox, I am sure, he would not have asked us to be satisfied with the lame explanation that the doctrine of the Sanhitâ-writers need not be mathematically correct as it refers exclusively to judicial astrology. It is difficult to say whether the ancient Aryas ever lived so near the north pole as to be aware of the existence of a day extending over at least two or three if not six months of the year. But the idea that the day of the Devas commences when the sun passes to the north of the equator, appears to be an old one. In the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa iii. 9. 22. 1. ### [c6.55](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.55) ∗ See Zimmer's Life in Ancient India p. 371. Kaegi's Rigveda, p. 116, note 68. ### [c6.56](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.56) ∗ In the Surya Siddhânta xii. 67 it is said that "At Meru Gods behold the sun, after but a single rising, during the half of his revolution beginning with Aries;" while in xiv. 9, the Uttarâyaṇa is said to commence "from the sun's entrance into Capricorn." The author, however, has not noticed the tradition that the Uttarâyaṇa is the day of the Devas and the apparent inconsistency arising therefrom. Perhaps he understood the tradition in its true sense. ### [c6.57](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.57) \*The original verses are as follows: दिनं सुराणामयनं यदुत्तरं निशेतरत्संहितकैः प्रकीर्तितम् । दिनोन्मुखेऽर्के दिनमेव तन्मतं निशा तथा तफलकीर्तनाय तत् ॥ द्वन्द्वात्मारोहति यैः क्रमेण तैरैव वृत्तैरवरोहतीनः । यंत्रव दृष्टः प्रथमं स देवैस्तत्रैव तिष्ठन् न विलोक्यते किम् ॥ Golâdhyâya vii. 11-12, Bâpudevashâstri's Ed. pp 304, 5, ### [c6.58](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.58) †एकं वा एतदेवानामहः । यत्संवत्सरः । It is however extremely hazardous to base any theory upon this. Traditions like these have been cited as indicating the fact the North Pole was inhabited in old days! Similar other traditions are said to indicate the existence of a pre glacial period. Is it not more probable to suppose that when uttarâyana and dakshinâyana came to be first distinguished, they were respectively named 'day' and 'night' with a qualifying word to mark their special nature? The history of languages shews that when people come across new ideas they try to name them in old words. The Uttarâyana and the Dakshinâyana may have been thus conceived as God's day and night. See infra, Chap. V. ### [c6.59](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.59) we are told that the year is but a day of the Devas and even Herodotus (450 B. C.) mentions a people who sleep during the six months of the year.\* If the tradition is, therefore, as old as it is represented to be, it is impossible to reconcile it with the later meaning of \*uttarâyana\* as commecing from the winter solstice and this would then furnish an additional ground to hold that in early times the Uttarâyana began with the vernal equinox as stated in the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa. ### [c6.60](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.60) I have stated above that when the commencement of the year was altered from the vernal equinox to the winter solstice, \*uttarâyana\* either lost its older meaning or was rather used to denote the solstitial division of the year. But this is not the only consequence of that change. With the year the beginning of the annual \*satras\* was also gradually transferred to the winter solstice and the change was complete when the Taittirîya Sanhitâ was compiled. In fact had it not been for the passage in the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa it would have been impossible to produce any direct evidence of the older practice. When the beginning of the \*satra\* was thus changed, the Vishûvân day must have gradually lost its primary meaning and come to denote simply the central day of the yearly \*satra\*. 4050 ### [c6.61](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.61) The old practice was not however completely forgotten and for the purpose of the Nakshatra-sacrifices the vernal equinox was still taken as the starting point. Thus it is that Garga tells us that "of all the Nakshatras the Krittikâs are said to be the first for sacrificial purposes and Shraviṣṭhâ for (civil) enumeration."† But even this distinction ### [c6.62](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6.62) \*Quoted in Narrien's Origin and Progress of Astronomy, p. 31. †Quoted by Sonâkara on Ved. Jy. 5. तेषां च सर्वेषां नक्षत्रणां कर्मसु कृत्तिकाः प्रथममाचक्षते श्रविष्ठा तु संहयायाः। appears to have been eventually lost sight of by the later writers and all references to \*uttarâyaṇa\* were understood to be made solely to the six months from the winter to the summer solstice, an error from which even Bhâskarâchârya did not escape, though he perceived the absurdity caused by it in some cases. At the present day we on the southern side of the Narmadâ begin the year at the vernal equinox for all \*civil\* purposes, but still all the \*religious\* ceremonies prescribed to be performed in the Uttarâyaṇa, are performed during the Uttarâyaṇa beginning with the winter solstice, a position quite the reverse of that described by Garga. When we at the present day have been thus using the system of a double year-beginning, we need not be surprised if the ancient Aryas, after shifting the commencement of the year to the winter solstice, managed to keep up the old and the new system together by assigning the different beginnings of the year to different purposes as indicated by Garga. It was the only alternative possible if nothing old was to be entirely given up. ## Linked texts (22) - [Taittirīyasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.krsnayajur*taittiriya.2.5.7.3) — Sanskrit - [Śatapathabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.satapatha.11.1.1.1) — Yājñavalkya & Śāṇḍilya (Vedic teacher), Sanskrit - [Sūryasiddhānta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.astro.siddhanta.early.suryasiddhanta.1.13) — Maya, Sanskrit - [Aitareyabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.aitreya.2.17) — Mahidāsa Aitareya, Sanskrit - [Taittirīyabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.taittiriya.1.1.9.10) — Sanskrit - [Ṛgvedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.rg.1.164.48) — Sanskrit - [Baudhāyanaśrautasūtra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.kalpa.srauta.baudhayana.2.4) — Baudhāyana, Sanskrit - [Kātyāyanaśrautasūtra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.kalpa.srauta.katyayana.5.1.1) — Kātyāyana (Vājasaneyi sūtrakāra), Sanskrit - [Bṛhatsaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.astro.samhita.rsi.brhatsamhita.3.1) — Varāhamihira, Sanskrit - [Mānava Dharmaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.manu.4.25) — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit - [Yājñavalkyasmṛti](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.yajnavalkya.1.125) — Yājñavalkya, Sanskrit - [Praśnopaniṣad](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.upanisad.mukhya.prasna.1.9) — Pippalāda, Sanskrit - [Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣad](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.upanisad.mukhya.brhadaranyaka.6.2.15) — Sanskrit - [Vājasaneyisaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.suklayajur*vajasaneyi.19.47) — Sanskrit - [Atharvavedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.atharva.4.11.11) — Atharvan & Aṅgiras, Sanskrit - [Bhagavadgītā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.gita.8.24) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Āśvalāyanaśrautasūtra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.kalpa.srauta.asvalayana) — Āśvalāyana, Sanskrit - [Āśvalāyanagṛhyasūtra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.kalpa.grhya.asvalayana) — Āśvalāyana, Sanskrit - [Pañcaviṃśabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.pancavimsa) — Sanskrit - [Tibetan translation ('Chi med mdzod)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.art.kosa.paryaya.amarakosa*bo) — Classical Tibetan - [Ārcajyotiṣa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.jyotisa.rk) — Lagadha, Sanskrit - [Siddhāntaśiromaṇi](https://indike.org/pramana/in.astro.siddhanta.early.siddhantasiromani) — Bhāskara II, Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.literature.tilak-1893.c6) · Pramāṇa