Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas c7: Chapter III. The Krittikas

The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas c7

Language
English

Contents

Chapter III. The Krittikas

c7.2

Nakshatras in old Vedic times generally mean asterisms and not zodiacal portions—The present and the older position of the solstices—In later works—In Vedāṅga Jyotisha—An objection against its antiquity examined—Passages in the Taittirīya Saṃhitā and Brāhmaṇa—The Krittikās head the Nakshatras—Deva and Yama Nakshatras—Their real meaning—Taittirīya Saṃhitā vii. 4. 8. discussed—Jaimini's and Shabara's interpretation of the same—Conclusions deducible therefrom—Winter solstice in Māgha—Vernal equinox in the Krittikās—The age of the Saṃhitā—2350 B. C.—Bentley's arguments and views criticised.

c7.3.1

WE HAVE seen that the ancient Aryas originally commenced their year, which was luni-solar and siderial, with the vernal equinox, and that when the beginning was changed to the winter solstice both the reckonings were kept up, the one for sacrificial and the other for civil purposes. Let us now examine if there is any reliable evidence to show that the Vedic priests made any corrections in the calendar when by the precession of the equinoxes the cycle of seasons gradually fell back. All our present calendars are prepared on the supposition that the vernal equinox still coincides with the end of Revatī and our enumeration of the Nakshatras begins with Ashvinī, though the equinox has now receded about 18° from Revatī. It has been shown by Prof. Whitney (Sūrya Siddhānta, viii., 9 note, p. 211) that the above position of the vernal equinox may be assumed to be true at about 490 A. D Taking this as the probable date of the introduction of the present system, we have now to see if we can trace back the position of the vernal equinox amongst the fixed circle of stars. The question, so far, as one antecedent stage is concerned, has been thoroughly discussed by Colebrooke, Bentley, Max Müller, Weber, Whitney, Biot, and other scholars: and I shall therefore only summarise what they have said, noting the points where I differ from them.

c7.3.2

I do not propose to enter into any detailed mathematical calculations at this stage of the inquiry, for I am of opinion that until we have thoroughly examined and discussed all the passages in the Vedic works bearing on this question, and settled and arranged our facts, it is useless to go into minute numerical calculations. The Vedic observations could not again be such as need any minute or detailed arithmetical operations. I shall therefore adopt for the present the simplest possible method of calculation,—a method which may be easily understood and followed by any one, who can watch and observe the stars after the manner of the ancient priests. We shall assume that the zodiac was divided into 27 parts, not by compass but by means of the leading stars, which Prof. Max Müller rightly calls the milestones of the heavens. The Vedic priest, who ascertained the motion of the sun by observing with his unaided eye the nearest visible star,* cannot be supposed to have followed a different method in making other celestial observations; and, if so, we cannot assume that he was capable of recognizing and using for the purposes of observation any artificial divisions of the ecliptic on a mathematical principle, such as those which would result from the division of 360° of the zodiac into 27 equal parts, each part thus extending over 13° 20' of the ecliptic.

c7.3.3

Of course, such an artificial method might be easily followed in later days, when the means of observation increased and the science of arithmetic was developed. But in the earliest days of civilization, it is more natural to suppose that the motions of the sun and the moon were determined by observing which of the known fixed stars was nearest to them. When we, therefore, find it stated in the Vedic works that the sun was in the Krittikâs, it is more probable that the fixed asterism, and not the beginning of the artificial portion of the zodiac, was intended. I admit that the accuracy of such observations cannot be relied upon within two or three degrees, if not more. But we must take the facts as they are, especially when it is impossible to get anything more accurate from the ancient observers of the heavens.* It will, I trust, however, be found that this inevitable want of accuracy in the old observations does not affect our conclusions to such an extent as to make them practically useless for chronological purposes. For instance, suppose that there is a mistake of 5° in observing the position of the sun with reference to a fixed star when the day and the night are of equal length. This would cause an error of not more than 5 × 72 = 360 years in our calculations; and in the absence of better means there is no reason to be dissatisfied even with such a result, especially when we are dealing with the remotest periods of antiquity.

c7.3.4

I shall, therefore, assume that references to the Nakshatras in the old Vedic works, especially in cases where the motions of other bodies are referred to them, are to the fixe asterisms and not to the zodiacal portions. I may also state here that as a change in the position of the vernal equinox necessarily causes a similar change in the position of the winter solstice, both the beginnings of the year, previously referred to, would require to be simultaneously altered. Whenever, therefore, we find a change in the position of the vernal equinox recorded in the early works, we must look for the evidence of a corresponding alteration in the position of the winter solstice, and the corroborative evidence so supplied will naturally add to the strength of our conclusions. This will, I hope, sufficiently explain the procedure I mean to follow in the investigation of the problem before us. I shall now proceed to examine the passages which place the vernal equinox in the Krittikâs, beginning with the latest writer on the subject.

c7.4

∗ Taitt. Br. i. 5. 2. 1, previously quoted. The passage is very important as it describes the method of making celestial observations in old times.

c7.5

∗ Similar observations have been recorded by Greek poets. Homer mentions 'the turns of the sun,' and Hesiod 'the rising and the setting of the Pleiades at the beginnings of day and night.' The observations in the Vedic works may be supposed to have been made in a similar way.

c7.6

It is now well-known that Varahamihira, in whose time the vernal equinox coincided with the end of Revati and the summer solstice was in Punarvasu, distinctly refers in two places to the older position of the solstices recorded by writers who preceded him. "When the return of the sun took place from the middle of Âshleshâ," says he in his Pancha Siddhântikâ, "the tropic was then right. It now takes place from Punarvasu."* And, again, in the Brihat Sanhitâ iii., 1 and 2, he mentions the same older position of both the solstitial points and appeals to his readers to ascertain for themselves by actual observation which of the two positions of the solstices is the correct one, whether the older position of the

c7.7

∗ See Colebrooke's Essays, Vol. II., p. 387. The verse may now be found in Dr. Thibaut's edition of the work. It is as follows:—

c7.8

आश्लेषार्धात्सीद्यदा निवृत्तिः किलोष्णकिरणस्य ।
युक्तमयनं तदासीत्सांप्रतमयनं पुनर्वसुतः ॥

c7.9

solstices or that given by the writer.* It is clear, therefore, that in the days of Varāhamihira, there existed works which placed the winter solstice in the beginning of (divisional) Dhanishthâ and the summer solstice in the middle of Ashleshâ. This statement of Varāhamihira is fully corroborated by quotations from Garga† and Parâshara which we meet with in the works of the later commentators; and it appears that the system of commencing the year with the month of Mâgha, which corresponds with the above position of the solstices, was once actually in vogue. Amarasinha states that the seasons comprise two months each, beginning with Mâgha, and three such seasons make an ayana.‡ The same arrangement of seasons is also mentioned in the medical works of Shushruta and Vâgbhata.§ The account of the death of Bhishma, related in the Mahâbhârata Anushâshana-parva 167, further shows that the old warrior, who possessed the superhuman power of choosing his time of death, was waiting on his death-bed for the return of the sun towards the north from the winter

c7.10

‡ Amara i. 4. 13 द्वौ द्वौ माघादिमासौ स्यादृतुस्तैरयनं त्रिभिः ।

c7.11

§ See Shushruta i. 6, and Vâgbhata’s Ashtângahridaya Sutrasthâna iii. 2; both of which are quoted further on in Chap. IV.

c7.12

*Thus :— आश्लेषार्धादक्षिणमुत्तरमयनं रवेर्धनिष्ठाद्यम् । नूनं कदाचिदासीद्येनोक्तं पूर्वशास्त्रेषु ॥ सांप्रतमयनं सवितुः कर्कटाद्यं मृगादितश्चान्यत् । उक्ताभावो विकृतिः प्रत्यक्षपरीक्षणैर्व्यक्तिः ॥

c7.13

† Garga, quoted by Somâkara on Ved. Jy. 5, says :— यदा माघस्य शुक्लस्य प्रतिपद्युत्तरायणम् । सहोदयं श्रविष्ठाभिः सौमाकौ प्रतिपद्यतः ॥

c7.14

Bhattotpala on Brihat. San. iii. 1, quotes Garga as follows:— श्रविष्ठात्पौष्णार्धं चरतः शिशिरः । solstice and that this auspicious event took place in the first half of the month of Mâgha.* It is evident from this that the winter solstice must have coincided in those days with the beginning of Dhaniṣṭhâ as described in the Vedâṅga Jyotiṣa and other works.

c7.15

There is thus sufficient independent evidence to show that before the Hindus began to make their measurements from the vernal equinox in Revatî there existed a system in which the year commenced with the winter solstice in the month of Mâgha and the vernal equinox was in the last quarter of Bharaṇî or the beginning of the Kṛittikâs.† We need not, therefore, have any doubts about the authenticity of a work which describes this older system and gives rules of preparing a calendar accordingly. Now this is what the Vedâṅga Jyotiṣa has done. It is a small treatise on the Vedic calendar, and though some of its verses still remain unintelligible, yet we now know enough of the work to ascertain the nature of the calculations given therein. It was once supposed that the treatise mentions the Râṣhis,

c7.16

† Prof. Max Müller has pointed out that in the Atharva Veda i. 19. 7 and in the Yâjnavalkya Smṛiti i. 267, the Krittikas occupy their early position, while the Viṣhṇu Purâṇa actually places the vernal equinox in the Kṛittikas. See Pref. to Rig., Vol. IV., p. xxxi.

c7.17

* Mah. Anu. 167, 26 and 28 :—

c7.18

परिवृत्तो हि भगवान्सहस्रांशुर्दिवाकरः ॥२६॥
माघोऽयं समनुप्राप्तः मासः सौम्यो युधिष्ठिर ।
त्रिभागशेषः पक्षोऽयं शुक्लो भवितुमर्हति ॥२८॥

c7.19

Lele, Modak, Ketkar and other Hindu astronomers have recently tried to determine the date of the Mahâbhârata war from such references, and they hold that the vernal equinox was then in the Krittikas.

c7.20

but a further study of the work has shown that though the word *Râshi* occurs in some of its verses, it is there used in a totally different sense. This work gives the following positions of the solstices and the equinoxes :—*

c7.21

1. The winter solstice in the beginning of Shravishthâ, (divisional) ;
2. The vernal equinox in 10° of Bharanî ;
3. The summer solstice in the middle of Âshleshâ, and—
4. The autumnal equinox in 3 20' of Vishâkhâ.

c7.22

The first year of the cycle commenced with the winter solstice* when the sun and the moon were together at the beginning of Dhanishthâ and the Uttarâyana also began at the same time. There is very little else in the Vedânga Jyotisha that may help us in our present inquiry except the fact that the enumeration of the deities presiding over the various Nakshatras begins with Agni, the presiding deity of the Krittikâs†. From these data astronomers have calculated that the solstitial colure occupied the position above mentioned between 1269 B. C. to 1181 B. C., according as we take the mean rate of the precession of the equinoxes 50" or 48"·6 a year.‡

c7.23

Some scholars, however, have boldly raised the question, what authority is there to hold that the position of the solstitial colure was recorded in the Vedânga Jyotisha from actual observation? It is conceded that the position of the solstitial colure might have been incorporated in the Jyotiṣha from real traditional information, but it is at the same itme contended that the language of the treatise and the methods given therein create doubts about the antiquity claimed for the work on the strength of the position of the solstitial points given therein. "I feel bound to remark," says Prof. Max Müller, "that unless there was internal evidence that the Vedic hymns reached back to that remote antiquity this passage in the Jyotiṣha would by itself carry no weight whatever¹." The existence of the different versions of the Vedāṅga Jyotiṣha and the obscurity into which some of its verses are still shrouded render it rather difficult to meet the above objection, especially as it is a side attack on the antiquity of the work with an admission that the position of the colure might have been recorded in the work from real traditions current in the time of its author. It is, however, needless to answer this objection, inasmuch as there is ample confirmatory evidence in the Vedic works themselves which not only bears out the statement in the Vedāṅga Jyotiṣha, but takes us back into still remoter antiquity.

c7.24

∗ See Ved. Jy. Verse 5.— प्रपद्येते श्रविष्ठादौ सूर्याचंद्रमसावुदक् । सार्पार्धे दक्षिणार्कस्तु माघश्रावणयोः सदा ॥ † Cf. Ved. Jy. Verse 25. अग्निः प्रजापतिः सोमो &c., ‡ See the late Krishnashastri Godbole's Essay on the Antiquity of the Vedas., p. 18 ; also Pref. to Rig., Vol. IV., p. xxviii.

c7.25

¹ See Pref. to Rig., Vol. IV., p. xxv. The mention of जौ for भध्युजै, first in the list of symbolic representations of the Nakṣhatras in verse 14, lends some support to these doubts.

c7.26

There are many passages in the Taittirīya Saṃhitā, the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa and other works where the Kṛittikās occupy the first place in the list of the Nakṣhatras.² In the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa (i. 1, 2, 1) it is distinctly stated “ one should consecrate the (sacred) fire in the Krittikâs ; ......the Krittikâs are the mouth of the Nakshatras.”* This shows that the first place given to the Krittikâs in the list of the Nakshatras is not accidental and that we must at least suppose that the Krittikâs were the “ mouth of the Nakshatras,” in the same way as Vasanta or spring was the “ mouth of the seasons”† or the Phâlguni full moon the “ mouth of the year.”‡ The phrase is the same in all places and naturally enough it must be similarly interpreted. But granting that the Krittikâs were the mouth of the Nakshatras in the sense that their list always commenced with them, it may be asked what position we are to assign to the Krittikâs in the course of the year. There were, as I have previously shown, two beginnings of the year, the winter solstice and the vernal equinox ; which of these two corresponded with the Krittikâs ? Or, are they to be supposed to have coincided with a point altogether different from these two ? A little consideration will show that it is not difficult to answer these questions satisfactorily. The present distance between the Krittikâs and the summer solstice is more then 30°, and if they ever coincided with the summer solstice it must have been long ago in the present cycle of the precession of the equinoxes. We cannot therefore interpret the above passage so as to place the summer solstice in the Krittikâs, unless we are prepared to take back the composition of the Taittiriya Sanhitâ to about 22,000 B. C, and further suppose that all evidence of the intermediate astronomical observations is entirely lost, and the same thing may be said against placing the Krittikās in the autumnal equinox.* Both the suggestions in my opinion are too extravagant to deserve any consideration. Nor can we assign the beginning of the Nakshatras to any random point in the ecliptic. There thus remain two possible explanations : viz., that the Krittikās coincided either with the winter solstice, or with the vernal equinox. Now, considering the fact that the vernal equinox is placed in the last quarter of Bharani in the Vedānga Jyotisha it is more natural to presume that the vernal equinox coincided with the Krittikās at the time when the Taittirīya Sanhitā was compiled. But we need not depend upon probabilities like these, when there are other passages in the Taittirīya Sanhitā and Brāhmaṇa which serve to clearly define the position of the Krittikās in those days.

c7.27

² These together with the list, wiil be found in Pref. to Rig., Vol IV., p. xxxiv. Cf. Taitt, San. iv., 4. 10; Taitt Br. iii, 1. 1. 6 and i. 5, 1. 2.

c7.28

∗ कृतिकास्वग्निमादधीत । ...... । मुखं वा एतन्नक्षत्राणां । यत्कृत्तिकाः ।। † Taitt. Br. i. 1. 2. 6 मुखं वा एतदृतूनां यद्वसंतः । ‡ Taitt. San. vii. 4. 8 quoted *infra*.

c7.29

In the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa (i. 5, 2, 7) it is stated that "the Nakshatras are the houses of gods . . . . the Nakshatras of the Devas begin with the Krittikās and end with Vishākhā, whereas the Nakshatras of Yama begin with the Anurādhās and end with the Apa-Bharanīs."† Prof. Max Müller appears to think that the latter group is called the Nakshatras of Yama because Yama presides over the last of them.‡ But the explanation appears to me to be quite unsatisfactory ; for on the same principle the first group should have been called the Nakshatras of Indrāgnī, the presiding deities of Vishâkhâ, the last in that group. I am, therefore, disposed to think that the principle of division in this case is the same as that followed in the case of the Devayâna and the Pitriyâna discussed before. We have the express authority of the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa stating that the sun was to be considered as moving amongst and protecting the Devas, when he turned to the north, in the three seasons of spring, summer and rains. In other words the hemisphere to the north of the equator was supposed to be consecrated to the Devas and the southern one to the Pitṛis. Now, the sun moved amongst the Devas when he was in the northern hemisphere. The Devas, therefore, must have their abode in that hemisphere, and as the Nakshatras are said to be the houses of the Devas, all the Nakshatras in the northern hemisphere, from the vernal to the autumnal equinox, would naturally be called the Nakshatras of the Devas. Now the southern hemisphere was assigned to the Pitṛis; but I have already quoted a passage from the Rigveda which states that it was the path of the god of death. In Rig. x. 14, 1, Yama is spoken of as the king of Pitṛis, and in verse 7 of the same hymn the deceased is told to go to the pitṛi-loka, where he would meet the god Yama. In the Vâjasaneyi Sanhitâ 19, 45, salutation is made to the world of Pitṛis in the kingdom of Yama. There are many other passages of similar import in the Sanhitâs,[*] and from all these it would be quite clear that the Pitriyâna or Pitṛi-loka was also called the kingdom of Yama. The Nakshatras in the southern hemisphere, therefore, came to be designated as the Nakshatras of Yama in opposition to the Nakshatras of the Devas, thus dividing the whole circle of stars in two equal groups. This also explains why Yama is made to preside over the Apa-Bharaṇîs. It was at the Apa-Bharaṇîs that the zodiac was divided, the Kṛittikâs going over into the Devas' and the Apa-Bharaṇîs turning down into the Yama's portion of the celestial hemisphere.* The Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa further states that the Nakshatras of the Devas move towards the south while the Nakshatras of Yama move towards the north. The words *dakshiṇa* (south) and *uttara* (north) are in the instrumental case, and doubts have been entertained as to their exact meaning. But if we accept the statement in the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa about the abode of the Devas, no other meaning is posible except that the Nakshatras of the Devas were counted from the vernal to the autumnal equinox, that is, to the point where the south (southern hemisphere) begins, and conversely in case of the Nakshatras of Yama. I may here mention that the movements of both the groups are described in the Brâhmaṇa in the present tense (*pari-yanti*), and that we may, therefore, suppose them to be recorded from actual observation. If this explanation of the division of the Nakshatras into the Nakshatras of gods and those of Yama is correct—and I think it is—it at once fixes the position of the Kṛittikâs at the beginning of the Devayâna or the vernal equinox at the time when these Vedic works were compiled.

c7.30

∗ A similar mistake is committed by the late Krishna Shāstri Godbole, in his essay on the antiquity of the Vedas, where he supposes Mrigashiras to be in the autumnal equinox. p. 20, 21.

c7.31

† देवगृहा वै नक्षत्राणि । . . . . । कृत्तिकाः प्रथमं । विशाखे उत्तमं । तानि देवनक्षत्राणि । अनुराधाः प्रथमं । अपभरणीरुत्तमं । तानि यमनक्षत्राणि । यानि देवनक्षत्राणि तानि दक्षिणेन परियंति । यानि यमनक्षत्राणि तान्युत्तरेण ।

c7.32

‡ Prep. to Rig. Vol. IV. p. xxxi.

c7.33

∗ Cf. Taitt. San. vii. 3, 14. यमेन पितृन् राज्ञा मनुष्यान् (scil.) अन्वभवत्। Also see Athar. Ved. xviii. 4.

c7.34

∗ May not Apa-Bharaṇîs have been so named from this circumstance? Bharaṇî appears to be an older name, changed afterwards into Apa-Bharaṇî, in the same manner, Mûla into Mûla-barhaṇî, and Jyeshṭhâ into Jyeshṭhaghni. Perhaps the description of Apa-Bharaṇî in Taitt, Br i. 5, 1, may be so understood. It says :—

c7.35

यमस्यापभरणीः । अपकर्षतः परस्तात् । अपवहंतोऽवस्तात् ।

c7.36

There is another and still more important passage in the Taittirîya Sanhitâ which supplies further confirmatory evidence on the same point. In the Taittirîya Sanhitâ vii. 4, 8 we have a discussion as to the time best suited for the commencement of the Satras like the gavâm-ayana which last for one whole year and as the passage is important in various ways I shall give it here in the original :—

c7.37

संवत्सरं दीक्षिप्यमाणाएकाष्टकायां दीक्षरन्नेषा वै संवत्सरस्य पत्नी यदेकाष्टकैतस्यां वाएषएतां रात्रिं वसति साक्षादेव संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षंतार्त वाएते संवत्सरस्याभिदीक्षंते यएकाष्टकायां दीक्षंतैतनामानावृतु भवतौव्यस्तं वाएते संवत्सरस्याभिदीक्षंते यएकाष्टकायां दीक्षंतैतनामानावृतु भवतः फल्गुनीपूर्णमासे दीक्षरन्मुखं वाएतत् संवत्सरस्य यत्फल्गुनीपूर्णमासो मुखतएव संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षंते तस्यैकैव निर्या यत्साम्मध्ये विपूर्वान्संपद्यते चित्रापूर्णमासे दीक्षरन्मुखं वाएतत् संवत्सरस्य यच्चित्रापूर्णमासो मुखतएव संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षंते तस्य न काचन निर्या भवति चतुरहे पुरस्तात्पौर्णमास्यै दीक्षरन्तेषाभेकाष्टकायां क्रयः संपद्यते तेनैकाष्टकां न छंबदकुर्वंति तेषां पूर्वपक्षे सुत्या संपद्यते पूर्वपक्षं मासाअभिसंपद्यते ते पूर्वपक्ष ऽतिष्ठंति तानुत्तिष्ठतओषधयो वनस्पतयोऽनुत्तिष्ठंति तान्कल्याणी कीर्तिरनूत्तिष्ठत्यरासुरिमे यजमानाहति तदनुसर्वं राप्नुवति ।

c7.38

In the Tândya Brâhmana (v. 9) we have the same passage with a few additions and alterations, and as this has been quoted by the commentators I shall give it here for comparison :—

c7.39

एकाष्टकायां दीक्षरन् ॥ १ ॥
एषा वै संवत्सरस्य पत्नी यदेकाष्टकैतस्यां वाएतां रात्रिं वसति साक्षादेव तत्संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षंते ॥ २ ॥

c7.40

तस्य सा निर्या यदपोऽनभिनंदतोऽभ्यवयंति ॥ ३ ॥ विच्छिन्नं वाएते संवत्सरस्याभिदीक्षंते यएकाष्टकायां दीक्षंतेऽतनामानावृतू भवतः ॥ ४ ॥ आर्तं वाएते संवत्सरस्याभिदीक्षंते यैऽतनामानावृतू अभिदीक्षंते ॥ ५ ॥ तस्मादेकाष्टकायां न दीक्ष्यम् ॥ ६ ॥ फाल्गुने दीक्षेरन् ॥ ७ ॥ मुखं वाएतत्संवत्सरस्य यत्फाल्गुनो मुखतएव तत् संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षंते ॥ ८ ॥ तस्य सा निर्या यत्सम्मेघे विषुवान् संपद्यते ॥ ९ ॥ चित्रापूर्णमासे दीक्षेरन् ॥ १० ॥ चक्षुर्वाएतत् संवत्सरस्य यच्चित्रापूर्णमासो मुखतो वै चक्षुर्मुखतएव तत् संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षंते तस्य न निर्यास्ति ॥ ११ ॥ चतुरहे पुरस्तात् पौर्णमास्या दीक्षेरन् ॥ १२ ॥ तेपामेकाष्टकायां क्रयः संपद्यते तेनैकाष्टकां न संवत् कुर्वंति ॥ १३ ॥ तेषां पूर्वपक्षे सुत्या संपद्यते पूर्वपक्षे मासाः संतिष्ठमाना यंति पूर्वपक्षेऽत्तिष्ठंति तानुत्तिष्ठतः पशवः औषधयोऽनुत्तिष्ठति तान्कल्याणी वागभिवदत्यरात्सुरिमे सत्रिणहति राप्नुवंति ॥ १४ ॥

c7.41

The third *sūtra* in the above gives an additional reason for rejecting the Ekāṣṭakā; while in the fourth *sūtra* *vichhinnam* is substituted for *vyastam* of the Taittiriya Sanhitā. Another important change is, that the word *Phalguni-pūrṇamāsa* is paraphrased by *Phalguni* in the 8th *sūtra*, thus clearly showing that the former was then understood to mean the full-moon night. Both the passages are similar in other respects.

c7.42

Fortunately for us Sâyaṇâchârya is not our only guide in the interpretation of these important passages. It is probably the only passage (the two passages being similar I treat them as one) in the Vedas where the commencement of the annual *satra* is given and from the ritualistic point of view it has formed the subject of a learned discussion amongst the Mimânsakas. Jaimini in his Mimânsa-darshana Chap. vi. Sect. 5 has devoted an Adhikarana (10th) to the interpretation of this passage, and the subject has been thoroughly discussed by Shabara, Kumârila, Pârthasârathi, Khaṇḍadeva and other writers on Mimânsâ. We have thus a continuous tradition about the meaning of this passage current amongst the Indian divines—a tradition based not upon mere authority, but on the logically solid rules of exegetics propounded in the work of Jaimini. I shall first give a literal translation of the passage from the Taittirîya-Saṃhitâ and then discuss its interpretation as bearing on the present question.

c7.43

"Those who are about to consecrate themselves for the year (sacrifice) should do so on the Ekâṣṭakâ (day). The Ekâṣṭakâ is the wife of the year; and he [i. e., the year] lives in her [i. e., the Ekâṣṭaka] for that night. (Therefore they) practically sacrifice (by) beginning the year.* Those that sacrifice on the Ekâṣṭakâ, sacrifice to the distressed (period) of the year. It is the season (dual) whose name comes last. Those, that sacrifice on the Ekâṣṭakâ, sacrifice to the reversed* (period) of the year. It is the season (dual) whose name comes last. They should consecrate themselves for the sacrifice on the Phalgunî full moon. The Phalgunî full-moon is the mouth of the year. They sacrifice (by) beginning the year from the very mouth. It has only one fault, *viz.*, that the Viṣhûvân [*i.e.*, the equator or the central day] falls in the rains. They should consecrate themselves for the sacrifice on the Chitrâ full-moon. The Chitrâ full-moon is the mouth of the year. They sacrifice (by) beginning the year from the very mouth. It has no fault whatsoever. They should consecrate themselves for the sacrifice four days before the full-moon. Their *Krava* [*i.e.*, the purchase of soma] falls on the Ekâṣhṭakâ. Thereby they do not render the Ekâṣhṭakâ void [*i.e.*, of no consequence]. Their *Sutya* [*i.e.*, the extraction of soma juice] falls in the first [*i.e.*, the bright] half (of the month). Their months [*i.e.*, the monthly sacrifices] fall in the first half. They rise [*i.e.*, finish their sacrifice] in the first half. On their rising, herbs and plants rise after them. After them rises the good fame that these sacrifices have prospered. Thereon all prosper."

c7.44

∗ The Tâṇḍya Brâhmaṇa, (Sûtra 3 in the above passage) adds a third reason thus:—" They go to *avabhṛitha* [i. e., the final bath] not delighted with water." Shabara and other commentators on Jaimini have noticed this additional ground for rejecting the Ekâṣṭakâ.

c7.45

Here in the beginning we are told that the Ekâṣhṭakâ is the day to commence the *Satra*, which lasts for one year. But the word Ekâṣhṭakâ is used to denote the eighth day of the latter (dark) half of the four months of Hemanta and Shishira seasons,† and sometimes it means the eighth day of the dark half of each of the twelve months of the year.* The statement in the following sentences that this Ekāṣṭakā is liable to the objection of occurring in the cold or the last season does, however, at once narrow the field of our choice. It must be further borne in mind that the Ekāṣṭakā, here spoken of, is the wife of the year, and is contrasted with the Phalguni and Chitrā full-moons; while tradition in the time of Jaimini and Āpastamba interpreted it to mean the 8th day of the dark half of Māgha. All writers on Mimānsā therefore take this Ekāṣṭakā to mean the 8th day of the dark half of Māgha. As the Ekāṣṭakā is the wife of the yeart and as the god of the year is said to reside with her on that night, those that commence their sacrifice on that Ekāṣṭakā may practically be supposed to commence it at the beginning of the year which resides there. In other words the Ekāṣṭakā is thus a constructive beginning of the year, and therefore the yearly sacrifice may be commenced on that day. But the passage now proceeds to point out the objections to the commencing of the sacrifice on the Ekāṣṭakā day. The 8th day of Māgha falls during the distressed period of the year, that is, according to Shabara and other commentators the period when people are distressed by cold.* The word in the text is *ârta* which literally means ‘distressed,’ but Sâyaṇa takes it to denote the end or destruction of the year, implying thereby that the old year is then brought to an end and that the consecration for the yearly *satra*, which must be made before the beginning of the new year, or, in other words, not after the previous year is ended or destroyed, cannot be made at this time. Though Shabara and Sâyaṇa thus give different interpretations of *ârta*, practically both agree in holding that in those days the old year ended before the eighth day of the dark half of Mâgha; for Shabara distinctly states that the word “reversed” used further on means “reversed on account of the change of *ayana*.”† Sacrificing during the distressed period of the year is thus the first objection to commencing the *satra* on the Ekâṣṭakâ day. The second objection is that it is the last season, that is, though you may be said to sacrifice to the constructive *beginning* of the year, yet as far as the seasons are concerned you sacrifice in the *last* of them. The word for season, *ṛitu*, has been used in the text in the dual number and it might be urged that it denotes two seasons. A reference to the Taittirîya Sanhitâ iv. 4-11, 1. will, however, show that the word *ṛitu* is there used in dual, probably because each season comprises two months, ‡ just as “scissors” is used in plural in English.

c7.46

∗ According to the Tâṇḍya Brâhmaṇa "broken" or "destroyed." † Cf. Ashv. Gri. Sutra ii. 4, 1; हेमन्तशिशिरयोश्चतुर्णांमपरपक्षाणाम-इमाष्टकाः।

c7.47

∗ Cf. Tāndya Brāhmana x. 3, 11. द्वादशकाष्टकाः द्वादशामावास्याः। Sāyaṇa in his commentary on Tan. Br. v. 9, observes that Ekashtakā is there used in its secondary sense and quotes Apastamba Grihya Sutra (viii. 21, 10) thus:— या माध्या पौर्णमास्या उपरिष्टाष्टका तस्याष्टमी ज्येष्य संपद्यते। तामेकाष्टेत्याचक्षते। Thus both Jaimini and Apastamba considered Ekāṣṭakā to mean the 8th day of the dark half of Māgha.

c7.48

† Shabar on Jaimini vi. 5, 35, quotes Atharva Veda iii. 10, 12; and Sāyaṇa in his Comm. on Taitt. San vii. 4, 8, cites, Atharva Veda iii. 10, 12, and Taitt. San, iv. 3, 11, 3. But these texts simply state that the Ekāṣṭakā is the wife of the year, without defining the Ekāṣṭakā.

c7.49

∗ आर्तं यस्मिन्काले भवति स आर्तः कालः, शीतेन च आर्तं भवति। Shabara on Jaim. vi 5. 37. Sâyaṇa आर्तमभिविनाशमभिलक्ष्य दीक्षते।

c7.50

† अयनपरिवृत्तिर्येस्तशब्देनोच्यते। Shabara on Jaimini vi 5. 37. Sâyaṇa in his comm. on Taitt. San. says व्यस्तमभिविपर्यासभिलक्ष्य दीक्षते। आदौ हि दीक्षा कर्तव्या। अयं संवत्सरस्यांतः कालः।

c7.51

‡ मधुश्च माधवश्च वासंतिकावृतू। Upon this passage the author of Kâla-Mâdhava observes द्विवचनं ऋतवयवमासाभिप्रायम्। Cal. Ed., p.59

c7.52

A similar passage also occurs in the Vājasaneyi Saṃhitā (13-25) and Mahīdhara while commenting on it expressly states that the dual there has the meaning of the singular number.* The "last named seasons (dual)" therefore simply means "the last season." It must be here mentioned that according to the passage in the Tāṇḍya Brāhmaṇa, which Shabara appears to quote, the first objection is thus stated :—"not delighted with water they go to avabhṛtha [i. e., the final bath]." This is but an amplification of the objection on the ground of the "last season" and Khaṇḍadeva expressly says that water is then undelightful "on account of cold." The Tāṇḍya Brāhmaṇa does not omit the objection of the "last season;" but simply expands and illustrates the same by referring to the natural dislike for a cold bath in that season. We may, therefore, regard this objection more as explaining the first than as an additional one. We now come to the third objection, viz., those that commence the sacrifice on the Ekāṣṭakā day sacrifice to the reversed period of the year. 'Reversed', vyasta in the original, is said by Shabara to indicate the change of ayana caused by the turning away of the sun from the winter solstice,† and Sāyaṇa seems to understand it in the same way. Thus although those that commence the satra on the 8th day of the dark half of Māgha may be supposed to do so practically at the beginning of the year, the husband of the Ekāṣṭakā, yet the procedure is triply objectionable, inasmuch as they sacrifice in the cold season, in the last of seasons (when water is undelightful) and when the year is reversed or upset by the turning away of the sun from the winter solstice.

c7.53

∗ द्विवचनमेकवचनार्थम् । † See Shabara quoted in the second note on the last page.

c7.54

To get over this threefold objection an alternative is next proposed. The Phalguni full-moon day was known to be the first day of the year. If you commence your sacrifice on that day, you avoid the three objections previously noted and still secure your object of sacrificing at the beginning or the mouth of the year. But even this course is not faultless; because if you commence on the Phalguni full-moon the middle or the central day of the *satra* falls in the rainy season, which again is not a desirable time. The first twelve days of a *satra* are taken up in the consecration and twelve more in *upasads* after which the regular *satra* sacrifices commence. So the middle day of the *satra* falls after six months and twenty-four days from the Phalguni full-moon, that is, on the ninth of the bright half of the month of Âshvina* Now if we suppose the winter solstice or the beginning of the cold season to fall on the Mâgha full-moon, the summer solstice, or the end of the summer and the beginning of the rainy season, would fall a little after the full-moon in Shrâvana. The months of Bhâdrapada and Âshvina therefore represented the rainy season in those days, and the occurrence of the Viṣhuvân in Âshvina or the rainy season was not believed to be auspicious. As the next alternative it is, therefore, suggested that the consecration should take place on the Chitrâ full-moon, and this course is said to be open to no objection whatsoever.

c7.55

But even this is given up for a still better time, and it is finally stated that persons desirous of consecrating themselves for the *satra* should do so "four days *before* the full moon." The full-moon here mentioned is not, however, specifically defined, and consequently it forms the subject of one of the Jaimini's Adhikaraṇas.* As no specific full-moon is mentioned it may mean either *any* full-moon-day, or the Chitrâ full-moon which is mentioned next before in the same passage, or it may refer to the Mâgha full-moon as the Ekâṣṭakâ is mentioned immediately afterwards in connection with it. Jaimini decides that it is the full-moon in the month of Mâgha, for it is stated immediately after, that those who commence the sacrifice on this full-moon will purchase their Soma on the Ekâṣṭakâ. This Ekâṣṭakâ can evidently be no other than the one mentioned in the beginning of the passage, and the object of the arrangement last suggested is to utilise somehow or other the important day of the Ekâṣṭakâ, which was at first recommended for the commencement of the sacrifice itself, but which had to be given up on account of the three-fold objection stated above. The full-moon must, therefore, be the one next preceding this Ekâṣṭakâ. Again the full-moon day is said to be such that when the sacrifice is finished the herbs and the plants spring up, which, as remarked by Shabara, can happen only in the Vasanta season.

c7.56

∗ This, in substance, is Sâyaṇa's explanation in his commentary on this passage.

c7.57

∗ Jaimini vi. 5, 30-37. Jaimini's Sûtras which I have here tried to translate and explain are as follows:—1. पौर्णमास्यामनियमोडविशेषात्; 2. आनंतर्यात्तु चैत्री स्यात्; 3. माघी वैकाष्टका श्रुतेः; 4. अन्याऽपीति चेत्; 5 न भक्तिस्त्वादेषा हि लोके; 6. दीक्षापराधे चानुमहात्; 7. उत्थाने चानुमरोहात्; 8. अस्यां च सर्विलंगानि. Sâyaṇa in his Jaimini nyâya mâla vistâra and in his comm. on the Taitt. San. fully adopts this view. But in his comm. on the Tâṇḍya Brâhmaṇa, v 9. 12 (Cal. Ed.) he is represented as saying that the full moon last mentioned refers to the Chaitrî! Some one, either the scribe the printer, or the publisher, has here obviously committed an error.

c7.58

To sum up; the last mentioned full-moon, though not specifically defined, must be prior to the Vasanta season and also the next previous to the Ekâshṭakâ, which is the wife of the year and which falls in the cold season, in the last season, *i e.*, Shishira [or when water is not delightful] and after the sun has passed through the winter solstice. It must also be remembered that the Phalgunî and the Chitrâ full-moon are to be excluded. Jaimini, therefore, concludes that this full-moon cannot be any other than the one falling in the month of Mâgha, and his conclusion has been adopted by all the Mimâmsakas. We can now understand why Laugâkshi, quoted by Somâkara, states that " they sacrifice to the year four days before the full-moon in Mâgha."*

c7.59

If Jaimini's interpretation of this passage is correct, we may, so far as our present inquiry is concerned, deduce the following conclusions from it :—(1) That in the days of the Taittiriya Sanhita the winter solstice occurred before the eighth day of the dark half of Mâgha, which again was a month of the cold season. Whether the solstitial day fell on the Mâgha full-moon is not so certain, though it may be taken as fairly implied. For the Ekâshṭakâ was abandoned because it occurred in the " reversed " period of the year, and it is quite natural to suppose that the priests in choosing a second day would try to remove as many of the objections to the Ekâshṭakâ as they could. In other words, they would not select a day in the " reversed " period of the year, nor one in the last season. The fact that a day before the full-moon in Mâgha was selected is, therefore, a clear indication of the solstice occurring on that day, while their anxiety to utilise the Ekāṣṭaka fully accounts for the selection of the fourth in preference to any other day before the full-moon. I may also remark that throughout the whole passage the intention of sacrificing at the beginning (real, constructive, or traditional) of the year is quite clear. The full-moon-in Māgha must, therefore, have been one of such beginnings. (2) That the year then commenced with the winter solstice. (3) That as there cannot be three real beginnings of the year at an interval of one month each, the passage must be understood as recording a tradition about the Chitrā full moon and the Phalgunī full-moon being once considered as the first days of the year. (4) That Viṣuvān had lost its primary meaning and that it fell in the rainy season if the sacrifice was commenced on the Phalgunī full-moon.

c7.60

∗ माघ्याः पौर्णमास्याश्चतुरहः पुरस्तात्सवत्सराय दीक्षते ।

c7.61

The passage thus supplies not only confirmatory, but direct evidence of the coincidence of the Kṛttikās with the vernal equinox in the days of the Taittirīya Sanhitā For, if the winter solstice fell on the full-moon day in Māgha, then the summer solstice, where the moon must then be, must coincide with the asterism of Maghā, and counting seven Nakshatras backwards we get the vernal equinox in the Kṛttikās. Independently of the Vedānga Jyotisha we thus have four different statements in the Taittirīya Sanhitā and Brāhmaṇa clearly showing that the vernal equinox was then in the Kṛttikās: firstly, the lists of the Nakshatras and their presiding deities, given in the Taittirīya Sanhitā and Brāhmaṇa, all beginning with the Kṛttikās; secondly, an express statement in the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa, that the Kṛttikās are the mouth of the Nakshatras; thirdly, a statement that the Kṛttikās are the first of the Deva Nakshatras, that is, as I have shown before, the Nakshatras in the northern hemisphere above the vernal equinox; and *fourthly*, the passage in the Taittirîya Sanhitâ above discussed, which expressly states that the winter solstice fell in the month of Mâgha. The vernal equinox is referred to the Krittikâs directly or indirectly in all these passages and I do not think that any more confirmatory evidence from the Vedic works is required to establish the proposition that the Krittikâs coincided with the vernal equinox, when the Taittirîya Sanhitâ was compiled. As an additional proof I may, however, mention the fact, that Pitris are said to be the presiding deities of Mâgha in the Taittirîya Sanhitâ iv. 10. 1. With the Krittikâs in the vernal equinox Mâgha is the summer solstice and as the Dakshinâyana or the *ayana* of the Pitris commenced at this point, the asterism which happened to be there at that time was naturally assigned to the Pitris. The position for all the other cardinal points of the ecliptic can be thus shown to be consistent with the position of the vernal equinox in the Krittikâs.

c7.62

Supposing the Krittikâs to denote the asterism of that name this gives us, according to Prof. Whitney's* calculation, 2350 B. C. as the probable time for the compilation of the Taittirîya Sanhitâ. Some scholars unwilling to carry the antiquity of the work to such a remote period, have urged, without assigning any special reason, that by Krittikâs we must here understand the beginning of the zodiacal portion of that name. Now as the position of the asterism of the Krittikâs in its zodiacal portion is 10° 50' from the beginning,† these scholars would place the vernal equinox about 11° behind the asterism of the Krittikas and thus reduce the antiquity of the Sanhita nearly by 11 x 72 = 792 years or to about 1426 B. C.* I have briefly stated before my reasons for discarding this supposition and holding that the names of the Nakshatras in the early Vedic days must be taken to denote the asterisms known by such names. If Indian priests are to be supposed incapable of making any accurate observations of solstitial points in 1200 B. C., † it is to my mind utterly inconsistent and illogical to hold that the forefathers of these priests, when they assigned the vernal equinox to the Krittikas, understood the word to mean not the asterism but the imaginary beginning of the zodiacal portion of that name. I cannot also understand why scholars should hesitate to assign the Vedic works to the same period of antiquity which they allow to the Chinese and the Egyptians. ‡ But it is needless here to enter into this controversy. For if I once succeed in showing, as I hope to do, that there is sufficient internal evidence in the Vedic literature itself of a still remoter antiquity, all theories, conjectures, and guesses, which have the effect of unduly reducing the antiquity of the Vedic works and also of throwing discredit upon the claims of the Indians to the origin of the Nakshatra system, will require no refutation.

c7.63

∗ See Sûrya Siddhânta Add. notes, p. 323.

c7.64

† This is the position given in the Sûrya Siddhânta viii. 29. See the table prepared by Prof. Whitney in his notes to this passage

c7.65

∗ This is Bentley's date about which see *infra*. † See Pref. to Rig., vol IV., p. xxix. ‡ M. Biot allows it in the case of the Chinese and consider that the Hindus borrowed the Nakshatra system from them Albiruni, in his chronology of ancient nations, &c., observes that other nations begin their asterisms with the Pleiades. He further states that he has found in some books of Hermes that the vernal equinox coincides with the rising of the Pleiades, but, says he "God knows best what they intend !"

c7.66

Bentley, however, takes his stand on a different ground. He suggests that the word *Vishâkhâ*, like *Vidala*,* may mean "possessed of two branches," and that these two branches may have been caused by the equinoctial colure bisecting the zodiacal portion of the Vishâkhâs. Now the equinoctial colure passing through the beginning of the divisional Krittikâs naturally bisects the zodiacal portion of Vishâkhâ. Bentley, therefore, concludes, without any more proof than this etymological conjecture, that this was the position of the colure when Vishâkhâ received its name. This is no doubt an ingenious hypothesis. But there is not only no evidence in the Vedic works to support such etymological speculation, but it may be easily shown to be inconsistent with the position of the winter solstice in the day of the Taittirîya Sanhitâ.

c7.67

I have already stated that from the passage of the Taittirîya Sanhitâ just quoted we may fairly infer that the winter solstice occurred in those days on the full moon in Mâgha According to the Vedânga Jyotisha it fell a fortnight earlier, that is, on the first day of the bright half of Mâgha. It is roughly estimated that the equinox must recede about two divisional Nakshatras, *i.e.*, 26° 40', to make the seasons fall back by one month. Between the times of the Taittirîya Sanhitâ and the Vedânga Jyotisha the equinox must accordingly recede 13° 20' or nearly 14°. Now the position of the equinox as given in the Vedânga Jyotisha is 10° of Bharanî. From this to the beginning of the *divisional* Krittikâs, the distance is only 3° 20', while if we measure it from the *asterism* of Krittikâ it is 3° 20' + 10° 50' = 14° 10'. Therefore during the period that lapsed between the Taittirîya Sanhitâ and the Vedânga Jyotisha the equinox, according to Bentley, receded only 3° 20' ; while if we understand the Krittikâs to denote the asterism of that name, it gives us a precession of 14° 10'. Now as the winter solstice fell a fortnight later in the days of the Sanhitâ we must accept the latter precession of 10°, which alone corresponds with that interval of time (i. e. a fortnight) and assume that the vernal equinox then coincided with the asterism of Krittikâ, a conclusion the probability of which has already been established on other grounds. Bentley's speculation must, therefore, be rejected, unless we are prepared to allow his guess about the primary meaning of Vishâkhâ to prevail against reasonable conclusions based upon a passage from the Taittirîya Sanhitâ.

c7.68

∗ This example has been added by Prof. Max Müller. See Pref. to Rig., Vol. IV., p. xxx. See also Bentley's Historical view of Hindu Astronomy, p. 2.

c7.69

But even admitting Bentley's speculation about the meaning of Vishâkhâ, we may fairly question the soundness of the conclusion drawn therefrom. For what ground is there for holding that the two divisions of Vishâkhâ must be mathematically equal in every respect? The word dala in vidala may be so understood; but dala and shâkhâ are not similar in this respect. Bentley's error, therefore, consists not in supposing that the colure may have cut the divisional Vishâkhâs, but in inferring therefrom that it must have bisected it. The whole ecliptic was divided into 27 Nakshatras, and 13½ could only be comprised in each hemisphere. Vishâkhâ, the 14th Nakshatra from the Krittikâs, may have been thus considered, by simply counting the number of the Nakshatras, as lying partly in the region of the Devas and partly in that of the Pitris.¹

c7.70

¹ This is enough to satisfy a merely etymological speculation unsupported by any other evidence whatsoever. Speaking more

c7.71

For though we might hold that the Vedic observers were not provided with means to fix imaginary points in the heavens and to refer to these points the motions of the heavenly bodies as astronomers do at present, yet it does not imply that they were unaware of the approximate distances between the various asterisms selected by them. In other words, they might be supposed to have roughly known the distances between the stars, though for obvious reasons they could not but refer the motions of the heavenly bodies only to the fixed stars. Thus understood, Bentley's conjecture about the primary meaning of Vishâkhâ does not necessarily imply that the equinoctial colure bisected the divisional Vishâkhâs in those days; and when the conjecture itself does not thus support his theory about the position of the colure, I do not think we shall be justified in accepting it, especially when it is shown that it is also objectionable on other grounds. I am, therefore, disposed to fix the date of the Taittirîya Sanhitâ at 2350 B. C., and not 1426 B. C. as Bentley has done.

c7.72

accurately if the vernal equinox coincided with the asterism of the Krittikâs, the equinoctial colure falls out of the divisional Vishâkas by 40, but it is nearly 60 behind the asterism of Anurâdhâ. Of these two asterisms Vishâkhâ would therefore be nearer to the colure. But we might as well ask what ground there is for holding that the Nakshatra divisions of the Zodiac, at the time when the vernal equinox was in the Krittikâs (supposing such divisions to have then existed), were the same as those which we now use and which commence with Revati. Bentley appears to have altogether overlooked this objection. I have already stated my view regarding the existence of the divisional Nakshatras in old times, and I would reject Bentley's etymological speculation on the mere ground that it requires us to assume the existence of such divisional Nakshatras and their bisection by colures.

c7.73

So far, we have been going over the ground more or less traversed before by several scholars. But it may be asked if we have here reached the *Ultima Thule* of the Vedic antiquity. Does the oldest hymn, the first utterance of the Aryan mind, reach back thus far and no further? Was it such a hymn that the Brahma-vâdins of old and Pânini several centuries before Christ believed and declared as "seen"? In what follows, I propose to bring together such evidence from the Vedic works as would enable us to deal with these questions. I have already drawn attention to the fact that the Chitrâ and the Phalgunî full-moon are mentioned as the mouths or the beginnings of the year in the passage from the Taittirîya Sanhitâ last quoted and discussed. In the next chapter I shall endeavour to show how these statements are to be interpreted, how far they are corroborated by other evidence and what conclusions we may deduce therefrom.

Linked texts (19)