History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v6.c81.428

v6.c81.428

In the Brahmavaivartapurāṇa quoted at great length by Hemādri on Kāla (pp. 255-259) four kinds of *vedhas* of ekādaśī by daśamī (viz. aruṇodaya-vedha, ativedha, mahāvedha and Yoga) are mentioned, but they are passed over here. In the case of Vaiṣṇavas, if daśamī extends on a civil day beyond 56 ghaṭikās from sunrise, then ekādaśī follows and continues for the whole of the next civil day, there is then what is called Aruṇodayavedha and Vaiṣṇavas cannot observe a fast on such an ekādaśī which is preceded by Aruṇodayavedha. The same result follows if daśamī extends up to 3, 2 or one ghaṭikā before sunrise or daśamī persists till the exact time when the sun rises and then ekādaśī starts (when there is what is called sūryodaya-vedha). A Vaiṣṇava in deciding on what tithi to fast is affected by both aruṇodayavedha and sūryodayavedha i. e. even if ekādaśī exists for full 60 ghaṭīs after sunrise on a civil day when daśamī precedes it by four ghaṭīs, or by three, two or one ghaṭī or when daśamī exists for one moment at sunrise and then ekādaśī follows at once, still the Vaiṣṇava cannot observe a fast on the ekādaśī of 60 ghaṭīs but only on the next i. e. the 12th. If dvādaśī touches three civil days, then the fast for Vaiṣṇavas is on the day which is wholly covered by dvādaśī and the pāraṇā is on the next day when dvādaśī ends. In any cases other than those specified above ekādaśī is the fast day and dvādaśī is the pāraṇā day. Nāradapurāṇa (pūrvārdha, chap 29 verse 45) prescribes that if there are two ekādaśīs, whether in the bright half or dark half, a householder should fast on the earlier of the two and ascetics (yatis) on the later. Sannyāsins and widows are governed by the rules for Vaisnavas Smārtas (all those who are not Vaisnavas) are not affected by the doctrine of aruṇodayavedha but only by sūryodayavedha i e. if there is daśamī before sunrise and an ekādaśī follows from sunrise, smārtas have to observe a fast on the ekādaśī. There are many texts that are apparently in conflict, but the Kālanirṇaya (pp 251-256) and Nirṇayasindhu (pp. 37-44) introduce order by showing that some texts refer to Vaisnavas alone, some to Smārtas alone and some to both. The Ekādaśītattva (p. 55) brings together many of the conclusions about the fast tithi and the pāraṇātithi.