History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v6.c81.734

v6.c81.734

One question on which there is difference of view is about the tithi on which Navarātra is to be begun when pratipad is mixed with amāvāsyā or dvitīyā. There are very lengthy discussions in the Nirṇayasindhu, Kālatattvavivecana, Puruṣārtha-cintāmaṇi and other works. Some quote passages from the Devī and other purāṇas condemning the beginning of navarātra on pratipad mixed with amāvāsyā. Devī is made⁴⁷¹ to say 'in my worship pratipad which is joined to amāvāsyā should not be accepted; pratipad existing only for a muhūrta (two ghaṭikās) at sunrise and then joined to the 2nd tithi should be accepted (for commencing Navarātra festival)'. On the other hand there471a are texts like the following: if one were to accept for the (beginning of the) worship of Caṇḍikā pratipad joined to part of 2nd *tithi* through ignorance or through another's advice, that leads to the death of that person's son. The Samayamayūkha says that both classes of texts are baseless or if they are authoritative they leave the matter undecided as they are opposed to each other. The decision has to be arrived at in a different manner. 'If pratipad is mixed with amāvāsyā but does not exist the next day, then it must be accepted for starting Navarātra as there is no other alternative. Therefore, even a pratipad mixed with amāvāsyā has to be accepted in such a case in spite of texts to the contrary. If pratipad starts with sunrise and spreads over the next day for less than three muhūrtas, then the full pratipad has to be accepted for beginning navarātra. If at first there is amāvāsyā for one muhūrta, then pratipad follows and then spreads over the next day up to less than three muhūrtas, then this latter, that is, pratipad mixed with dvitīyā has to be accepted as the beginning. For want of space all possible alternatives are not dealt with here.