History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v6.c82.157

v6.c82.157

[^732 a]: तस्मान्न नक्षत्रं आदधीत ।... रोसौ वैशाखस्यामावास्या तस्यामादधीत सा रोहिण्या सम्पद्यते । आत्मा वै प्रजा पशवो रोहिणी ।...शतपथ XI. 1 1 3 and 7 nal equinox was in Kṛttikā about 2300 B. C. Instead of admitting this as a probable date for the Vedic works, Fleet boldly asserts that the list of nakṣatras beginning with Kṛttikās has no basis in fact, but belongs entirely to ritual and astrology (*JRAS for 1916 p 570*). No detailed arguments are deemed necessary Fleet does not specify cogent evidence, nor does he assign reasons why priests later on changed the beginning of the list from Kṛttikā to Aśvinī, nor does he vouchsafe how the list of nakṣatras in the Vedic age began in fact for ordinary folk if the Kṛttikā list was a pure priestly invention Even Thibaut (in I A. vol. 24 at p. 100) had to admit that the beginning of the nakṣatra series with Kṛttikā instead of with Aśvinī seriously affects Max Muller's assignment of 1500 B. C. to 800 B C. to the Vedic period In the Tai. S VII 4 8 there is a discussion about the time for undergoing the dīkṣā in a Sāmvatsara-satra'.⁷³⁵ It is proposed there that the dīkṣā may be performed on the Full Moon in Phalgunī because that is the beginning of the year; then an objection is raised against this and it is proposed that the dīkṣā may be taken on Full Moon in Citrā, because that was the beginning of the year. If the year began with the winter solstice in those days this reference would have to be placed at 4000 or 6000 B. C. This passage probably embodies traditions that the year began in different months in different periods of antiquity.