Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Bharatiya Jyotihshastra (History of Indian Astronomy), translated by R. V. Vaidya v2.c12.s2.t17: Varāhamihira

Bhāratīya Jyotiḥśāstra (History of Indian Astronomy), translated by R. V. Vaidya v2.c12.s2.t17

Language
English

Varāhamihira

v2.c12.s2.t17.1

His Date

v2.c12.s2.t17.2

He was a famous astronomer, who compiled works on all the three branches of astronomy. Let us consider his probable date. He has nowhere mentioned his date explicitly. But he has already mentioned in his Karaṇa work named Pañcasiddhāntikā that he has adopted Śaka 427 as the starting year. He must have been at least 20 years old, if he had compiled the work then. It is impossible that such a work could have been written at an earlier age and from this we can take Śaka 407 as the approximate year of his birth. A line is often quoted in support of the date of his death. It runs as follows :—

v2.c12.s2.t17.3

नवाधिकपंचशतसंख्याके वराहमिहिराचार्यो दिवं गतः ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.4

which means that Varāhamihira passed away in Śaka 509. It is not known if this line was originally in prose or in metric form, if in metric form, it is extremely incorrect. According to some, this line is quoted by PṚTHŪSVĀMI, the commentator of Brahmagupta. The author has gone through the Pṛthūdaka-commentary of the first ten chapters of Brahmagupta's Siddhānta, but he has not come across this line in it. He has not read the commentary on Golādhyāya and other chapters following the first ten. He is unable to say, if the line is given in this commentary or in that of Khaṇḍakhādyaka. This Pṛthūdaka lived about the Śaka year 900. If the line was written by Pṛthūdaka himself, it must have been written 400 years after Varāha and hence it requires very careful scrutiny for its acceptance in the face of Śaka 427 given by Varāha himself.

v2.c12.s2.t17.5

According to Prof. Weber**, it is the statement of ĀMARGJA, the commentator of Brahmagupta that Varāhamihira died in Śaka 509. He has not given the original quotation, but it must pobably be the same as above. It is, thereefor,

v2.c12.s2.t17.6

*The apsides were assumed to be at the first point of Aries in the beginning of Kalpa. ** See footnote 293 in Weber's book.

v2.c12.s2.t17.7

doubtful if the line is the quotation of Pṛthūdaka or of Āmarāja. Weber has quoted another statement of Āmarāja that Śatānanda was born in Śaka 917. But the work, *Bhāsvatīkaraṇa* of Śatānanda has taken Śaka 1021 as the epochal year. There is no other well known Śatānanda. From this, Āmarāja’s statement about Śatānanda appears to be quite incorrect; and hence, if it is made by Āmarāja at all, it also deserves little or no consideration. The second point to be considered, is that Āmarāja’s statement carries little weight since he lived after Śaka 917, that is 4 or 5 centuries later than Varāhamihira. Considering the correctness or otherwise of our manuscripts, if the above quoted line be in prose, it leaves room for doubt, if it has come down to us in its exact form. It is, therefore, clear that it is better to accept Śaka 427 which is given in his own work and which leaves no room for any doubt according to planetary positions given in it, as more reliable than to say, after relying on such a quotation, that Varāhamihira died in Śaka 509. It is true that the Śaka year which is adopted by a Karaṇa work need not be the year in which the work was completed. Thus Keropant’s work has given examples for Śaka 1772, though it was printed in Śaka 1782. In the same way, Varāha’s work could have been completed after Śaka 427. Even then, the calculations concerning the work might have started in Śaka 427 or in about a year or two before or after it. Otherwise there seems to be no other reason for adopting Śaka 427 as the epochal year. If he was not born in Śaka 427, there was no possibility of adopting that Śaka. This shows that he was not born after Śaka 427; not only this but it is felt that he must have been at least 15 or 16 years old in that year, and he must have selected that year for solving examples; and that is why the year appears in the work. There is no other probable reason for its mention in it. The mean sun’s entry into Aries occurred nearabout the first lunar day of the light half of Caitra (i.e. amānta Vaiśākha) in Śaka 427; and he must have adopted the year Śaka 427, because it was convenient to calculate the mean positions of planets for the moment and to describe the method of calculating ahargaṇa from the 1st lunar day of the light half. It is just possible that the work might have been actually compiled even later. But even then, the mean sun’s entry into Aries apears to have occurred near about the first lunar day of the light half in Śaka 419 before Śaka 427 and in Śaka 438 before that year. The year 419 need not be considered at all and the figure 438 has not been adopted. This shows that the work was completed before Śaka 438. The Pañcasiddhāntikā mentions Āryabhaṭa’s name and his work was compiled in Śaka 421; hence, one may be led to raise the objection that there was hardly any possibility of Āryabhaṭa’s work having become so famous in a period of 6 years; but the objection is not worth much consideration. Varāha’s work could possibly have taken 4 or 5 years more after Śaka 427 for completion. It is, therefore, not quite impossible for the well known astronomer, devoted to the same work and residing in the famous city of Avanti, to have noticed Āryabhaṭa’s work or to have known his views. It appears for certain that in Śaka 427, Varāhamihira was old enough to be able to do calculations. If, therefore, it be supposed that he was 15 years old in Śaka 427, his year of birth comes to be Śaka 412 and if Śaka 509 be supposed to be the year of his death, his age at death comes to be 97 which is not an impossibility. The birth-year of Varāhamihira, then, from all considerations comes to be about Śaka 412. It is just possible that he adopted Śaka 427 as the starting year, because it was his year of birth. There is however, no doubt that his birth year is not later than Śaka 427.

v2.c12.s2.t17.8

The following verse from the work, *Jyotirvidābharaṇa*, shows that Varāhamihira was one of the nine gems at the court of Vikrama, *i.e.* near about the commencement of the Vikrama era :—

v2.c12.s2.t17.9

धन्वंतरिक्षपणकामरसિંહशंकुवेतालभट्टघटखर्परकालिदासाः ।।
ख्यातो वराहमिहिरो नृपतेः सभायां रत्नानि वै वररुचिनैव विक्रमस्य ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.10

The famous Varāhamihira was one of the nine gems at the court of KING VIKRAMA. These nine gems were ;—*Dhanvantari*, *Kṣapaṇaka*, *Amarasiṃha*, *Śaṅku*, *Vetālabhaṭṭa*, *Ghaṭakharpara*, *Kālidāsa*, *Varāhamihira* and *Vararuci*”.

v2.c12.s2.t17.11

It has been mentioned in this work that it was compiled by the famous poet Kālidāsa who composed the poems “Raghu”, “Kumāra”, etc. and the verse.

v2.c12.s2.t17.12

वर्षेः सिधुरदर्शनांबरगुणै ३०६८ यति कलौ संमिते मासे माधवसंज्ञिते च विदितो
ग्रंथक्रियोपक्रमः ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.13

This work was begun in Kali-elapsed year 3068, in the month name Mādhava.

v2.c12.s2.t17.14

It is stated in the verse that the work was commenced in 3068 elapsed from Kali, that is, in Vikrama Samvat 24. But it also describes the following method of finding ayanāṃśas for a particular year.

v2.c12.s2.t17.15

शाकः शरांबोधियुगो ४४५ नितो हृतो मानं खतकै ६० रयनांशकाः स्युः ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.16

Subtract 445 from the Śaka number (of the year concerned) and divide (the remainder) by 60, and the result would be the ayanāṃśa. Also, the first chapter contains the word मवा वराहमिहिरादिमनैः meaning, ‘as accepted by Varāha and others” and hence this work cannot be relied upon. If some other Varāhamihira had lived about the commencement of Vikrama era, as mentioned in this work, he must have been a different person from the compiler of the Pañcasiddhāntikā*

v2.c12.s2.t17.17

HIS LINEAGE, RESIDENCE, ETC.

v2.c12.s2.t17.18

Varāhimihira observes in Bṛhajjātaka,

v2.c12.s2.t17.19

आदित्यदासतनुयस्तदवाप्तबोधः कापित्थके सवितृलब्धप्रसादः ।।
आवंतिको मुनिमतान्ववलोक्य सम्यग्घोरां वराहमिहिरो रुचिरां चकार ।। ६ ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.20

उपसंहाराध्याय.

v2.c12.s2.t17.21

*The late Raghunāth Śāstri Tembhūkar, an astronomer of Poona, gave me a verse about the date of Varāhamihira, which he reported to me to have taken from the Kutūhala Mañjarī, belonging to Rājārāma Vyankaṭeś Śāstri of Bidar. The verse runs thus :—

v2.c12.s2.t17.22

स्वस्तिश्रीनृपसूर्यसूनुजशके याते द्विवेदांबरै ३०४२ मानाब्दमित त्वनेहसि जये वर्षे बसं-
तादिके ।। चैत्रे श्चेतदले शुभेसुतिथावादित्यदासभद्रेदांगे निपुणो वराहमिहिरो विप्रो
खैराशिभिः ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.23

(Meaning :—The Brāhmaṇa ‘Varāha’ son of Ādityadāsa and proficient in Vedāṅgas, was born with the blessings of the god Sun, on the 8th lunar day of the light half of Caitra, in the year named Jaya, in the Yudhiṣṭhira Śaka 3042). Varāhamihira, the author of Pañcasiddhāntikā also was “son of Ādityadāsa, who got him with the blessings of the god Sun’, But the year mentioned in this verse does not agree with calculation by any method whatsoever; hence, the verse is not reliable.

v2.c12.s2.t17.24

“Varāhamihira, who was the son of Ādityadāsa, from whom he obtained knowledge, who was blessed with the god Sun at Kāpitthaka and lived in Avantī, compiled this beautiful ‘horā’ work, after studying the views of sages”.

v2.c12.s2.t17.25

This shows that Ādityadāsa was the name of his father, from whom he mastered all knowledge. He received blessings from Sun at Kāpitthaka and was the resident of Ujjayinī. Kāpitthaka must be a place near Avantī, and he might have lived there for some time. That he was the devotee of Sun, is apparent from the prayers chiefly offered to Sun god in the benedictory verses he has given at the beginning of all his works. The following verse from the Pañcasiddhāntikā shows that his tutor in astronomy was a preson different from his father :—

v2.c12.s2.t17.26

दिनकरवसिष्टपूर्वान् विविधमुनीन् भावतः प्रणम्यादौ ।
जनकं गुरुं च शास्त्रे येनास्मिन् नः कृतो बोधः ।। १ ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.27

अध्या. १.

v2.c12.s2.t17.28

That he was the resident of Ujjayinī can be seen from 4 or 5 of his references made elsewhere.

v2.c12.s2.t17.29

FOREIGN TRAVEL.

v2.c12.s2.t17.30

Some people are found to believe that Bhāskarācārya went to Greece to learn ‘astronomy’. But, looking to his works and to those of his earlier writers, this belief appears to be quite baseless. The same remark is also made about Varāhamihira by some. But his works and Bhaṭotpala’s commentary on them show that works on all the subjects deat with by Varāhamihira in his works existed in plenty in our country before him and hence he had no reason to go to a foreign country.

v2.c12.s2.t17.31

HIS WORKS

v2.c12.s2.t17.32

He has compiled works on pilgrimage (travel), marriage, mathematics (Karaṇa), Horā (astrology), and Saṃhitā (Astronomy). His famous work on the Saṃhitā branch, known as Bṛhatsaṃhitā was compiled by him after all other works as can be seen from his own remark in the Bṛhatsaṃhitā.

v2.c12.s2.t17.33

वक्रानुवक्रस्तमयोदयास्तास्ताराग्रहाणां करणे मयोक्ताः ।
होरागतं विस्तरतश्च जन्म यात्राविवाहैः सह पूर्वमुक्तं ।। १० ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.34

अध्या १.

v2.c12.s2.t17.35

“I have treated in my Karaṇa work the questions of direct and retrograde motions, the rising and setting of planets and luminaries ; the work on Horā-branch which includes the description of birth in detail, has already been described along with the subjects on travel and marriage”.

v2.c12.s2.t17.36

The work on Horā-branch, alluded to by him, in the above verse, refers no doubt, to the Bṛhajjātaka. The following verse from the Bṛhajjātaka shows that the works on marriage and Karaṇa preceded the Bṛhajjātaka while that on travel (yātrā) followed it.

v2.c12.s2.t17.37

अध्यायानां विंशतिः पंचयुक्ता जन्मन्येतद्यात्रिकं चाभिवत्स्ये ।। ३ ।। ...विवाहकालः करणं ग्रहाणां प्रोक्तं पृथक् तद्विपुलं च शास्त्रम् ।। ६ ।। बृ. जा. उपसंहाराध्याय.

v2.c12.s2.t17.38

“The group of three (subjects) which I will describe along with the subject of birth, have been given in 25 chapters....the subject of marriage, and that of the calculation of planets, which are described independently, form ‘extensive branches”

v2.c12.s2.t17.39

The karaṇa work referred to in it is the Pañcasiddhāntikā itself. It does not refer to any other work compiled earlier. This consideration and the consideration of his age lead one to believe that the Pañcasiddhāntikā itself was Varāha’s first work. Utpala’s commentary on chapter 1, of the Bṛhatsaṃhitā, shows that his work on marriage was known as Bṛhadvivāhapaṭala. This work and his work on pilgrimage are not available at present. He has compiled a work named Laghujātaka on Horā branch in addition to his Bṛhajjātaka; he remarks in it,

v2.c12.s2.t17.40

होराशास्त्रं वृत्तमेया निबद्धं निरीक्ष्य शास्त्राणि ।। यतस्तस्याप्यार्येभिः सारमहं संप्रवक्ष्यामि ।। १ ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.41

“After studying the scientific works compiled on the subject of astrology (Horā), I describe their summary in Āryā metre.”

v2.c12.s2.t17.42

CIRCULATION OF WORKS

v2.c12.s2.t17.43

This shows that the Laghujātaka is the abridged edition of Bṛhajjātaka. From all considerations the order of his works seems to be as follows :—

v2.c12.s2.t17.44

Pañcasiddhāntikā, Vivāhapaṭala, Bṛhajjātaka, Laghujātaka, Yātrā, Bṛhatsaṃhitā. The Laghujātaka, in this, might have been probably compiled after Yātrā and Bṛhatsaṃhitā. The works, Bṛhajjātaka and Laghujātaka are very much in use amongst astrologers even to this day; and both of them have been printed at Bombay, Poona, Vārāṇasī and other places and might have been published in several places in different scripts. Dr. Kerne has published only the text of the Bṛhatsaṃhitā and its English translation in the 5th volume of the Royal Asiatic Society. The text of the Bṛhatsaṃhitā has been published in the Bibliotheca Indica at Calcutta. The Jaganmitra press of Ratnagiri has published the text of Bṛhatsaṃhitā along with its Marāṭhi translation.

v2.c12.s2.t17.45

COMMENTARY

v2.c12.s2.t17.46

Bhaṭotpala is the famous commentator of Varāha. The Bṛhatsaṃhitā and the Bṛhajjātaka being very useful works, have remained in use up to this day. Even then, it may also be said that Utpala’s commentary has specially been the cause of their popularity. Utpala, in his commentary on the Bṛhatsaṃhitā, in the discussion on ‘Nirājara vidhi’, remarks “commented in detail under the question of travel” which shows that Utpala has written a commentary on the work on pilgrimage. He wrote a commentary on the Laghujātaka also. Other works of Varāha do not appear to have been commented upon by Utpala. The date of Utpala’s commentary comes to about Śaka 888 i.e. about 400 years after Varāha. His remark " others hold this view " in the commentary on Rāhucāra and at other 2 or 3 places, show that there were other commentaries on the Bṛhatsaṃhitā before Utpala's time. The commentaries on the Bṛhajjātaka by Mahidāsa ard Mahidhara are in the Deccan College collection (See Nos. 341, 343 of 1882—83 A.D.).

v2.c12.s2.t17.47

DESCRIPTION OF HIS WORKS

v2.c12.s2.t17.48

A more detailed description of the Bṛhatsaṃhitā, the Bṛhajjātaka and the Laghujātaka will be given later on. A description of the Pañcasiddhāntikā, his works on mathematical-branch, has been given before in almost full details. The remaining points will be dealt with here.

v2.c12.s2.t17.49

A verse has already been given above which remarks, " I have described in the Karaṇa work the questions of retrograde and direct motions, setting and rising of plantets, etc." Later on he observes,

v2.c12.s2.t17.50

युद्धं यदा यथा वा भविष्यमादिश्यते त्रिकालज्ञैः ।। तद्विज्ञानं करणे मया कृतं

v2.c12.s2.t17.51

सूर्यसिद्धांतात् ।। बृ. सं. अ. १९.

v2.c12.s2.t17.52

" I have incorporated from the Sūrya Siddhānta in my Karaṇa work, the knowledge of predicting, like the seers of the three times (past, present and future) when and how war will take place."

v2.c12.s2.t17.53

And all these questions have been dealt with by him in the Pañcasiddhāntikā. This remark and other proofs also show that the Pañcasiddhāntikā itself was his Karaṇa work (i.e. a work on practical mathematics). Nowhere ir the book has he mentioned Pañcasiddhāntikā as its name.

v2.c12.s2.t17.54

अष्टादशभिर्ध्ववा ताराग्रहतत्रमेतदध्यायैः ।। भजते वराहमिहिरो ददाति निर्मत्सरः करणं ।। ६५ ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.55

पं. सि. अ. १८

v2.c12.s2.t17.56

" Free from jealousy Varāhamihira has given this excellent short treatise on the planets comprised in 18 āryās."

v2.c12.s2.t17.57

In this, he calls the work as a Karaṇa and a Tantra. He has, at one more place in the Pañcasiddhāntikā, called the work a Karaṇa or a 'Tantra'. Utpala has given the name of Pañcasiddhāntikā to the work. It has already been pointed out that he has translated the five Siddhāntas. He has recommended his own corrections to be applied to the mean positions of planets mentioned by the Sūrya Siddhānta.

v2.c12.s2.t17.58

क्षेप्याः शरेंदु १५ विकलाः प्रतिवर्षे मध्यमक्षितिजे । दश १० दश गुरोर्विशोध्याः शनैश्चरे सार्धसप्त ७।३० युताः ।। १० ।। पंचद्वया २५ विशोध्याः सिते बुधे खाश्चिश्चंद्र १२० युताः ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.59

" The following corrections should be applied to mean places of planets :— 15 seconds per year should be added to Mars ; 10 to be deducted from Jupiter ; 7½ to be added to Saturn ; 25 to be subtracted from Venus and 120 to be added to Mercury."

v2.c12.s2.t17.60

It has already been shown above that none of the Siddhāntas of the Pañcasiddhāntikā was compiled by Varāhamihira and these corrections prove the fact beyond doubt. Had the places and motions of planets giver in any one of them been calculated by him, there was no need of mentioning the corrections. It has been pointed out before that the elements given in Bhāsvatī karaṇa tally after these corrections are applied.

v2.c12.s2.t17.61

Varāhamihira has mentioned the mean places from different Siddhāntas. The explanation of eclipses is also given in different ways from different works.. However, the following verses from chapters 1 and 18 show that in mentioning them it was Varāha's intention to show that he has rectified in his work those items which the earlier authors of Tantras were unable to do.

v2.c12.s2.t17.62

पत्तत्परं रहस्यं भ्रमति मतिर्यत्र तंत्रकाराणां ।।
तदहमपहाय मत्सरमस्मिन् वक्ष्ये ग्रहं भानोः ।। ५ ।।
दिक्स्थितिविमर्दकर्णप्रमाणवेलाग्रहाग्रहाविंदोः ।।
ताराग्रहसंयोगं देशांतरसाधनं चास्मिन् ।। ६ ।।
सममंडलचंद्रोदय यंत्रलेखानि तांडबछाया ।।
उपकरणायक्षडयाबलंबकापक्रमाद्यानि ।। ७ ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.63

प्रद्युम्नो भूतनये जीवे सौरे च विजय्नंदी ।। ५६ ।।
भग्रावतः स्फुटमिदं करणं दृष्टं बराहमिहिरेण ।।

v2.c12.s2.t17.64

The above verses mean :—

v2.c12.s2.t17.65

(No. 5) “That subject which is the greatest mystery, which perplexes the minds of the writers of astronomical works, viz. the eclipse of the sun, I am going to explain in this work, dismissing all jealousy.”

v2.c12.s2.t17.66

(No. 6) “Moreover these are contained in this work, the (rules for the calculation of the) direction, the duration, the period of total obscurity, the hypotenuse, the time of the measures (i .e. beginning, middle and endlng of eclipses) of the eclipses or (eventual) non-eclipses of the moon, the conjunctions and obscurity of stars and planets, the means of finding the difference in longitude.”

v2.c12.s2.t17.67

(No. 7) “The prime vertical, the rising of the moon, the construction of astronomical instruments; the shadow of the gnomon ; other useful matters ; the sine of the terrestrial latitude; the sine of colatitude; the declination and other subjects.”

v2.c12.s2.t17.68

Similarly,

v2.c12.s2.t17.69

(No. 59) “This Karaṇa work has been accurately compiled by Varāhamihira, since Pradyumna broke down in his efforts (over the calculation) of Mars and Vijayanandī over that of Jupiter and Saturn.”

v2.c12.s2.t17.70

It, therefore, shows that he must have done something more than the original works included in the Pañcasiddhāntikā. The corrections to mean planets mentioned above is one of such items. There are no means to know what the other items were. It is not, however, possible that he might have made great changes in the original. It appears that he retained those things from the five Siddhāntas which, he thought showed an agreement with experience, and those general methods which were theoratically sound in his opinion and omitted the remaining matter. It seems also possible that he must have evolved his own methods concerning the questions of ‘deśāntara’ (difference in longitude) calculation of chāyā (shadow) ; grahaṇa (eclipses) and chedyaka (projections).

v2.c12.s2.t17.71

He at first compiled the Karaṇa work. But later on his Saṃhitā works show that his attention was drawn very much to astrology and various natural phenomena, properties of matter and their utility in everyday life. Brahamagupta has crticised earlier astronomers, but has nowhere criticised Varāhamihira.* Bhāskarācārya has praised him and has taken Varāhamihira’s quotations in support of his statements in a number of his works. There have been several authors who wrote on ‘astronomy’ as a branch of natural science, but it can be said that there has been no other astronomer after Varāhamihira who has himself treated several branches of natural science itself. It is a matter of pride to us that such a scholar lived in our country in such an ancient time. But while his works on astrology have been found very useful to this day, his works on Saṃhitā have neither been much studied nor been used to that extent. Had the studies of properties of matter continued on the same line without any break, the Europeans could not have surpassed us in this field. But it is misfortune of our country that the tradition was not continued.

Cites (15)