Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Bharatiya Jyotihshastra (History of Indian Astronomy), translated by R. V. Vaidya v2.c15.s2: Retrospect and Prospect

Bhāratīya Jyotiḥśāstra (History of Indian Astronomy), translated by R. V. Vaidya v2.c15.s2

Language
English

Retrospect and Prospect

v2.c15.s2.1

We have already seen the various phases through which our growing science of astronomy has passed. If works compiled before Varāha mihira and those in the intervening period between Brahmagupta and Rājamṛgāṅka would become accessible, we would know more of the history of the science. Research work in the Saṃhitā Branch came to a standstill very soon after Varāha. The mathematical branch was in a flourishing condition till about Śaka 1000. Bhāskarācārya’s treatises threw into the shade most of the previous works and from that time onwards the theory propounded in Bhāskara’s works came to be regarded as the alpha and omega of the knowledge of astronomy. As the divorce between planetary calculations and the realities of the heavens became more palpable in course of time, there appeared on the scene some annonymous bīja*-finder of the Sūrya Siddhānta, as also Keśava Daivajña and Gaṇeśa Daivajña, and they rectified the elements of the planets. They could not, however, revitalize the science and ensure its future growth. The corrections (bīja-saṃskāras) proved to be mere makeshifts of the moment in the absence of the tradition of recording observations, and these corrections were in certain respects not quite accurate. Another great drawback of such corrections was that they led to the general belief that the difference between the results of calculation and those of observation was due to a cumulative error traceable right back to the beginning of the Kaliyuga, and hence the corrections were so devised that the error which had really accumulated in a few years was spread over a very long period. Consequently the corrections could not remain valid for a long time, and in certain cases they proved useless from the very beginning. A glaring instance of this is that the year-length once handed down in the remote past was never corrected later, with the result that at present the correction of the year-length has become the toughest problem affecting the question of calendar reform. Even though Brahmagupta noticed that the equinox receded a day, he distributed the difference over a period of 3700 years according to the traditional belief, that all variations originated at the beginning of Kaliyuga, though in reality the difference was the result of the error accumulating since Āryabhaṭa's time, that is, a period of about 150 years. Otherwise, Brahmagupta himself could have introduced the measure of the tropical year; and once he had introduced it, calendar reform would not have been an uphill task as at present. Even the observations of Keśava and Gaṇeśa proved to be of little use. Had there been a record of past observations, it would have been of much use to them for comparing results. In short, although corrections were applied from time to time, they could rectify the planetary elements only for the time being.

v2.c15.s2.2

∗ It is not known who devised the bīja (correction) for the S. S.

v2.c15.s2.3

The superstitions that our ancient works are *apauruṣa* (divine) and perfect in every way, and the consequent feeling of reverence which even the *pauruṣa* (man-made) works of Āryabhaṭa and Brahmagupta inspired as if they were also of divine origin proved very detrimental to the growth of astronomical science. It engendered the belief that our duty was strictly confined to the occasional correction of elements whenever planetary calculations failed to accord with observation and that this too was not to be done independently but under the name of *bīja* applicable to the original work. It was due to this, coupled with the fact that protracted observations ceased for want of royal patronage, that no new discoveries were made in India as they were made in Europe. The cessation of royal patronage must have been also due in a large measure to the self-complacence of the astronomers who believed that, thanks to the older treatises, they were not duty bound to do anything more. Had the astronomers been alive to their duty, they could have secured royal support. Again, owing to Muslim domination most of the eminent princes of Southern India had vanished after Śaka 1300 and the same fate had befallen those of the North even earlier. The peace of the country was disturbed, and this also proved to be a great obstacle to the growth of the science. In spite of this, it is a matter for pride that in many a village like Nāndgaon in the Konkan, Pārthapura on the bank of the Godāvari and Golagrāma, and at the academy of Vārāṇasi, there arose among our people observers like Keśava and Gaṇeśa, theorists like Kamalākara, and designers of instruments like Padmanābha, each one ploughing a lonely furrow. When peace had hardly been restored under the rule of the Marathas and Peshwas, when the tradition of taking observations was just being revived by designers like Cintāmaṇi Diksit (P. 174) and when the knowledge of theory, almost lost, thanks partly to works like the *Grahalāghava* and partly to other reasons, was just being recovered by scholars like Yajñesvar, the commentator of the *Laghu Cintāmaṇi*, the rule of the Peshwas ended. The efforts made by such men as Jayasimha on a grand scale at Delhi, Ujjain and Jaipur apparently came to an abrupt end, because of political unrest. Since the advent of British rule, peace reigns supreme and learning is being fostered. But practically no facilities have been provided for the critical study of mathematical astronomy and other profound and interesting aspects of that science. On the contrary the printing press has proved to be a new menace to the growth of astronomy, for, the almanac-makers who were once to be found practically in every town are fast vanishing, being no longer in demand. In these circumstances who would care to study theory works like those of Bhāskarācārya? However, the mathematical branch has somehow managed to remain alive because the necessity of muhūrtas, and the ardent desire of the people to know the future in the light of astrological works persist even to-day and are bound to persist in future to the same degree as before, and the Joshis are compelled to do at least some planetary calculations. Natal astrology is in a fairly good condition, if not flourishing as vigorously as before, but that can hardly add to our credit.

v2.c15.s2.4

Copernicus compiled his work in Śaka 1465. Prior to this date European astronomy was practically in the same condition as astronomy in India. The great difference between the two, however, was that the European science was progressive while ours was stagnant. It was not very long before Copernicus, that Gaṇeśa Daivajña and his father Keśava Daivajña, both of them research-loving scholars, were flourishing in our country. But with the advent of Copernicus, European astronomy passed through such a tremendous change that while the science of the by-gone days was comparable to the newly grown sapling of the Banyan tree, the latter-day-science was the Banyan tree itself, towering in the full-grown majesty of centuries, yielding shade and shelter to thousands. Ours has merely clung to the status quo ante .*

v2.c15.s2.5

One of the important reasons why the science of astronomy has attained the highest degree of excellence in Europe to-day is navigation. This does not hold good in our country, still there are other reasons that necessitate the study of astronomy. The first of these is the need of compiling the almanac, which includes the needs of both Dharma śāstra and Muhūrta. Astrology is the second reason and curiosity the third. Some are of opinion that our old astronomy has become utterly worthless, that nothing would be amiss if the almanac is lost. But even a little enquiry will show them that none of the ancient nations put in as much effort as our ancient ancestors did in the sphere of astronomy, and that they could achieve much greater success in it than in any other empirical science like medicine. Again, if they give some thought to the state of things in the villages, they will come to know that 90 or even 95 per cent of the population do require the almanac. The educated modernist may choose to ignore the almanac, but that does not mean that the common man would follow suit. In fact our astronomy owes its origin to the necessity of the almanac which serves as the mirror of the heavens. The educated people, however, would be justified in demanding that the almanacs should be reformed and in wishing that our feeling of veneration towards astronomy should be directed to some more desirable channel. But they are not justified in repudiating the almanac itself or the sense of veneration which it inspires.

Linked texts (2)