Bharatiya Jyotihshastra (History of Indian Astronomy), translated by R. V. Vaidya v2.c15.s2.3

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.