Key point on 360d vs 365d years

[Guest guest]

Pranaam Sanjay,

 

During the last few days, I read some parts of Mahabharata for

collecting some data for astrological analysis of Mahabharata events.

I had no luck so far. If you tell me Achyuta Dasa's views on when Kali

Yuga started, it will help my research tremendously.

 

I came across something interesting in Virata Parva of Mahabharata.

 

When Arjuna comes out of his ajnaata vaasa (hiding) to fight Kaurava

armies and save King Virata's cows, Duryodhana rejoices that one year

ajnaata vaasa bet is broken and Pandavas have to go back to 12 years

of vana vaasa (stay in forests) and 1 year of ajnaata vaasa (hiding).

Then Bheeshma gives his opinion thus:

 

teshaam kaalaatirekena jyotishaam cha vyatikramaat |

panchame panchame varshe dwau maasaavupajaayatah || 47-3

teshaambhyadhikaa maasaah pancha dwaadasa cha kshapaah |

trayodasaanaam varshaanaamiti me vartate matih || 47-4

 

"It is true that time is formed by degrees & minutes, days,

fortnights, months and seasons. However, learned astrologers consider

the excess time that is built into this. Once in every 5 years, there

is an extra month. During the 13 years, there were 5 extra months and

12 extra days. Considering them, thirteen years have already passed.

Arjuna must've come out of the hiding only after recognizing this

fact. He did not break the bet."

 

Essentially, Duryodhana is insisting on 365.2425 day solar years and

arguing that 13 years are not over yet. And, Bheeshma is counselling

him that 360 tithis (not even 360 days) form one year. Though lunar

years (of tithis) are synchronized with solar years with the help of

adhika maasas (extra months) that come at the rate of 2 months per 5

years, Bheeshma is saying that astrologers consider a year to be 360

tithis. If a lunar year has 13 months, he is considering it to be 1

year PLUS 1 month. He is advising Duryodhana to accept the same

definition for years in their bet (of 12 years in forests and 1 year

in hiding), instead of insisting that a year means 365.2425 days and

so 13 years aren't over yet.

 

The above is a very clear point and a basis for the war. I cannot

imagine any corruption in it. Moreover, Bheeshma is a very learned

person and Vyasa who reported Mahabharata is the son of Pararsara.

Both of them knew astrology better than all of us. So this makes a

very very strong case for the use of 360-tithi years in astrology.

 

In fact, though I used 360 day years until sometime back, I insisted

that an even more correct way would be to use 360 tithis. Ever since I

coded 360-tithi years in JH, I've been using only that in all

nakshatra dasas! I sincerely believe that this is the correct

approach, partly based on experience, partly based on intuition and

NOW partly based on Bhishma's teaching.

 

I request you to kindly reconsider your views on this issue and

comment on Bheeshma's statement.

 

Your sishya,

Narasimha

 

PS: I noted this point 3 days back. It was an interesting coincidence

that the next day I received a copy of July 2001 EST, in which there

was an interview with K.K. Pathak. He also uses 360-tithi years and

made the same point that I had noted from Mahabharata!! So this is a

well-known point and not my own discovery.

 

---------------------

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao Tel: (781) 270-4997

3 Baron Park Lane #13 email: pvr

Burlington, MA 01803 email: pvr108

 

Homepage: http://www.vedicastrologer.org

 

Home address will change in July/Aug, 2001

---------------------

[Guest guest]

Dear Frank,

 

> this is very interesting.... can the 360 tithi years also account for>

progression and> as time unfolds , the years get longer? I would like to hear

your> thoughts on this.> > When reading Sri BV Raman's book on Varshaphal he

poses a strong> argument > on a sideral year being = to 365.256374 vs. the

accepted 365.2425.> Now, how does this knowledge differ from 5,000 ( + or -)

years ago.> Should modern> calculations precede ancient knowledge?

 

Bheeshma talked about 2 extra lunar months coming in every 5 years. So he

clearly knows about solar years and lunar years and the way they are

synchronized. The point he made about extra months in some years being counted

by Jyotishas on top of the years is a philosophical point and not a 365.2425 vs

365.25 kind of point. Some lunar years have 13 months. But, for the purpose of

the bet, Bheeshma said that a year of 13 months should be considered as one

year and one month. Thus, the bet of 13 years was over 5 months and 12 days

before Duryodhana thought it was over.

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

 

---------------------

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao Tel: (781) 270-4997

3 Baron Park Lane #13 email: pvr (AT) mediaone (DOT) net

Burlington, MA 01803 email: pvr108

 

Homepage: http://www.vedicastrologer.org

Home address will change in July/Aug, 2001

---------------------