Secrets of the earth

[Guest guest]

Shri Robert E. Wilkinsonji,

Namaskar!

I have gone through your message (#2681

of March 23 in the WAVES-VEDIC forum) i.e.

the Q & A session of your mentor several times. Since it is a topic about

reforming the Hindu calendar, I thought it better to record my views.

The Q & A session is actually about the zodiac, its

types and divisions vis-à-vis predictive astrology and the Vedic calendar and

even divine incarnations and consists of such questions/answers as:

“Q. Astrology

has become mostly a predictive art. What happened that we lost the connection

to the zodiac as a script for understanding the Earth’s evolution?”.

And the answer to this question by your mentor is

 

In the

course of discovery a great revelation took place millennia ago. This was

the zodiac just as we know it today. The method to preserve this knowledge

over vast cycles of time was to use the human being’s thirst for

knowing the future; and this script is a source of knowledge of destiny

for the individual, as well as for the species as a whole. The zodiac is

indeed the ‘horoscope’ of the Earth, and it can be

‘read’ just as one would read of the character and destiny of

a person from his or her natal chart. This thirst for knowing the future

was one method to preserve the Script (the 12 hieroglyphs) down the ages,

especially through periods when it was dangerous to teach the Tradition

openly.

 

 

The whole edifice of discussion in the entire Q &

A session is thus revolving around zodiac, its types and its utility vis-à-vis

the Avataras of Vishnu, human evolution and so on, besides of course, the

predictive part and the Vedic calendar.

Your mentor has made very valiant attempts, claiming

that ,”Most people today, and in this I include astrologers, pundits of

various schools, cosmologists, and so forth, have not been initiated into the

art I will describe. They have not undergone the discipline (sadhana) required to reveal certain

timeless truths. Many millennia ago a wiseman (or woman, more likely) did

undergo the discipline I am referring to”

However, what is a jarring note in all this Q & A

session is that the word zodiac has not been defined at all! As such, we

have to get the basic records first and only then we can proceed further.

The definition of “Zodiac” as per Oxford English Dictionary is,

“An imaginary belt in the heavens, about 18° wide, through which the

ecliptic passes centrally and which forms the background of the motions of the

sun, moon and planets”. And the definition of

“Ecliptic” as per the same dictionary is, “The apparent path

of the sun’s annual motion among the stars”. And the meaning

of the word “apparent” as per the same dictionary is, “That

maybe seen; distinguished from true or from mean”. And as a student

of primary school geography knows, “the sun is stationary” and only

appears to move (apparent motion!)!

All this lengthy Q & A session therefore boils

down to the simple fact that much ado has been made about something that is an

“imaginary belt through which passes an Apparent path of the fictitious

movement of stationary sun”.

Then a lot of “Tapasya” and

“yoga” has been discussed/involved regarding the same

“imaginary belt” also known as “circle of animals”

having twelve equal “animals” like Bull and Goat (or is it a Crocodile!)

and Lion and so on! And then further hair-splitting has been done about whether

that “imaginary circle of animals” is a moving one (so called

sayana!) or an immovable one (so called nirayana!).

Tapasyas sometimes do result in hallucinations when

some tapasvis see a “Scorpio” equal to a “Lion” and so

on. Such hallucinations may in fact be essential for delineating intangible

things like the future of nations or even of individual human beings!

Sometimes such hallucinations are called intuition or even trances

(samadhis) for predictive purposes! But so far as the real Vedic calendar

is concerned, I think it should be left alone, without being burdened by

“Scorpions” and “Goats” and “Twins” etc.

etc. – all of which are supposed to be of equal size!

In fact, the real Vedic calendar never bothered about

such “animals” or “the circle of animals” and it was

based on Madhu, Madhava etc. months, which got subsumed in/combined with

phenomena like Vasanta Sampat, Uttarayana and so on.

Madhu, the first day of Vasanta Ritu, means honey.

So why burden it with “Fishes”. Similarly,

“Tapah” the first day of Shisira Ritu means

“penance”. That is also the day of Uttarayana. Why

thrust a “Goat” or a “Crocodile” on it?

This will be clear from npj3.doc in the files section.

As per that document, since the real Vedic calendar

had been going on from the time of the Rig-Veda till the time of Acharya Sayana

without any “Bulls” and “Rams”, why burden

that calendar with such unnecessary encumbrances now, all in the name of

tapasya and yoga etc. etc.? Why not keep those “moving Bulls”

or “stationary Goats” etc. tethered to predictive gimmicks

alone! That is my humble request!

With regards,

A K Kaul

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

 

 

 

 

jyotirved

[jyotirved]

Saturday, March 28, 2009 12:42 AM

'waves-vedic '

" Secrets of the

Earth "

 

 

Dear Dr. V. V. Ramanji,

Namaskar!

I am glad to hear your views, “I do

appreciate Kaulji’s careful investigation of the matter with a historical

spirit of inquiry which is a sine qua non for any robust culture and

evolving tradition.”.

In my original

message #2691 on Waves-Vedic forum to Dr. Robert E. Wilkinson, I had said, at

the end of that mail “As per that (npj3.doc)

paper since the real Vedic calendar had been going on from the time of the

Rig-Veda till the time of Acharya Sayana without any ‘Bulls’

and ‘Rams’, why burden that calendar with such unnecessary

encumbrances now, all in the name of tapasya and yoga etc. etc.? Why not

keep those ‘moving Bulls’ or ‘stationary Goats’ etc.

tethered to predictive gimmicks alone! That is my humble request!”

But as usual, Shri Sunil

Bhattacharjya, rushed after you with all the tongs and hammers, at your

comments, “I have always admired your (Kaul’s) no-nonsense

scholarly and informed approach to questions pertaining to <Vedic>

astrology, and your (Kaul’s) valiant efforts through balanced and

rationally derived results to replace centuries of (what I regard as)

accumulated errors”.

For the kind perusal of the members

of this forum, I post that document (npj3) below so that they can decide for themselves

as to whether, as per our shastras or even modern geography, we really need,

for the real Vedic calendar, the mess known as Mesha, Vrisha etc. rashis, which

are nothing but imports from Babylonia via the Greeks.

(npj3.doc is in fact a post at Hindu

Calendar forum, in response to the queries raised by a member, Shri Narayan

Prasad, of that forum, several years back).

With kind regards,

A K Kaul

***

****

***

****

****

****

***

 

Shri Narayan Prasad ji,

Namaste!

I am indeed thankful to you for prodding me to make my thoughts

about Vedic luni-solar months etc. articulate and cohesive. I, therefore,

request you to please go through this post carefully so that we take some

constructive steps in the right direction for streamlining our calendars at the

earliest.

 

The shlokas quoted by Diksit are from recent

works:

The two sholkas that you have quoted from “Bahratiya Jyotish

Shastra” of S. B. Dikshit in support of Rashi based lunar months, are

actually from “Kala Madhava” of thirteenth century and “Kala

Tattva Vivechan” of sixteenth century AD. As such, both these works

are quite recent ones and it is not surprising at all that they have advocated

to calculate lunar months vis-à-vis astrological Rashis like Aries, Taurus etc.

 

Vedic calendars were framed without astrological

Rashis:

However, the task we have at our hands is to streamline our

calendars in accordance with the Vedic lore that should be applicable to whole

of India

and not as per Narada etc. Purana, that is based on the Surya Sidhanta of Maya

the mlechha, or some so called Jyotisha shastra etc.

Let us, therefore, see the relevant references for that purpose

i.e., the real fundamentals of the calendar as it existed during the Vedic and

post-Vedic period.

 

1.

4000 BCE: The earliest reference---at least of around

4000 BCE----we have to an

intercalary month (adhika-masa) is in the Rigveda 1/25/8. An adhika-masa

can take place only when lunar synodic months are calculated vis-à-vis solar

sankrantis. Since in the Vedic period only Madhu, Madhava etc. solar months and

not Aries etc. astrological rashis were in vogue, it means that even the

earliest references to lunar months in the Vedas are without Mesha etc. Rashis

but in relation to Madhu, Madhava etc. solar/lunar months.

2.

3000 BCE: Taittiriya Samhita 1/4/14 says: “Madhushcha

madhavashcha shukrashcha shuchishcha nabhashcha nabhasyashcha ishashcha

oorjashcha sahashcha sahasyashcha tapashcha tapasyashchai up yam griheeto asi

samsarpo asi amhaspatyay tva”

Here Madhu, Madhava etc. twelve months have been named and

then samsarpa is the thirteenth (intercalary/adhika) month and amhaspati a

decayed (kshyaya) month. THERE ARE

NO RASHIS HERE AND LUNAR MONTHS,

INCLUDING ADHIKA/KSHAYA-MASA, WERE RELATED TO MADHU, MADHAVA ETC. SOLAR MONTHS AND

EVEN NAMED AS (LUNAR, APART FROM SOLAR) MADHU, MADHAVA ETC.

WITHOUT ANY DOUBT.

3. Again the same Taitiriya

Samhita 5/6/7 says “shadratrir deekshitah syat shadva ritavah

samvatsarah…dwadasha ratreer deekshitah syat dwadasha masah

samvatsarah… trayodasha ratreer deekshitah syat, trayodasha masah

samvatsarah”

i.e. “One should get consecrated for six days as the

year comprises six seasons. One should get consecrated for 12 days as the

year comprises 12 months. One should get consecrated for 13 days as the

year comprises 13 months (including an adhika masa)”. There are no rashis

involved here but the solar months Madhu, Madhava etc. are implied because of

references to six seasons, and thereby the lunar months are related to those

very solar months.

4. 3000 BCE: Vajasaneya Samhita 22/31 says:

“Madhave svaha, madhavay svaha, shukray svaha shuchaye

svaha, nabhase svaha, nabhasyaya svaha, ishay svaha, oorjay svaha, sahase

svaha, sahasyay svaha, tapase svaha, tapasyaya svaha, amhaspataye

svaha”

 

Here all the twelve solar months of Madhu, Madhava etc.

have been named consecutively and the thirteenth month has been named as

amhaspati. Obviously, the thirteenth is an adhika lunar month. Thus

as per this proof also, lunar months were known by the names of solar months of

Madhu, Madhva etc. in early Vedic days!

..

5. 3000 BCE

and 100 BCE: In Shatapatha Brahmana 4/5/14 we find “Upayama

griheeto asi Madhave tu etyeva advaryur-grihnati upyama griheeto asi madhavay

tveti pratiprastha taitaveva vasantikav sayad vasante aushadhayo jayante

vanaspatayah pachyante tena haitav madhushcha madhavshcha”

Translation “Since in the Vasnata (spring season)

grains in the fields start sprouting that is why the two months of that season

are known as Madhu and Madhvava”.

The commentary on this mantra by Shri Hari-Swamin says,

“Madhu Madhavaviti chaitra vaishakhav ritu grahanam chaitradayo masah

devatah. Chaitra vaishakhayor madhu madhava namdheya praptim darshayati.

Etav uktav masav vasantikav”

Translation “Madhu and Madhava are Chaitra and

Vaishakha as they are the two months of Spring season. As such the shruti

has shown the names of Chaitra and Vaishakha as Madhu and Madhava”

Shri Hari-Swamin is said to be a scholar of around first

century BCE. It means that

the tradition of calling solar months Madhu, Madhava by lunar names like

Caitra, Vaishakha etc. and vice-versa was prevailing then.

 

6. 1400 BCE: Acharya Lagadha’s Vedanga Jyotisha says:

“Svarakramete somarkav yada sakam savasavav, syat

tadadi yugam maghastapah shuklo ayanam hyudak”

As per Dikshit’s translation, it means ”When

the sun and the moon while moving in the sky, come to Vasava (Dhanishtha i.e.

Beta Delphini) star together, then the yuga, the Magha (month), the tapas

(seasonal month), the light half of the month, and the Winter Solstice, all

commence together”.

7. Sixth mantra of the same VJ says

“Prapadyate shavishthadav surya chandramasav udak,

sarpardhe dkshinarkastu, magha shravanayoh sada”

Dikshit’s translation: “The sun and the moon

turn towards North in the beginning of Dhanishtha and towards South in the

middle of Ashlesha. The sun always does this in the month of Magha and

Shravana”

THIS IS THE VERY FIRST INDIGENOUS ASTRONOMICAL WORK OF 14TH CENTURY BCE AND

HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH

SO CALLED ARIES ETC. RASHIS,

WHETHER SAYANA OR NIRAYANA, BUT TELLS US THE METHODLOGY OF CALCULATING ALL THE TWELVE MONTHS, BOTH SOLAR AND LUNAR, LIKE TAPAH AND

MAGHA, APART FROM WINTER SOLSTICE AND

SUMMER SOLSTICE ETC. IF

ACHARYA LAGADHA COULD DO IT IN EARLY 14TH CENTURY BCE, WITHOUT INVOLVING ANY ARIES ETC. ASTROLOGICAL RASHIS, WHY CAN’T WE DO IT

TODAY?

8. 1400 BCE

to 400 BCE: The

Mahabharata contains quite a few “finishing touches” of

a post Vedanga Jyotisha Era since it follows the VJ methodology for calculating

adhika-masa etc. This “itihasa” could therefore be of a period of

1400 BCE to 400 BCE, since the latter was the period when

Graecho-Chaldean rashis had started gaining a foothold in India. Mangal, Shani etc. planets,

had, however been propagated in India

prior to 400 BCE, as is evident

from the Atharva Jyotisha of about 500 BCE.

That is why there is no mention of Aries etc. astrological rashis in the MBh

either but there are references to nakshatras times without number. We

also find reference to Magha, Kaumudi etc. months at several places. In the

Gita, which is a part of the MBh, Lord Krishna has identified Himself with

Margasheersha.

Besides, it is also common knowledge that Bhishma waited

for Uttarayana to shed off his mortal coil but we do not find even by mistake

anywhere in the entire MBh any mention of Makara Rashi/sankranti, which is supposed

to be the synonym of Utarayana by “Sayana Vedic jyotishis”.

Similarly, Bhishma is said to have shed off his mortal coil on Magha Shukla

ashtami in Rohini nakshatra as per Shanti Parva 47/3 which reads as:

“shuklapakshyasyashtamyam maghamasasya parthiva,

prajapatye cha nakshatre madyam prapte divakare….”

Here Magha Shukla ashtami and Rohini nakshatra have been

mentioned clearly without any reference to any Makara etc.

rashi/sankranti. Same is the case with several other references in

the MBh, which proves it beyond any doubt that Magha, Phalguna etc. solar/lunar

months besides Uttarayana etc. phenomena were calculated during those days also

without any “assistance from” Aries etc. astrological Rashis!

 

9. 875 AD: Vateshwara Sidhanta and Gola, a work of 9th

century AD, says in Chapter 3, verse 29 “The months Chaitra,

Vaishakha etc. are called, according to the Vedas, Madhu, Madhava, Shukra,

Shuchih, Nabhas, Nabhasya, Isha, Urja, Sahas, Sahasya, Tapas and Tapasya

respectively. The names of the seasons have come down to us

since the time of the Vedas”.

On page 423 of the same work (translated by K. S. Shukla,

published by INSA, Delhi)

there is a table listing Chaitra etc. 12 months vis-à-vis Madhu etc. Vedic

months which have been clubbed with the respective seasons! IF VATESHWARA

COULD CALCULATE SOLAR AND LUNAR

MONTHS WITHOUT THE “ASSISTANCE OF” ARIES ETC.

ASTROLOGICAL RASHIS, WHY CAN’T WE DO IT TODAY?

10. 1375 AD:

A mantra in the Samaveda Samhita 4/6/4/2 reads:

“Vasanto innur antyo greeshmo innur antyah

varshani anu sharado hemanta shishir innurantyah”

As per this mantra six seasons of Vasanta, Grishma etc.

have been discussed. And this is how Acharya Sayana of 14th

century AD has commented on it:

“Vasantah innu – vasant eva chaitra vaishakharupi

vasanta ritureva rantyah – ramaneeyah bhavati. Greeshma innu

jyeshtha ashadarupo greeshm ritureva rantyah ramaneeyah. Varshani varsha

shravan bhadrapad rupen avayavi bhuta pravrit ritur eva rantyah

ramaneeyah. Tanyanu sharadah ashvina kartika rupena avayaveebhoot rituh

rantyah ramaneeyah. Hemanta margasheersha pausha roop eve rantya

ramneeyah shishir innu magha phalguna roop eva rantyah ramneeyah”

A simple and running English translation of this commentary of

Sayana is “Vasanta comprises two months of Chaitra and Vaishakha.

Vasanta is a pleasant season. Greeshma comprises two months of Jyeshtha

and Ashada. It is a pleasant season. Varsha comprises two limbs of

Shravana and Bhadra. Varsha is a pleasant season. Ashvina and

Kartika are the two months of Sharad ritu. Sharad ritu is a pleasant

season. Margashersha and Pausha are the two months of Hemanta.

Hemanta is a pleasant season. Magha and Phalguna are the two months of

Shishira Ritu. Shishira Ritu is a pleasant season”.

 

We have thus seen above that right from the earliest Veda i.e. the

Rigveda (about 4000 BCE) till the

end of the fourteenth century AD, there is an unbroken stream of clubbing

Chaitra, Vaishakha etc. lunar months with the solar months of similar names and

also Madhu and Madhava etc. solar months with the lunar months of similar names

without any assistance from any Aries etc. astrological Rashis. Thus

these very names serve the purpose of solar as well as lunar months. We

have seen that Acharya Sayana also has subsumed Chaitra etc. months into

Vasanta etc. seasons. It means that Chaitra etc. were the names of solar

months even according to him. Since these are also the names of lunar

months, obviously, lunar Chaitra would follow a solar Chaitra, lunar Vaishakha

a solar Vaishakha and so on.

 

Vedic months Madhu, Madhava are synonymns of

Chaitra, Vaishakha etc.

That completely accounts for the following pattern of the Vedic

calendar, as summarized by Dr. A. K. Bag, in (“History of Astronomy in India”, published by INSA, Delhi) in his article

“Astronomy in Indus Civilization and during Vedic Times”. In

fact, this is the summary given by him as per the Taittiriya Samhita 4/4/11

a) Vasanta Ritu comprising two solar

months of Madhu and Madhava which are also known as (solar) Chaitra and

Vaishakha, with lunar Chaitra and Vaishakha following the solar months of

similar names.

b) Grishma Ritu comprising two solar months of

Shukrah and Shuchih, also known as (solar) Jyeshtha and Ashada, with lunar

Jyeshtha and Ashada following the respective solar months.

c) Varsha Ritu comprising two solar months of

Nabhas and Nabhasya also known as (solar) Shravana and Bhadra, with the lunar

Shravana and Bhadra following the respective solar months.

d) Sharad Ritu comprsing the two solar months of

Isha and Urja, also known as (solar) months of Ashvina and Kartika, with lunar

Ashvina and Kartika following their respective solar months.

e) Hemanta Ritu comprising the two solar months of

Sahas and Sahasya, also known as (solar) months of Margasheersha and

Pausha, with lunar Margasheersha and Pausha following their respective

solar names.

f)

Shishira Ritu comprising the two solar months of Tapas and Tapasya,

also known as (solar) months of Magha and Phalguna, with lunar

Magha and Phalguna following their respective solar months.

 

THAT IS THUS THE REAL

VEDIC CALENDAR, AS ADVOCATED BY THE VEDAS, BRAHMANAS, THE VEDANGA JYOTISHA, THE

MAHABHARATA AND OUR ACHARYAS LIKE

HARISWAMIN, VATESHWARA AND SAYANA.

 

Early Vedic lunar months were

not necessarily as per Chitra etc. nakshatra Full Moons:

Regarding the names of lunar months as per the Full Moon

nakshatra, this is the system being followed at present for Lahiri

festivals. As we have seen above, if we want to adopt the real Vedic

calendar, we do not have to run after a Full Moon conjoining a particular lunar

nakshatra for the name of that lunar month.

 

S. B. Dikshit has also clarified it at several places that

the Full Moon conjoining the relevant nakshatra for the names of lunar months

is a much later phenomenon. This is what he has said on page 30 of his

work (English translation of Part I):

“In short the terms Chaitra etc. were not in vogue in

the Samhita and Brahmana period. Thus it can be proved from the historical

point of view that these terms came into use after a very long period of time

after the terms Madhu, etc. became current”

 

But by the time of Vedanga Jyotisha (14th

century BCE), Chaitra etc.

nomenclature for solar as well as lunar months, without reference to either

nakshatra based Purnimas or any Aries etc. astrological Rashis, had got fully

established.

A practical demonstration of this point is that the VJ says that

Dakshinayana-cum-solar (Nabhasya)-cum-Shravana always starts when the New Moon

(Amanta) falls in the middle of Ashlesha and Uttarayana-cum-Tapah-cum-Magha

always starts when the New Moon is in Dhanishtha. Neither of these two

conditions gets always fulfilled either for Dakshinayana or Uttarayana whether

we take Lahiri nakshata division or the so called sayana nakshatra division,

the simple reason being that according to the VJ, the nakshatras start from

Krittika instead of from Ashvini, and the year started from Uttarayana!

 

THAT IS WHY WE HAVE TO DO A RE-THNK ABOUT THE NAKSHATRA DIVISION

AS TO WHETHER IT SHOULD START FROM ASHVINI OR KRITTIKA AND

WHETHER IT SHOULD BE AN EQUAL DIVISION OF 27 NAKSHATRAS OR AN UNEQUAL DIVISION

OF 28 NAKSHATRAS AS SUGGESTED BY BHASKARA-I AND

OTHER EALIER ACHARYAS. THAT IS APART FROM THE FACT

AS TO WHETHERE THE NAKHATRAS SHOULD BE SO CALLED SAYANA OR SO CALLED NIRAYANA!

(Pl. se my post “When was the real Onam”).

 

“Sayana Vedic astrology” falls on its

face by dint of the “crutches” of Sayana nakshatras!

WHILE TALKING ABOUT NAKSHATRAS, I MUST PUT ON RECORD THAT THE

GREATEST DRAW-BACK WITH NAKSHATRAS VIS-À-VIS THE SO CALLED SAYANA RASHIS IS THAT ALL THE PROMINENT STARS, KNOWN AS “MILE

POSTS”, ARE AWAY BY AT LEAST

TWENTY DEGREES FROM THE RELEVANT NAKSHATRA! E.g. The Star Ashvini (Beta

Arietis) had an ecliptic longitude of about 34 degrees as on January 1, 2000

whereas the nakshatra division of that (Ashvini) name of the so called Sayana

Rashichakra would range from 0 to 13-20’ i.e. the Ashvini Star is out of

the range by at least 20 degrees from the outermost limit of the nakshatra

division of that very name. Equally, Bharni Star (41 Arietis) had a longitude

of 48 degrees in 2000 AD whereas that division ranges from 13-20 to 26-40. Thus

Bharni star is out of range by at least 21 degrees from the outermost limit of

that very Bharani nakshatra division. Same is the case with all the other

nakshatras!

 

THOSE “JYOTISHIS” CLAMOURING FOR A SO CALLED SAYANA

RASHICHKARA FOR PREDICTIVE GIMMICKS DO NOT SEE

THE IRONY THAT THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE

TO CALCULATE ANY OF THE DASHA-BHUKTIS CORRECTLY SINCE NO NAKSHATRA WILL FALL IN

THE RELEVANT DIVISION NOR WILL THE

RELEVANT STAR HAVE ANYTHING TO DO

WITH THE NAME-SAKE OF THAT VERY NAKSHATRA DIVISION!

BUT THEN “SAYANA VEDIC JYOTSHIS” ARE HARDLY BETTER THAN “NIRAYANA VEDIC

JYOTISHIS” SINCE BOTH ARE

BLIND TO THE WRITING ON THE WALL!

 

“First Point of Aries” in the

Kritika nakshatra

How useless the so called Sayana rashis are vis-à-vis the actual

Vedic nakshatras will be clear from the following example:

Shatapatha Brahmana 2/1/2/2 says “Krittikasu agnim

adadheeta…eta ha vai prachyai disho na chyavante…”. It

means, “One should get consecrated in Krittika nakshatra. They do

not deviate from the East”. Krittikas did not “deviate from

the East” since the “First Point of Aries” was in that

nakshatra then i.e. about 3000 BCE.

This nakshatra division ranges from 26-10’ to 40-00 degrees.

However, the longitude of the Krittika star (Eta Tauri a.k.a. Alcyone) as

on January 1, 2000

AD was about 60 degrees. Thus we will only be making a laughing stock of

ourselves if we try to link the so called sayana rashichakra to krittika

nakshatra since it is away by about 20 degrees from the extreme limit of that

very nakshatra division! Therefore it could hardly be such a non-existent

krittika nakshatra which our Vedic Rishis were talking about!

 

Nakshatras in the Mahabharata:

In the Shalya Parva 5/6, we find the following reference

“Chatvarimshad ahanyadya dve me nissritasya vai, pushyena

samprayatoasmi, shravane punaragatah”

Translation “I (Balarama) have been away for forty-two

days. I left this place on Pushya nakshatra and am back in Shravna

nakshatra”

Obviously, these could not be imaginary so called sayana nakshatras

but the actual nakshatras or prominent stars of those names, with which the

moon had been conjunct during the period of forty-two days when Balarama was

away. Pushya to Punarvasu means 27 nakshatras/days (excluding Abhijit)

and then again Pushya to Shravana means 15 days. Thus it becomes 42 days

(if we include both Pushya the day of departure and Shravana the day of coming

back) but if we include Abhijit also, it will be 28 days from Pushya to

Punarvasu and then 14 days from Pushya to Utarashadha – excluding

Shravana. But since in the VJ, there are only 27 nakshatras, it appears the MBH

also has been calculating the lunar nakshatra days in multiples of 27 only.

Besides, Abhijita is a nakshatra of very short duration -- hardly a few

degrees, thus the lunar conjunction with that nakshatra could not be that long

to be taken as one day. It could have been subsumed in other nakshatras.

In any case, it goes to prove that instead of artificial nakshatra

divisions of the so called “Sayana Vedic Jyotishis” the MBh also

was taking into account the actual nakshatras.

 

Duplicate Chaitra etc. names

Coming

to your next point,

<If

at all duplicate nomenclature is to be used for the solar months, let it be on

the name of Rashis, as used in South India.>

 

We

have just seen in the commentary of Acharya Sayana as to how he clubbed Chaitra

etc. solar and lunar months with Vasanta etc. seasons.

 

Acharya

Sayana was a minister of Viajayanagar empire of South

India besides being the younger brother of Madhvacharya

a.k.a. Vidyaranya Muni of the “Panchadashi” fame.

Acharya Sayana was a scholar of extraordinary calibre and I have not seen yet

any commentator of his stature who has explained all the four Vedas in such an

exhaustive and lucid manner. There is hardly any scholar, whether from

East or West, who does not acknowledge the authority of Sayana about the Vedic

interpretations. Aries etc. Rashis were very much prevalent at Acharya

Sayana’s time in India

– 14th century AD--since the Surya Sidhanta by Maya the

mlechha had got entrenched in our cultural ethos by then completely. THE

MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION THAT ARISES HERE IS AS TO WHY DID ACHARYA SAYANA SPURN

THE SO CALLED MESHA ETC. RASHIS AND TALK

ABOUT CHAITRA, VIAISHAKHA ETC.

MONTHS VIS-À-VIS VEDIC SEASONS?

Obviously,

these Aries etc. signs being a creation of astrologers, did not suit him

(Acharya Sayana) at all, and he just ignored them with the disdain and

contempt these astrological rashis deserve. SCHOLARS THROUGHOUT INDIA

SHOULD EMULATE ACHARYA SAYANA IN THIS RESPECT i.e. they must spurn rashi based

calendar! But on the other hand, for the last about a hundred years, maximum

support of these good for nothing astrological rashis is being

provided/mustered by ”Vedic astrologers” through their astrological

magazines and “Vedic jyotisha” monthlies and so on and so forth!

These “scholars” also preside over several “panchanga

standardization committees” and are always back at square one by opting

for the same “almighty” Lahiri Rashichakra that was being already

used sine 1950, thanks to N. C. Lahiri’s jugglery!

Thus

these “Vedic scholars/astrologers” are decimating those very Vedas

that they pretend to defendand they are doing so just for the sake of sinful

crumbs which they earn by dint of “Vedic astrology”---i.e.

“correct predictions from incorrect data”!

 

I,

therefore, do not see any valid reason against naming Madhu, Madhava etc. Vedic

months as solar Chaitra and Vaishakha etc. as was done by every Seer from

Lagadha of the VJ to Acharya Syana of Samaveda Bhashya. These very names

can be used for lunar months.

 

Even alternative names of solar momths can be without

astrological rashis:

If,

however, you are still of the opinion that the use of Chaitra etc. names for

solar as well as lunar months will create some confusion, we can think over the

thirteen names of solar/lunar months as given in Taittiriya Brahmana

3/10/1. These are:

1)

Arunah; 2)Arunarajah; 3) Pundareekah; 4) Vishvajit; 5) Abhijit; 6) Ardrah 7)

Pinvaman; 8) Unnavan; 9) Rasavan; 10) Iravan; 11) Sarvaushadhah; 12) Sambharah;

13) Mahaswan

 

 

(Please

see page 27 of Dikshit’s “Bharatiya Jyotisha”--English

translation—Vol. I)

 

This

will obviate the necessity of duplicating Chaitra etc. names for solar as well

lunar months without our having to fall back upon Aries etc. astrological rashis.

Amanta and Purnimanta systems -- both can and should

continue:

Regarding

your earlier suggestion that there should be one pattern of lunar months

throughout India i.e. they should be either Amanta (New Moon to New Moon) or

Purnimanta (Full Moon to Full Moon), I am of the opinion that we must continue

with both the systems since both of them are Vedic, as explained by me in one

of my earlier posts to you about the same. I do not want to make any

changes in any pattern arbitrarily unless and until they are warranted by the

Vedas and are unavoidable. We are almost divided in the middle ---

half of India celebrating

Amanta and half Purnimanta – and it will create further confusion when we

change the system from Makara to Tapah and then ask Northern

India to make Krishna Paksha follow Shukla paksha or South and

Central India etc. etc. to put Krishna Paksha before Shukla Paksha. It

will take them a considerable time to get to grips with that double confusion,

without any advantage or plus points. It is also not necessary that they

will agree with this suggestion of ours, since it is not an easy job to change

the settled pattern

 

Sayana versus Nirayana is the worst conflict:

Thus,

in any case, once we shun Aries etc. Rashis completely for the real Vedic Calendar,

we shall then not have to enter into an endless discussion and conflict with

either “Vedic” or “anti-Vedic” or

“non-Vedic” jyotishis, since we will not be using rashis at all for

Vedic calendar, which means there will be no confusion whether the rashis are

sayana or nirayana. Let the jyotishis continue to wallow in the mud of those

sayana and Lahiri and Ramana and Fagan Rashis and give a full demonstration of

their charlatanism but at least our “Vedic calendar” will steer

clear of the same since we will not refer to Aries etc. astrological Rashsi as

our Vedic Rishis never referred to them, at least in respect of deciding the

calendar.

AND THAT

IS NO MEAN ACHIEVEMENT.

Sayana versus Nirayana was the main reason of the failure of

“Calendar Reform”

Before

closing this note, I must put on record my views as to why the earlier efforts

of streamlining the calendar failed:

As we

know through “Bharatiya Jyotisha Shastra” of Dikshit and other

works, real scholars of Vedic lore were feeling highly perturbed with the

anachronism of celebrating Uttarayana etc. phenomena after at least a fortnight

or so of the actual phenomenon over the last about couple of hundred

years. They also tried to put it back on rails and quite a few seminars

were held; quite a few “calendar reform committees” established,

but it had just become a zero sums game! Almost every

“Committee” had recommended the so called Sayana Rashis for

celebrating festivals etc. but the efforts were never successful in spite of

even the Jagadguru Shankarachrya of Dwarka, on a representation by V. R. Lele,

issuing an Adesha-Patra more than a 100 years back (in Shaka 1814)that only (so

called) Sayana rashis must be used for deciding fairs and festivals (Pl. see

“Bharatiya Jyotish Shastra”). But now the same Dwarka Peetha,

including the current Jagadguru Shankaracharya of that Peetha, is celebrating

all its festivals and muhurtas not as per the Vedas or other shastras, but as

“dictated” by “almighty” Lahiri! WHY?

Only because all these “reformists” were talking of (so called)

Sayana rashis, which is an anathema to “Vedic Jyotishis”!

They just do not want to lose their sinful crumbs, however hard we may try to

instil God’s fear into them! Money for them is more powerful and

intoxicating than Jeevan Mukti!

THEREFORE,

IT IS BETTER TO SHELVE THE RASHIS COMPLETELY -- WHETEHR THE SO CALLED

SAYANA OR THE SO CALLED NIRAYANA – FOR THE PURPOSE OF STREAMLINING OUR

CALENDAR! LET US PREPARE A “TITHI-PATRAK’ WHICH DOES NOT

CARRY THE NAMES OF ANY RASHIS, SO THAT WE CELEBRATE OUR FESTIVALS ON CORRECT

DAYS AND LET THE “SAYANA

VEDIC ASTROLOGERS” AS WELL

AS THE “NIRAYANA VEDIC ASTROLOGERS” CONTINUE TO “MAKE CORRECT

PREDEICTIONS FROM INCORRECT DATA”.

We

must, therefore, select the seasonal year with Madhu, Madhava etc. months with

Aruna et. synonyms and Vasanta etc. seasons plus Chaitra, Vaishakha etc.

solar/lunar months coupled with Krittika etc. actual 28 nakshatras (including

Abhijit) instead of the so called sayana or nirayana nakshatra division of 27

equal nakshatras.

With

regards,

Avtar

Krishen Kaul

President

All India

Calendar Reform Committee

New Delhi

 

 

HinduCalendar [HinduCalendar ] On Behalf Of Narayan Prasad

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

12:16 AM

HinduCalendar

RE: [HinduCalendar] Re:

First Point of Aries -- Definition as per Modern Astronomy

Dear

Shri Avtar ji,

 

Namaste !

 

You wrote:

 

<<I have never seen any lunar month ever being named as per any rashi

in any part of the country! >>

 

My reply:

I

thought you have fully read Pt S B Dixit’s book “bhAratiiya

jyotiSa-shAstrAchA itihaas”. On pp.390-391 he writes:

<QUOTE>

“meSAdisthe savitari yo yo mAsaH prapUryate chAndraH |

chaitrAdyaH sa j~neyaH pUrti-dvittve’dhimAso’ntyaH

||”

 

&

“miinAdisthe raviryeSAm-Arambha-prathame kSaNe |

bhavet te’bde cAndra-mAsAsh-chaitrAdyA dvAdasha smRtAH ||”

<UNQUOTE>

Kindly

translate into English these two Sanskrit shlokas yourself to explain

other members also what they mean.

You wrote:

<< also known as solar Ashvina as per the Vedanga Jyotisha …… that was the start of the Lunar Ashvina….. also known as solar Kartika as

per the Vedanga Jyotisha….

lunar months

are always supposed to be named as per nakshatra division where the Full Moon falls!

Fore xample, Chaitra month is given that name because the Purnima of that month

is supposed to fall in Chitra nakshatra, Vaishakha has that name because the

full Moon is in Vishakha nakshatra, Jyeshtha is Jyeshtha as the full moon is in

Jyeshtha nakshatra and so on! It may be mentioned here that even nirayana lunar

months fail on this count! >>

My reply:

As

I expressed my view earlier, I do not like the use of the same nomenclature for

solar months and lunar months, because in general they will start on different

dates. We must not force lunar months’ nomenclature to solar ones, if we

want to be scientific.

Why give

same scientific name to two entities which do not indicate the same thing in

the same context ?

 

Moreover,

you are contradicting your own statements. It appears that you yourself name

the lunar months based on nakSatra names (Ashvina, Kartika,…), and at

other place you yourself ridicule such idea.

 

Kind

regards.

Narayan

Prasad