Chapter XV. Units of Kāla

Volume V: Part I pp. 486–536

Chapter XV. Units of Kāla

We shall now turn to the units of time from yuga backwards to muhūrta, leaving aside Manantara, Kalpa and Pralaya for the moment.

The word ‘yuga’ occurs at least 33 times in the Ṛgveda and appears to have been used in several senses Vide H of Dh vol. III p 886–890. Two senses stand out as prominent, viz a short period or a very long period For the first sense we may cite Ṛg. I. 158. 6 (‘Dīrghatamas, the son of Mamatā, became old in the 10th Yuga, he became brahmā high priest and leader of the waters flowing to their goal’¹ Here yuga cannot mean a period of more than ten years and probably means a period of five years; in Ṛg III.26.3 we read ‘like a neighing horse by its mother, Vaiśvānara (Agni) is kindled by the Kusikas in each yuga’, vide Ṛg III 55.18² In the Vedingajyotisa³ ( verses 1 and 5) yuga is said to comprise five years There is nothing to prevent us from taking this sense in the two passages cited from the Ṛgveda. In Ṛg III. 55.18 it is possible to recognize a recondite reference to five year units of time each divided into six seasons In the Ṛgveda saṁvatsara means a year in several passages such as I 110. 4, I. 140 2, I 161 13, I 164 44, VII 103 1, 7, 9, X. 190 2. In Ṛg X. 87. 17 we have the derivative form ‘Samvat-sarīṇā’⁴ from saṁvatsara ‘O Agni that observes what men do! May the demon possessing magic devices not partake of the cow’s milk that springs after a year’. In Ṛg X. 62 2 we have the word parivatsara 'those ancestors that shattered Vala by righteousness and forced out the wealth consisting of cows' and in Rg. VII. 103. 8 the word 'parivatsarīṇā'. Samvatsara and Parivatsara are two of the five names bestowed on the five years of a yuga in the other saṁhitāṣ Just as the word yuga was used in several senses even in the Ṛgveda it is quite possible that the words 'saṁvatsara' and 'parivatsara' meant simply year and also successive years of a cycle of five yearṣ In the Tai. S. (V 5. 7. 1–3) namaskṛta ( salutation ) is offered to Rudra with Saṁvatsara, to his bow towards the right with Parivatsara, to his bow behind with Idāvatsara, to the bow towards the north with Idvatsara and to the bow above with Vatsara. The Vāj. S. (27. 45 ) names these five separately with Idāvatsara in place of Idvatsara; similarly, in Atharva VI 55.3 salutation is offered to Idāvatsara, Parivatsara and Saṁvatsara. In Tai. Br. (I 4. 10.1⁶) Agni, Āditya, Candramas and Vāyu are identified with Saṁvatsara, Parivatsara, Idāvatsara and Anuvatsara and it should be noticed that the four names of years are brought in close relation to the four cāturmāsyas, viz Vaiśvadeva, Varuṇa-praghāsa, Sākamedha and Śunāsīrīya. Thus even in the Saṁhitās names (generally five) are mentioned in a certain fixed order. There is no reason why this should be so unless they formed a fixed series in a cycle. Thibaut in his Grundriss (p. 9) hammers on the fact that sometimes only two or three or four out of the five are mentioned and argues (rather obstinately) that knowledge of the five year yuga cannot be assumed for the Vedic timeṣ It should be noted that Kauṭilya speaks of the yuga of five saṁvatsaras and of the insertion of two intercalary months, one at the end of 2½ years and the other at the end of five yearṣ⁷

divided into twelve parts ( dvādāśara ). But it is a very difficult matter to keep in view the twelve divisions correctly. In Rg. I. 164. 15 it is said ' They say that the 7th of those that are born together is born of one; there are only six twin sages born of the gods'. Here there is a reference to seasons, six of which have two months each, the 7th has only one ( viz. 13th or intercalary month ) and that the 13th month is not fit for religious riteṣ The Atharvaveda V. 35. 4⁸ also states that samvatsara has twelve spokes and the months have 30 spokeṣ This explains Rg. I. 164. 11-13 and 48. In the brāhmaṇas also the year is said to have 360 days and 720 days and nights together; Śatapatha IX. 1. 1. 43, Ait. Br. VII, 7 also say the⁹ same. We have also to recognize that the Vedic samhitās and brāhmaṇas speak of a 13th month that was intercalateḍ About Varuna the Ṛgveda says¹⁰ ' He knows the twelve months with their progeny ( the days ) and also the month that is addeḍ' The Tai. S. ( IV. 6. 7. 1-2 ) refers to a year of twelve months and also of 13 monthṣ The Kaustaki Br 19. 2 speaks of the 13th month. The Tai S. ( I. 4. 4, VI. 5. 3 4 ) expressly mentions the 13th month called Samsarpa or Amhaspatya'. It is called Amhasaspati in Vaj. S. ( VII. 30 and XXII. 31 ) and Samsarpa in Maitrāyaṇī S. III. 12. 13. The Kauśītaki Brāhmaṇa connects the 13th month with the Śunāsīriya sacrifice.¹¹ The Maitrāyaṇī Saṃhitā ( I. 10. 8 ) draws a distinction between a rṭuyāji and cāturmāsya-yāji, the former being one who offers sacrifice thinking 'now Vasanta has started, rainy season has started, śarad has started while the Cāturmāsya-yāji is one who offers sacrifice in view of the 13th month.¹² How and when the month was inserted in the Ṛgveda times or the times of the Tai S is not clear. What is clear is that one whole month was addeḍ Therefore, Thibaut overstates the case when he asserts emphatically (Grundriss p 7) that all Vedic texts agree that the year was exclusively of 360 dayṣ A year in which one month was added (i. e of 390 days) was also well-known to the Ṛgvedic Indianṣ Therefore, in order to explain the facts we have here probably to postulate two calendars, one a purely sacrificial (or religious) of 360 days (12 months of 30 days) probably inherited by the Vedic Indians from their ancestors about whom we know next to nothing, and another calendar where a month was added in order to bring the year in line with visible astronomical data. It is known that the ancient Egyptians¹³ had an official calendar of 360 days (12 months of 30 days each) plus five days added at end i. e of 365 days only and no intercalary day was inserted in a year. The result was that the opening day of this calendar would shift back through the solar year until a whole cycle of that year had been completed in 1456 or 1506 yearṣ This calendar called sliding calendar was in use for about 3000 years in Egypt from proto-dynastic period until the Roman perioḍ There was also another calendar against which this sliding calendar moveḍ A year of 360 days (divided into 12 months of 30 days each) was not peculiar to ancient Vedic India nor to ancient Egypt, but played an important role also in Mesopotamia, which had a strictly lunar calendar. The co-existence of months of various lengths for later times is vouchsafed by the Arthaśāstra p 108 (Sham Shastri's ed of 1919 ). A year of 360 days was in later times in India called a Sāvana one (from ‘savana’ meaning extracting of some juice in a sacrifice) and a month was added after about 30 months to bring the lunar year (of 354 days) in line with the solar year.

In the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa (II. 1. 3. 2)¹⁴ the Sun's apparent passage for six months in the north and for six months in the south is referred to, though the word ayana is not employed in this passage. The word ‘ayana’ occurs in the sense of ‘motion or path’ in the Ṛgveda (āyan-n-āpo ayanam-icchamānāḥ, Ṛg. III. 33. 7) Uttarāyaṇa and Dakṣiṇāyana in later literature mean no more than the sun's (apparent) motion or path in the northern celestial sphere and in the southern sphere respectively. The Sun's movement in the north for six months and in the south for six months is mentioned in Br. Up. VI. 2. 15-16 also. Thibaut (Grundriss p 10 pare 6) cites Kauśītaki Br. 19. 3 as stating that the Sun stands still after it has gone for six months towards the south in order to turn again to the north and then observes that no one has a right to assume, from this statement in the Kauśītaki¹⁵ Br. that for six months the Sun goes north or south, that the halves of the year are to be understooḍ What Thibaut is driving at is not clear to me We have in this passage six months passages of the Sun in the north and also in the south. A year has ordinarily only twelve months Therefore it must be assumed that halves of a year are meant. Thibaut does not explain what part of the year these six months in the north and south correspond to. Thibaut is probably swayed by the fact that in the Śatapatha and elsewhere Vasanta, Grīṣma and Varṣā are lumped together as the seasons (ṛtus) for the gods but Uttarāyaṇa does not exactly correspond with these three ṛtus. That may be so, but the rule or maxim is that names are given on the basis of what is principal or eminent (prādhānyena vyapadeśā bhavantī). Vasanta and Grīṣma are important parts of Uttarāyaṇa; therefore, by association with these two and for the sake of symmetry varșā is also held to be a rtu for the godṣ

As regards the seasons, there are varying statements In Rg. I 15 the word ‘rtunā’ occurs several times, but once we have ‘rtūn’ also ‘O Indra’ drink Soma according to the seasons from the wealth (i e the richly filled vessel) of the brāhmaṇa’ Rg. II 36 and 37 are styled Rtavya hymns The Ṛgveda itself names five seasons, viz. Vasanta (X 161 4, X 90. 6), Grīṣma (X 90. 6), Prāvṛs (VII. 103. 3 and 9), Śarad (over 25 times, as in II 12, 11, VII 66 11, X. 161. 4 ), Hemanta (X. 161. 4 ), but the Rg. does not expressly mention Śiśira Three seasons are metaphorically meant in Rg I 164. 48 and six in Rg I. 164. 15. The Atharvaveda¹⁶ (VI. 55. 2 ) mentions all the six; but not in the usual order. The Ait Br. says that the year has five rtus¹⁷ by putting together Hemanta and Śiśira. The Maitrāyaṇī Saṃ in I. 7. 3 speaks of Samvatsara as having five rtus and again as having six rtus and the Śat Br. (II 1.3.16 ) says that sam-vatsara comprises six rtuṣ In Śatapatha XII. 8.2.33 the rtus are said to be three viz Grīṣma, Varṣā and Hemanta and in the very next passage they are said to be six. There is mention of seven rtus in Atharvaveda VI 61 2 But one should not be puzzled by thiṣ The 7th rtu is probably meant to represent the 13th intercalary month as it is expressly mentioned in Atharva. (V. 6.4). Thibaut surprisingly asserts that the lists of the names of the seasons are only priestly inventions and the Vedic texts exhibit no practical use for them (Grundriss p. 11 ). Thibaut appears to be obsessed with the influence of priests and offers no good reasons why the names should be regarded as inventions and not as correctly registering what was current in the then society In Tai S ¹⁸ IV 411.1 the six rtus with two months for each are mentioneḍ Vasanta is mentioned as the first of rtus ( mukham vā etad-rtūnām yad-vasantaḥ )in Tai. Br I. 1.2.6. The Śatapatha¹⁹ provides that Vasanta, Grīṣma and Varṣā are the seasons of gods, Śarad, Hemanta and Śiśira are seasons of the pitṛs; similarly the bright half of a month, the day and the forenoon of a day are the times for gods and the dark half of a month, the night, the afternoon of a day are the times for pitṛs and it winds up with the prescription that a brāhmaṇa should consecrate the sacred fires in Vasanta, a kṣatriya in Griṣma and a vaiśya in Śaraḍ²⁰ At least as early as the edicts of Aśoka the words ‘varṣa’ (which etymo-logically means ‘rains’) and ‘samvatsara’ are both used in the same sense viz. a year in the Brahmagiri inscription (vide C. I. I. I. p. 175 ).

There are Western scholars that deny the knowledge of the planets to the Vedic Indianṣ But Thibaut (Grundriss p. 6) and Kaye (p. 33 ) both concede that it is inconceivable that the Vedic Indians did not observe and distinguish at least the larger planets in early times, but they contend that the Vedic passages cited as proving knowledge of the planets on the part of Vedic Indians cannot be accepted as evidence of the record of observations about planets and that the mere mention of the number seven or five (about Ādityas in Ṛg. X. 72. 8-9 or oxen) cannot be relied upoṇ Both Thibaut and Kaye approach these problems with a peculiar mentality. Their criticism is mainly destructive and has a flavour of special pleading against things and ideas Indiaṇ They hardly ever propose their own explana-tions of the disputed passages and when they rarely do they do not show how their explanations are more satisfactory than the ones they criticize. One typical case may be cited here. Almost all scholars agree that Kṛttikās are the same as Pleiades; but Kaye (Archaeological survey memoir No 18 p. 24 and I. A. vol 50, p. 45 ) appears to doubt this, yet he has not the goodness to say positively what other cluster Kṛttikās stand for and why. The principal reason for the paucity of references to planets probably is that the cult of the worship of planets that we find well deve- loped in Yāj. I 295-308 had not yet arisen in Vedic timeṣ At least Bṛhaspati ( Jupiter ) appears to be clearly meant in two Vedic verseṣ ‘Bṛhaspati,²¹ first appearing in the highest heaven of the great Luminary ( the Sun ), destroyed darkness &c.’ ‘Bṛhaspati, who first appearing, rose in front of Tiṣya ( Puṣya ) constellation’. ‘The seven²² priests guard the dear and fixed seat of the bird ( Agni ) along with the five adhvaryus; oxen, going eat, ageless, delight in the east, the genancos of gods’ ( Ṛg III.7.7 ). Here the ( five ) oxen, the five planets Similarly, ‘Ho ( Indra ) filled heaven and earth and the mid-region; he superintends in various ways the five gods, the 49 gods ( Maruts ) at the proper seasons together with the thirty-four lights similar to his own but each according to the different ordinancos governing each’²³ ( Ṛg. X. 55. 3 ). ‘these five oxen that stand in the midst of the great heaven’ ( Ṛg I. 105. 10 ) Vena²⁴ may betaken to be the brilliant Venus in Ṛg. X. 123. 1 and 5 the latter of which may be translated as follows: ‘The young lady (Usas or lightning), approaching with a smile her lover, bears in the highest heaven Vena, the dear one, and she moves about, in the places of the dear (Vena) and sits down with him on a golden wing (a cloud)’. This would be a fine description of Venus rising in the east at dawṇ

About months a good deal would have to be said later oṇ The word is either ‘mās’ or ‘māsa’. We have ‘mās’ in Rg. I. 25. 8, IV 18.4, X 52. 3²⁵ ‘He (Agni) appears every day and every month’ and we have ‘māsa’ in Rg. III. 31. 9, V. 78. 9 (may the boy lying in the womb of his mother for ten months come out alive &c. ), X. 184. 3. ‘Mās’ (the measurer) also means the Moon, as in Rg. VIII 94. 2, X 12.7 (‘sūrye jyotir-adadhur-māsyaktun,’ the gods placed light in the Sun and darkness in the Moon), X. 64. 3, X. 68. 10, X 92.12, X 93. 5. The words ‘mās’ (moon) and ‘māsa’ (month) are Indo-European, as variants of the same occur in many languages of the so-called Aryan family of languageṣ

Naksatras have been a matter of serious discussions in numerous workṣ The word ‘Naksatra’ has in all three senses (1) star in general; (2) 27 equal parts of the zodiac; (3) asterism in the zodiacal belt (which may each consist of one or more stars). In my opinion the first and the 3rd are the most frequent meanings of the word in the Vedic samhitāṣ It may be that the zodiacal belt was divided into 27 equal parts called naksatras, but the easier, more natural and probably the earlier way was to mark some conspicuous star groups like Krttikās, Mrgaśīras and to refer to them as naksatraṣ The word ‘naksatra’ occurs frequently in the Ṛgveda and the other Samhitās and brāhmaṇas; ‘the naksatras like thieves go away along with nights ( to make room ) for the Sun that sees the world (Rg. I. 50. 2), ‘May the earth, the heaven, the waters, the Sun along with the nakṣatras and the wide sky listen to us’ (Rg. III. 54. 19); ‘he ( Varuna ) urges on in two ways the big and high heaven ( the Sun ) and nakṣatras and also spreads the earth’ (Rg. VII. 86. 1); ‘when he ( the Sun ) comes up, nakṣatras are not seen in the heavens, no one knows truly ( how this happens )’ Rg. X. 111. 7, ‘The Ādityas are strong through Soma, the earth is great through Soma and then Soma is placed in the lap of these nakṣatras’ (Rg. X 85 2) In some passages like Rg. VII. 81. 2 and X. 88. 13, it is difficult to say what ‘nakṣatram’ stands for. Nakṣatra in most of the above passages means a star in general But in Rg. X. 85 2 and in X. 68 11 (the pitṛs adorned the heavens with nakṣatras)²⁷ nakṣatra appears to mean the 27 well-known asterismṣ So also when the Śatapatha contrasts the Kṛttikās (that do not swerve from the east) with other nakṣatras ( that do swerve), nakṣatra should be taken to mean asterisms in the Zodiacal belt, the 27 (or 28) constellations in the Zodiacal belt in which the moon appears to move. Another word is ‘str’ (that is an Indo-European word), which always occurs in the instrumental plural in the Ṛgveda (as in I 68. 5, I 87. 1, I 166. 11, II 2 5, II. 34 2, IV. 7. 3, VI. 49. 3 and 12 ) and is often connected with decking the sky. The word ‘ṛkṣa’ in the sense of ‘star’ occurs in Rg ²⁸ I. 24. 10 ‘these ṛkṣas that are established high up ( in the sky ) are seen at night, but where did they go by day’. This refers to the constellation of the seven sages ( Ursa Major ). In the Atharvaveda VI 40 1, the constellation of the seven sages is expressly mentioned : “ May Heaven and Earth confer on us freedom from danger here, may the Sun and the Moon do the same for us; may the wide mid regions confer on us freedom from danger and may there be abhaya for us on account of the oblation offered to the Seven Sages” The Śatapatha states that the seven sages were formerly called ‘ṛkṣāh’ ( note 727 below ) In Rg V. 56 3, VIII. 24. 27, VIII, 68 15 the word ṛkṣa means either ‘bear’ or something else It has been pointed out above p 494 that in Rg. X.55.3 there is a reference to twenty-seven nakṣatraṣ²⁹ Apart from that the Ṛgveda mentions the nakṣatras Tisya (as above) and Aghā and Arjunī³⁰ (in Ṛg. X. 85. 13) which two latter correspond to Maghā and Phalgunīs according to the Atharvaveda. It is possible to hold either that Aghā and Maghā were names for the same nakṣatra in Ṛgvedic times or that Aghā was changed to Maghā by the time of the Tai S. and the Atharvaveda hymnṣ If the latter alternative be accepted the change in the names of the two nakṣatras (Aghā and Arjunī) could not have taken place in a short time, but would require at least a hundred years between the time of Ṛg. X. 85 on the one hand and Tai. S. and Atharva 19. 7 on the other. This would strongly militate against Max Muller's assignment of two hundred years to the Samhitās which are purely hypothetical and the minimum dates (vide Intro p XV to the 4th volume ed of the Ṛgveda) Apart from Aghā and Arjunī which it is agreed are two of the 27 nakṣatras, it is probable that the Ṛgveda refers to Mṛgaśiras, Punarvasu, Satabhiṣak and one or two more by name. The Nakṣatras are 27 or 28 (adding Abhijit after Uttarā- sādha and before Śravana in ancient authorities) In the Vedic literature, Vedāṅgajyotisa and even in Yājñavalkya-smṛti they are enumerated from Kṛttikā to Apabharani (or Bharani) while in works from the 3rd or 4th century A. D. and in modern times they are enumerated from Aśvini to Revati.

It is time now to set out in a list the names of nakṣatras, deities governing them, their gender and the number of stars in each. There is some divergence of views as regards the names and the deities, which will also be pointed out in the appended table: complete lists occur in Tai S IV. 4.10. 1-3, Tai Br. I. 5 and III 1, Atharvaveda XIX. 7. 2-5, Kathaka saṃhitā 39 13, Maitrāyaṇī saṃhitā II. 13 20 and Vedānga-Jyotisa. For European equivalents of the Indian nakṣatras, vide Colebrooke in Asiatic Researches vol. IX chart opposite p 322, Dikshit's Marathi work (2nd eḍ p 459) and Burgess in J. R. A. S for 1893 p. 756. It is not unlikely that there is a veiled reference to Revati, Punarvasu and Pusya nakṣatras in Rg X. 119. 1-3³¹, and Rg X. 85.22 appears to refer³², as Tilak says in ‘Orion' p 166 ff., to the Mṛgasiras nakṣatra; ‘Vṛṣākapi 'O Indra' when you dashing upwards came to the house, where was that Mṛga guilty of a good deal of sin, to whom did that Mṛga, that confounds people, go? Indra is superior to all'. From Rg I. 161 11 and 13 and IV. 33.7, Atharvaveda IV. 11.11 it appears that the dog-star (Sirius) is referred to, and that twelve days were added at the end of the year during which the Ṛbhus slept or took rest or enjoyed the hospitality of the Suṇ³³ In Rg I 124.9 ' satam te ... râjan bhiṣajah sahasram’ it is possible to see a reference to the Śatabhiṣak nakṣatra of which Varuṇa is said be the devatā in the Tai. Br. III. 1, especially as in the following verse (amī ya ṛkṣā nihitāsa uccā) there is a special reference to the Great Bear or to nakṣatras in general.

Some remarks on the nakṣatras in general and on individual nakṣatras would not be out of place. In the Atharvana Nakṣatrakalpa (the first of the Atharvaparisiṣṭas edited by Bolling and Negelein) in chapter 4 verses 1-8 the devatās (deities) of the nakṣatras are given and chap. 2 states the number of stars in each nakṣatra In some Purāṇas also such as the Visṇudharmottara (I 83. 13-21) the presiding deities of nakṣatras are set out. In the Brhat-saṃhitā Varāhamihura (chap. 97. 4-5) specifies the deities of the nakṣatras from Aśvinī to Revatī (including Abhijit) as noted below. The Brhat-saṃhitā (96 1-3), the Ātharvaṇa-nakṣatra-kalpa (I. 2) and the Visṇudharmottara (I. 88 4-7) specify the number of single stars in each nakṣatra (which are from one to six), those having six stars being Kṛttikā, Āśleṣā and Maghā Vide JASB, vol 62 part 1 p. 14 where Hoernle gives a table, from a mṣ of Puṣkarasārī’s work, of nakṣatras, the stars in each, the muhūrtas, the gotra, devatā of each. According to Hoernle the work is very olḍ Some notes are added on individual nakṣatras (mentioned in the Vedic works). Kṛttikā—The Tai. Br. III. 1. 4. I specifies Kṛttikās as Ambā, Dulā &c Pānm refers to Kṛttikā as Bāhulī (in IV. 3. 34). J. C. Hickey in ‘Introducing the universe’ (pp 119-120) says that persons of unusually keen 731 vision under favourable atmos pheric conditions can see even eleveṇ Mṛgaśīrsa—Tai Br. III. 1. 4. 3 mentions both names viz. Mṛgaśīrṣa and Invakā. Punarvasu—In the Kāthaka and Mai. S. this is masculine singular; Pāṇini states (1. 2. 61) that in the Veda the word ‘Punarvasu’ is employed optionally in the singular (i. e. sometimes in the dual, sometimes in the singular) Kālidāsa employs the dual Punarvasū in Raghuvaṁśa XI 36 'gām gatāyīva divāḥ Punarvasī.' Tisya—Pāṇini uses the word Tisya in I 2 63 and 3.34 and the words Pusya and Sidhya in the sense of 'on which undertakings prosper or succeeḍ' Phalguṇī—Pāṇini provides that the words Phalguṇī and Proṣṭhapadā as nakṣatras are optionally used in the dual or plural. Niṣṭyā—Mai. S shows that this is neuter singular. Niṣṭya in Rg. VI, 75. 19, VIII 1. 13, X 133 5 appears to mean 'outsider or outcaste'. Viśākhā—Pāṇini (I 2 62) provides that in the Veda 'Viśākhā' is sometimes used in the singular, sometimes in the dual, while in his day it was used in the dual Anurādhā—The mantra in Tai. Br III 1 2 1 appears to use it as masculine plural Rohinī—Jyeṣṭhā is called Rohinī in Tai S and Tai, Br (I 5) Jyeṣṭhā is styled Jyeṣṭhaghnī in Atharva VI 110 2 Vide note 753 below. Mūla—In Tai S, Vicṛtau is used for Mūla The Atharvaveda brings together Vicṛtau and Jyeṣṭhaghnī in VI 110 2-3 and has 'Vicṛtau nāmā tārake' in II 8.1 and VI 121 3 In Rg X. 87 10 (tṛṇḍhī mūlam yātudhānasya vṛkṣa) Mūla means 'root, foot' The word 'Mūlabarhaṇa' occurs in Atharva VI 110. 2 and Mūlabarhanī in Tai Br. I 5 1 4. Abhijit—not mentioned in Tai S. and Kāṭhaka, though mentioned in Tai. Br., Atharva and Mai. S It is sometimes mentioned in later works e g. the Anuśāsanaparva (64 5-35) mentions the consequences of gifts to brāhmaṇas on 28 nakṣatras from Kṛttikā to Bharaṇī. Śroṇā—Atharva calls it Śravaṇa and Kāṭhaka speaks of it as Aśvattha. In Pāṇini IV 2 22 Aśvattha is mentioned as a nakṣatra, The word Śroṇā in Rg. I, 112 8 means 'lame or cripple' Proṣṭhapadā—Atharvaveda speaks of 'dvayā Proṣṭhapadī'. It would be noticed that some of the names of nakṣatras differ such as Invakā (in Tai Br I 5 1 and Kāthaka) for Mṛgaśīrṣa, Bāhū for Ārdrā (in Tai Br I 5 1, Kāthaka S and Maitrāyaṇī S ), Tiṣya for Puṣya, Niṣṭyā for Svāti (in Tai. Br.), Rohiṇī (in Tai Br. I 5 4 and Tai S ) for Jyeṣṭhā, Vicṛtau in Tai S for Mūla (in other Vedic texts), Śroṇā (in Tai S, Tai, Br. and Mai S.) and Aśvattha in Kāthaka S for Śravaṇa (in Atharva ), Śraviṣṭhā for (medieval and modern) Dhaniṣṭhā, Apabharaṇī for Bharaṇī (in Atharva, Mai S and modern times ). The deities also differ, the most striking being the change of place between Bhaga and Aryaman as presiding deities of Āṣāḍhās in the Kāṭhaka, Vedāṅgajyotiṣa, Sāṅ gr., and Indra as deity of Citrā in Tai. S and Tvastṛ in Tai. Br. | No | Vedic name | Modern name | Vedic deity generally | Tai. Sam IV 4 10. 1-3 | Tai. Br I 5 | Tai. Br III 1, 4-5 | Atharva-veda XIX 7 2-5 | Kāthaka Saṃ39 13 | Maitrā-yani S 11 13 20 | Vedānga Jyotisa verses 25-26. (Rg ), 36 40 (Yajurveda) sets out only deities | Gender | Number of stars | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | 1 | Kṛttikā | Kṛttikā | Agni | Kṛttikā | Kṛttikā | Kṛttikā | mentions no deity for any nakṣatra | Kṛttikā | Kṛttikā | Agni | ⁴¹ | | | 2 | Rohini | Rohini | Prajāpati | Rohini | Rohini | Rohini | Rohini | Rohini | Rohini | Prajāpati | F. | one | | 3 | Mṛga-śīrṣa | Mṛga-śīrṣa | Soma | Mṛga-śīrṣa | Invakā | Mṛga-śīrṣas or Invakā | Mṛga-śīras | Invakā (deity Maruts) | Invakā (deity Maruts) | Soma | N. | one | | | | | | | | | | | | | ⁷⁰ | | | 4 | Ārdrā | Ārdrā | Rudra | Ārdrā | Bāhu | Ārdrā | Ārdrā | Bāhu | Bāhu | Rudra | ⁷¹ | | | 5 | Punar-vasū | Punar-vasū | Aditi | Punar-vasū | Punar-vasū | Punar-vasū | Punar-vasū | Punar-vasū | Punar-vasū | Aditi | M. | two | | | | | | | | | | | | | ³⁹ | | | Main Entry | Nakshatra/Form 1 | Deity 1 | Nakshatra/Form 2 | Nakshatra/Form 3 | Nakshatra/Form 4 | Nakshatra/Form 5 | Nakshatra/Form 6 | Nakshatra/Form 7 | Deity 2 | Gender/Number/Source | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | sya | Pusya | Brhas-pati | Tisya | Tisya | Tisya | Pusya | Tisya | Tisya | Bṛhaspati | M. one | | āreṣā | Āślesā | Sarpāh | Āślesā | Āślesā | Āślesā | Āślesā | Āślesā | Āślesā | Sarpāh | F. Plural | | aghā | Maghā | Pitarah | Maghā | Maghā | Maghā | Maghā | Maghā | Maghā | Pitarah | F. Plural | | halguni | Purvā (Phal-guni) | Arya-man | Phal-guni | Pūrvā Phal-guni | Phal-guni | Pūrvā Phal-guni | Phal-gunih (Bhaga deity) | Phal-gunih (Bhaga deity) | Bhaga | F. Plural; dual in Atharva, Tai. Br. I. 5 and III. 1 and singular in Tai. S. | | halguni | Uttarā Phalgunī | Bhaga | Phal-guni | Uttarā Phal-guni | Phal-guni | not men-tioned | Uttarā Phal-gunih (deity Arya-man) | Phal-gunih (deity Arya-man) | Aryaman | F. one; dual in Tai. Br. I. 5 and III. 1. 4. 10 | | Hasta | Hasta | Savitr | Hasta | Hasta | Hasta | Hasta | Hasta | Hasta | Savitr | M. singular; dual in Kathaka | | Jitrā | Citrā | Indra | Citrā | Citrā | Citrā deity Tvastṛ | Citrā | Citrā (Tvastṛ) | Citrā (Tvastṛ) | Tvastṛ | F. one | | Svāti | Svāti | Vāyu | Svāti | -Nistyā (Vāyu) | Nistyā (Vāyu) | Svāti | Nistyā (Vāyu) | Nistyam (Vāyu) | Vāyu | F. one N. in Mai | | No. Vedic name | Modern name | Vedic deity generally | Tai. Saṃ IV 4 10, 1-3 | Tai Br. I, 5 | Tai Br. III. 1 4-5 | Atharva-veda XIX 7. 2-5 | Kāthaka Saṃ 39.13 | Maitrā-yani S. II 13 20 | Vedānga Jyotisa verses 25-26 (Rg), 36. 40 (Yajurveda) sets out only deities | Gender | Number of stars | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | 14 Visākhā | Visākhā | Indrā-gni | Visākhe | Visākhe | Visākhe | Visākh | Visā-kham | Visā-kham | Indrāgni | F. N | Two singular in Kāt, Mai | | 15 Anūrādhā | Anū-rādhā | Mitra | Anū-rādhā | Anū-rādhā | Anū-rādhā | Anū-rādhā | Anū-rādhā | Anū-rādhā | Mitra | F. M. | Plural plural in Tai. Br. III 1.5.1. | | 16 Rohini | Jyesthā | Indra | Rohini | Rohini | Jyesthā | Jyesthā | Jyesthā (Indra) | Jyesthā (Varuna) | Indra | F. | one | | 17 Viortau | Mūla | Pitarah | Viortau (Pitarah) | Mūla-barhani (Nirrti) | Mūla (Nirrti) | Mūlam | Mūlam (Nirrti) | Mūlam (Nirrti) | | M or F | two (when vicrtau) N one (Mūla) in Kāt, Tai. Br III. 1.5.3 | | 18 Asādhā | Pūrvā-sādhā | Apah | Asādhā | Pūrvā-sādhā | Asādhāh | Asādhā | Asādhā | Asādhā | Apah | F. | Plural | | 19 Asādhā | Uttarā-sādhā | Visve-devāh | Asādhā | Uttarā-sādhā | Asādhāh | Uttarā | Uttarā-sādhā | Asādhā | Visve-devāh | F. | Plural | | | Abhijit
(not counted) | Brahmā | not men-
tioned | Abhijit
(deity not ṃ) | Abhijit
(Brahmā) | Abhijit | not men-
tioned | Abhijit
(Brahmā) | not men-
tioned | N. | | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | 20 Abhijit | Abhijit
(not counted) | Brahmā | not men-
tioned | Abhijit
(deity not ṃ) | Abhijit
(Brahmā) | Abhijit | not men-
tioned | Abhijit
(Brahmā) | not men-
tioned | N. | one | | 21 Śroṇā | Śravana | Viṣṇu | Śroṇā | Śroṇā | Śroṇā | Śravana | A´sva-ttha | Śroṇā
(Viṣṇu) | Viṣṇu | F | one | | 22 Śravisthā | Dhani-
stha | Vasavah | Śra-
visthā | Śra-
visthā | Śra-
visthā | Śra-
visthā | Śra-
visthā | Śra-
visthā | Vasavah | F | Plural | | 23 Sata-
bhisak | Sata-
bhisak | Indra | Sata-
bhisak | Sata-
bhisak
(Indra) | Sata-
bhisak
(Varuna) | Sata-
bhisak
(Varuna) | Sata-
bhisak
(Indra) | Sata-
bhisak | | M
N | one
in Atharva, Mai. | | 24 Prostha-
padā | Pūrvā
Bhadra-
padā | Aja
Ekapād | Prostha-
padā | Prostha-
padā | Prostha-
padā | Prostha-
padā | Prostha-
padā
(Ahirbu-
dhnya) | Prostha-
padā
(Aja
Ekapād) | Aja Ekapād | M
F. | Plural in Tai Br.
I, 5 and III. 1
in others | | 25 Prostha-
padā | Uttarā
Bhadra-
padā | Ahirbu-
dhnya | Prostha-
padā
(Ahirbu-
dhnya) | Prostha-
padā
(Ahirbu-
dhnya) | Prostha-
padā
(Ahirbu-
dhnya) | Prostha-
padā
(Ahirbu-
dhnya) | Uttarā
Prostha-
padā
(Aja
Ekapād) | Prostha-
padā
(Ahirbu-
dhnya) | Ahirbu-
dhnya | M | (or F ?) Plural | | 26 Revatī | Revatī | Pūsan | Revatī | Revatī | Revatī | Revatī | Revatī | Pūsan | | F | one | | 27 A´sva-
yujau | A´svinī | A´svinau | A´sva-
yujau | A´sva-
yujau | A´sva-
yujau | A´sva-
yujau | A´sva-
yujau | A´svinau | | M. | dual | | 28 Apabha-
ranī | Bharanī | Yama | Apabha-
ranī | Apabha-
ranī | Bharanī | Apabha-
ranīh | Bha-
ranyah | Bhara-
ṇīh | Yama | | F | Plural | and Kāṭhaka S, Pitarah as deity for Mūla in Tai S. but Nirṛti in almost all other texts; Indra as deity of Śatabhiṣak in Tai. S. and Mai. S but Varuna in Tai Br (III. 1.) and Kāṭhaka. Further, it was also specified whether a nakṣatra had only one star or had a cluster of two or three or more. Besides, the important point for consideration is; why does the Tai S. differ from the Tai. Br and Tai Br. I 5 from Tai. Br. III. 1 in the number of nakṣatras, in the names and the deities also of some of them No satisfactory explanation can be given except this that the Tai. S passage is earlier by some centuries than the Tai Br. section (III 1) or the Tai. S was composed in a country far away from the place where the Tai Br. was composeḍ This latter does not appear to be probable since one part of Tai. Br. (I 5) differs from another part (III. 1). The latter section speaks of a nakṣatra-iṣṭī in which oblations are offered to 28 nakṣatras (including Abhijit) and their deities (one nakṣatra being dealt with on each day from Kṛttikās) together with puronuvākyās (invitatory verses) and yājyās (oblation verses) which are different for each nakṣatra The first fourteen nakṣa- tras from Kṛttikā (up to and including Viśākha) are called Devanakṣatras and the fourteen nakṣatras from Anūrādha to Apabharaṇi or Bharaṇi are called Yamanakṣatraṣ After Viśākha, the Tai. Br. (Nakṣatrestī) inserts Paurnamāsī with appropriate puronuvākyā and yājyā verses and after Apabharaṇi an offering to Amāvasyā with a puronuvākyā (which is the verse 'Niveśanī saṁgamanī vasūnāṁ' Tai S III. 5 1.1) and a yājyā (which is the verse 'yat te devā adadhur', Tai S. III. 4 1.1). Besides, it was laid down that the sacrificer had to invoke gods in the sacrifice by a name (to be kept secret) derived from the presiding deity of the nakṣatra on which he was⁴⁰ born ( i. e. if born on Kṛttikā, then some name like Agnimita &c., if on Puṣya, Bṛhaspatimitra &c. ).

If the nakṣatras ( 27 or 28 ) had been borrowed at one time en bloc from a foreign source the divergences in the names of the nakṣatras, in the presiding deities, and in the gender and number should ordinarily not have arisen to the extent they do. But, if they were an indigenous growth then differences of opinion would naturally have been evolved in the passage of centurieṣ The only asterisms first specialised and named in Greece and Syria were the Pleiades in Job 38. 31, Homer and Hesiod; Orion in Job 39 31, Homer and Hesiod; Arcturus in Job 9.9 and in 39.32, Homer and Hesiod, the great Bear in Homer and Hesiod, Aldebaran in Homer and Hesiod and three more including Sirius ( vide 'Dawn of Astronomy' by Norman Lockyer, 1884 p. 33 ). This is several centuries later ( if not thousands ) than the early Vedic texts wherein the whole scheme of nakṣatras appearṣ

Further details contained in the Tai Br and Baudhāyana śrauta sūtra ( 28 3-4 ) are not set out here. The Nakṣatreṣṭi in the Tai. Br ( III. 1 ) has been competently dealt with by Prof Paul Emile Dumont in the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol 98, No 3 ( 1954 ) with text, English translation and noteṣ The nakṣatras had been closely observed and many legends arose from imaginary resemblances of star groups to animals and also fanciful interpretations of the constellations observed in the sky. The nakṣatras were closely concerned not merely in a religious rite called Nakṣatreṣṭi, but they were of prime importance in the basic śrauta rite, viz. consecration of the sacred fires (Agnyādhāna). In the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa ( II. 1. 2 ) reference is made to several nakṣatras from Kṛttikā onwards together with their presiding deities as being fit for Agnyādhāna ( viz Kṛttikā, Rohiṇī, Mṛgaśīrṣa, Pūrva Phalguni, Uttara Phalguni, Hasta, Citrā ). The Tai Br. recommends spring, summer and śarad for Agnyādheya in the case of brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya or vaiśya sacrificer respectively. The Śatapatha appears to condemn setting up of sacred fires in relation to naksatra alone and recommends that Agnyādheya should be performed on the New Moon of Vaiśākha on which there is Rohini naksatra; ⁴⁰ but these rules did not apply when a person had resolved upon performing Soma sacrifice and he should not in that case stop to consider the season or naksatra.

Very interesting information and legends are given in the Vedic texts about some of the naksatraṣ About the Krttikās the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa⁴² states 'other naksatras contain one star, or two or three or four stars, but these Krttikās are many, the sacrificer reaches plenty; therefore one should set up sacred fires on the Krttikāṣ These ( Krttikās ) indeed do not swerve from the east, while all other naksatras do swerve from the eastern directioṇ' The recondite allusion in Rg. I. 164. 33 ( atra pita duhitur-garbham-ādhāt ) and X. 61. 7 ( pita yat svām duhitaramadhiskan ) are developed into a myth, a lengthy account of which is given in the Ait. Br XIII, 10 and Śatapatha I. 6. 2. 1-4 ( Prajāpati approached his daughter, some say the heaven and others say it was Usas &c. ) and about Rohinī, Mrga, the Mrgavyādha ( Sirius ) and the three stars in the belt of Orioṇ Prajāpati⁴³ is said to have had 33 daughters which he gave in marriage to king Soma, who was fond of Rohinī and on account of that suffered from Rājayaksman ( Tai. S. II, 3. 5 1)

Why the naksatra lists begin with the Krttikās in the Vedic Literature and why with Aśvini in classical Sanskrit literature can be explained only on astronomical considerationṣ The ver- nal equinox was in Kṛttikā about 2300 B. C. Instead of admit- ting this as a probable date for the Vedic works, Fleet boldly asserts that the list of nakṣatras beginning with Kṛttikās has no basis in fact, but belongs entirely to ritual and astrology (JRAS for 1916 p. 570 ). No detailed arguments are deemed necessary Fleet does not specify cogent evidence, nor does he assign reasons why priests later on changed the beginning of the list from Kṛttikā to Aśvinī, nor does he vouchsafe how the list of nakṣatras in the Vedic age began in fact for ordinary folk if the Kṛttikā list was a pure priestly invention Even Thibaut ( in I A. vol. 24 at p. 100 ) had to admit that the begin- ning of the nakṣatra series with Kṛttikā instead of with Aśvinī seriously affects Max Muller's assignment of 1500 B. C. to 800 B. C. to the Vedic period In the Tai. S VII 4 8 there is a discussion about the time for undergoing the dīkṣā in a Saṁvat- sara-satra.⁴⁴ It is proposed there that the dīkṣā may be performed on the Full Moon in Phālguni because that is the beginning of the year; then an objection is raised against this and it is pro- posed that the dīkṣā may be taken on Full Moon in Citrā, because that was the beginning of the year. If the year began with the winter solstice in those days this reference would have to be placed at 4000 or 6000 B. C. This passage probably embodies traditions that the year began in different months in different periods of antiquity.

Great controversies have raged over the question whether the Indian nakṣatras are indigenous or were borrowed from some other people. The great French astronomer Biot held that Indians borrowed the nakṣatra system from the Chinese and Whitney followed Biot There were others who held that Indians borrowed them either from the Babylonians or the Arabs I cannot enter here into the merits of these discussions The Arabs them- selves admit that they borrowed their astronomy from Indian Siddhāntas and there is hardly anything to show that they knew the complete nakṣatra system as early as at least 1500 B. C. Therefore, we may leave the Arabs out of account altogether ( vide Thibaut m Grundriss p. 14 ) Great scholars are often blinded by prejudices and shut their eyes to basic factṣ The Chinese system of Sieu had at first only 24 and then it became one of (it is said) 28 at about 1100 B. C. (as said by Thibaut in Grundriss p. 13.) There are no clear traces in the Vedic texts that nakṣatras were held to be 24 during the times of those textṣ We should not accept at their face value the assumptions of the antiquity of astronomy in China that are sometimes advanced (vide 'East and West', Rome, vol. VI, p. 288.) Besides, neither in Babylonia nor in China were the asterisms thoroughly integrated with the religious systeṃ In Vedic times one was not entitled to perform solemn sacrifices unless he had already set up sacred fires on certain nakṣatraṣ Further, the months (Māgha, Phālguna, Caitra &c.) were named after certain nakṣatras and exist only in Sanskrit, not in Greek, Latin or Chinese. The deities that were deemed to preside over the nakṣatras from such ancient days as those of the Tai S. and Tai. Br. are almost all of them exclusively Vedic and have no counter-parts in Babylonia or China. Besides, though thousands of cuneiform tablets have been found in Babylonia no one has, so far as I know, pointed to a single tablet where all the nakṣatras appear in an orderly series of 27 or 28, as we find in Vedic Samhitāṣ It is at least clear that long before the Taittirīya saṃhitā the Vedic people had fixed the number of the nakṣatras (at 27 or 28 ), their names and order and their presiding deities and had made the nakṣatras a most integral part of their sacri- ficial systeṃ Furthermore, almost all of the Indian names of nakṣatras are significant or have ancient legends connected with theṃ For example, Ārdrā means ‘wet’ and the nakṣatra was call- ed Ārdrā because when the sun was in it rains set iṇ Punarvasu was probably so called because the grains of paddy or barley sown in the ground sprout up as new wealth after being buried; Pusya, was so called because the young sprouts grow and become nourished; Āśreṣā or Āśleṣā, because the grown-up plants of paddy or barley grow high enough to embrace each other; Maghā, be- cause the paddy or other plants are putting forth the standing crop which is wealth in itself; Kṛttikā, because they (being six or seven), look like the skin of the spotted deer on which a religious student was to sit for Vedic study. In these circum- stances the burden to prove borrowing of the nakṣatra system by Indians was very heavy on those who affirmed it. What is the evidence? There is very little evidence except prejudice and speculatioṇ The main tangible evidence they can and do rely on is that the Chinese or Babylonians had also 28 nakṣatras as the Indians haḍ But these scholars, though very learned and far-seeing in their own way, never stopped to consider how from China and Babylon the naksatras could reasonably be supposed to have been derived by Indians more than 3500 years ago (on a most modest estimate) and allowed to be the very centre and basis of their religion of sacrifices, what were the means for the communication of the thoughts and ideas underlying the naksatra system and why one may not surmise that the real state of things was the other way about ( viz. the Babylonians and Chinese derived the system from the ancestors of Indians ) or that all systems were derived from a common prehistoric source. Another reason for discounting the theories of Biot, Weber and Whitney may also be advanced viz the researches of Tilak in his 'Orion' (particularly pp. 61–95) and of Prof. Jacobi have at least made this clear that the Krttika series is not the oldest arrangement of the naksatras known to Indians, but that the Indians had once an older arrangement, which plac- ed Mrgaśīrsa at the vernal equinox. Those who are interested in these somewhat novel and rather barren controversies raised by Biot, Weber and others may read Weber's 'der vedischen Nachrich- ten von den Naksatras', two volumes, I A vol 23 pp. 154–159 (Jacobi on the 'date of the Ṛgveda'), pp. 238–249 (Buhler's note on Jacobi's theory and Tilak's Orion, I A. pp. 85–100 (Thibaut on 'antiquity of Vedic civilization') and pp 361–369 (Whitney), I A 48 pp. 95–97. The word 'naksatra' is derived by Yaska ⁴⁵ from the root 'naks' meaning 'to go', while the Śatapatha Br. (II 1. 2. 17–18) and Tai Br. II 7 18 derive it as from na plus ksatra and Panini (VI 3 75) accepts this derivatioṇ The word 'naksatra' (m) is applied even to the Sun in Rg. VI. 67. 6. Tai. Br teaches how one is to mark the naksatra on which one has to perform a religious act, viz, he should mark about dawn and before the first rays light the sky the part of the sky where the naksatra appears and when the sun appears the naksatra would be to the west of the sun, at which time he should perform what he has to do. It is stated that sage Matsya established into eminence Yajñesu and Śatadyumna by this method (Tai. Br. I. 5. 2 1.)

Even so early as the Ait. Br. ⁴⁶ Vedic Indians had arrived at the conclusion that the Sun was one and never setṣ ‘This Sun indeed never sets nor riseṣ When people think that he (the Sun) sets what happens is he reaches the end of the day, reverses himself, creates night below and day above When people think that he rises in the morning, that means that having reached the end of the night he reverses himself, makes day below and night above. He indeed never sets'. This is in very interesting contrast to the Jaina view in Suryaprajnapti of two suns and two moons or the view of Heraclitus in Greece (6th century B C.) that a new sun was born and died every day ( Eisler p. 43.)

In the Brāhmaṇa period Indians had⁴⁷ found out the day called Visuvat or Viśuva (which is said to be in the middle of the sacrificial year) when the day and night were of equal length: 'As a person fastens the two wings or sloping sides of a hall (or shed) to the bamboo ridge or beam that is in the middle (of the shed), so people use the Divākirțya day for stretching across the two sides ( half years)'.

I have purposely devoted some space to the subject of the astronomical knowledge of people in the Vedic age. Several European scholars that have written on the astronomical achievements of ancient and medieval India, have indulged in very disparaging and contemptuous statements about Indians not only in astronomy, but generally. To take only one or two instances Thibaut ( Grundriss p. 3 ) is pleased to observe that what Indians knew before Greek influence is not much and is of a primitive character. This is how Whitney, a learned American scholar of Sanskrit, unburdens himself; ‘there can be no question that, from what we know in other respects of the character and tendencies of the Hindu mind, we should not at all look to find the Hindus in possession of an astronomical science possessing so much of truth. They have been from the beginning distinguished by a remarkable inaptitude and disinclination to observe, to collect facts, to record, to make inductive investigations’ ( J. A. O S vol. VI p. 471 ). His coadjutor, Mr. Burgess, differed from him even in regard to astronomy ( ibiḍ pp. 477–480 ).

One is tempted to return Whitney’s compliments to Indians in the same coin by saying that for 1400 years from Ptolemy, the ancestors of Whitney and other highbrows hardly ever made any discovery of astronomical importance, stuck unthinkingly and slavishly to the Almagest and were literally in the dark about the true astronomical position during what are often called the Dark Ages of Europe. Even Luther who rebelled against the authority of the Pope denounced Copernicus as a fool, charged the latter with turning upside down the science of astronomy and relied upon the Bible, which, he said, declared that Joshua commanded the Sun to stand still and not the Earth ( Joshua 10. 12 ). This betrays the old mentality that if there is a contradiction between the words of the Bible and Nature, the believers in Scripture must correct their ideas of Nature in accordance with the Bible and not the Bible in accordance with what is found to be Nature. This also reminds one of the maxim of the Pūrvamīmāṁsā that there is nothing too heavy for a sacred text.

I should request all Western authors interested in Indology and dazzled by some writings of a few Greeks to ponder deeply over the following words of Sir Norman Lockyer in his ‘Dawn of Astronomy’ (1894) ‘Anaximander told us that the earth was situated on the flat end of the cylinder, and Plato, on the ground that the cube was the most perfect geometrical figure, imagined the earth to be a cube, the part of the earth known to the Greeks being on the upper surface. In these matters the vaunted Greek mind was little in advance of the predecessors of the Vedic priests’ (p. 8). If the Greeks forged ahead in one or two branches, there were several other peoples in the world that far surpassed them in other equally important matterṣ I would also recommend to them to read carefully what Sarton says in his Preface (p. IX) to ‘A history of Science’ where he charges Western writers with unpardonable omissions viz. ignoring the scientific efforts of Egypt, Mesopotamia and other countries and assuming childishly that science began in Greece and secondly hiding the superstitions which surrounded eminent Greekṣ Writers at least in the 19th and 20th centuries should have no reason to run down one people and praise to the skies another people, but their endeavour should be to arrive at well- documented, well-balanced, impartial and cautious judgments upon the achievements of ancient peoples of the world

The chronology of the Vedic age is far from certaiṇ Jacobi, Dikshit, Tilak and some others would put the Vedic age back to 4000 B. C. or even earlier Winternitz puts it as far back as 2500 B. C. while Max Müller and following him many Western scholars would thrust all Vedic Literature between 1500 to 800 B. C. Even taking these latter timings the Vedic Litera- ture shows a good deal of progress in astronomical matters which Indians could not have owed to Greece. There is no extant literature in Greece that can be placed earlier than about 900 or 800 B. C with certainty. The Homeric poems and the works of Hesiod are the oldest surviving literary writings in Greek. Homer mentions the Sun, the Moon, the morning and evening star, the Pleiades, Hyades, Orion, Great Bear, Sirius (Orion’s Dog), Bootes (Arcturus) and Hesiod mentions practi- cally the same stars as Homer; Hesiod says that spring began sixty days after winter solstice, puts down moon’s period at thirty days, but does not mention equinoxeṣ⁴⁹ It should be noted that Vedic astronomy several centuries (if not thousands of years) earlier than Homer and Hesiod was at least as advanced as that in the two Greek authorṣ The very ancient peoples (besides Indians and Chinese) are the Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Hittites and Chaldeanṣ About the Egyptians, the Cambridge Ancient History (vol. II p. 218) states that there is very little trace of the application of Mathematics to Astro- nomy in Egypt and that, though the length of the solar year had been fairly accurately determined, this was done by observation of the heliacal rising of Sirius or Sothis which happened to correspond rather closely with the first rise of the Nile and involved no calculation whatsoever. About Hittites and Chaldeans there is not much to be said as no one asserts that nakṣatras were borrowed from theṃ Even about 800 B. C. Homer’s and Hesiod’s knowledge of astronomy was meagre. Even Hipparchus, regarded as the greatest astronomer of anti- quity who completed his catalogue about 130 B C, had access to a continuous series of observations made in Mesopotamia reaching back to 747 B C.⁴⁹ Ptolemy wrote about 150 A. D. his Almagest is based on the observations of Hipparchus, and almost all that is known about the predecessors of Ptolemy is derived from the latter’s work, as, owing to the very excellence of Ptolemy’s work, all writings of his predecessors ceased to be studied and have not been recovereḍ The theory of Greek influ- ence in astrology will be dealt with a little later on, but a few words may be said here about the supposed influence of Greek astronomy on the Indian Siddhāntas⁵⁰, and later workṣ first place no Indian work of the Siddhānta class admits that any Yavana knowledge was at the basis of the Indian astronomy nor do these ancient Sanskrit works on astronomy set out any large number of purely astronomical terms of Greek origin as Varāha does in astrology. The subjects to be dealt with in the Pañcasid- dhāntikā are set out in chap. I, verses 5–7 and there is hardly any word therein that can be said to be originally Greek. Reliance is placed by Weber and others on the fact that two of the five Siddhāntas the characteristics of which are summarised by Varāhamihira in his Karaṇa⁵¹ called Pañca- siddhāntikā are designated Romaka and Pauliśa and it is argued that this clearly suggests Greek influence. One should like to know the number of purely Greek astronomical words employed in the Siddhāntas (older than Varāha) and different from the 36 or 37 Greek words said to have been employed in Sanskrit astrology by Varāha and others Conceding for argument that Romaka stands for the Alexandrian school that does not prove Greek influence on the Siddhāntaṣ There is hardly any evidence to show that any medieval work or calendar in India followed or was based mainly upon the data of the Romaka.⁵² The length of its year is 365 days, 5 hours 55 minutes and 12 seconds which exactly agrees with the determination of the extent of the year given by Hipparchus and accepted by Ptolemy (Thibaut in Grundriss p. 42) The rules set up by Varāha for ahargaṇa according to Romaka give results for the meridian of Yavanapura (and not for that of Ujjayinī). It did not occur to any Western scholar so far that the Romaka-siddhānta being in Sanskrit was most probably composed by some Greek⁵³ settled in India familiar with Sanskrit as well as with the Greek or Alexandrian astronomy that preceded Ptolemy and probably even Hipparchus and that therefore Varāha gave a summary of it in his karaṇa, just as in his famous work on Astrology, the Bṛhatjātaka, he mentions the views of the Yavanas and frequently differs from theṃ Further Varāha is generous in his appreciation of Greek astrology.⁷⁴³ 'Yavannas are indeed Mlecchas and this śāstra is well cultivated (or established) among them; even they (the Yavanas) are honoured as if they were sageṣ What need it be said about a brāhmaṇa well-versed in Astrology (he will be honoured much more)'. The word 'śāstra' in this verse when read along with 'daivavid' in the 2nd half must be taken in the sense of ‘horā-śāstra’. But Varāha nowhere pays a similar compliment to Yavanas about their proficiency in Astronomy and Mathematicṣ This would suggest that in astronomy he did not rate them high or did not think they had anything special to impart to Indians or at least he did not base his astronomical theories on the works of Greek astronomerṣ He hardly ever employs any Greek words that are not already employed in his work on astrology.

Thibaut (Grundriss, p 42) holds that the name Pulisa has decidedly a non-Indian appearance. One fails to understand why these learned writers are so positive about a certain name being non-Indiaṇ We have in Sanskrit such ancient names as Pulastya,⁷⁴⁴ Pulaha, Paulastya ( for Kubera ) which contain most of the elements of the word Pulisa and are very similar to it. Even in these days Hindus bear such names as Nabobsingh. The siddhāntas are called Paitāmaha and Pulisa because they were deemed to have been composed by Pitamaha and Pulisa. Alberuni, Thibaut says, traces the name Pulisa to a Greek author Paulus; but Alberuni who was familiar with both Indian and Greek authors might have committed a mistake, as even such a scholar as Weber, whose vast reading and phenomenal industry are a marvel, was misled by mere similarity in name and one recalls what was said in the drama Śakuntala by the attendant of Śakuntalā’s little son that the child was misled by the similarity of nameṣ Thibaut himself admits that it cannot be proved that the Pulisa siddhānta is related to the work of the Greek astrologer Pauluṣ Pulisa-siddhānta appears to have restricted itself mostly to astronomical matterṣ We have seen (p 488) that the Paitāmaha-siddhānta was composed about 80 A. D. Therefore, that Siddhānta could not have borrowed anything from Ptolemy (150 A. D.). Prof. Neugebauer again has no doubt that the original impetus to scientific Hindu astronomy came from Hellenistic astronomy, since he thinks that the use of the eccentric-epicycle model alone is sufficient proof. But he is inclined to hold that the period of reception lies between Hipparchus and Ptolemy and hopes that a systematic study of Hindu astronomical works might reveal information about pre-Ptolemaic Greek astronomy no longer preserved in available Greek sourceṣ It is doubtful whether that hope will ever be fulfilleḍ If ancient Indians were capable of analysing the elements of the Sanskrit language and raising such a system as Panini's, if they could plumb the depths of the human mind and create a mental discipline like the Yoga, if they carefully noted centuries before Christ the parts of the glottis and other organs in the mouth in the production of the letters of their language and produced the Pratisakhyas and Siksa works, if they could create a fable literature and invent the game of chess and make a gift of these two to the whole of mankind, if their knowledge of Algebra was of a superior order (vide Colebrooke's Essays, vol. II. at p. 446 and Cajori's 'a History of Elementary Mathematics' pp 93–101), if they invented the decimal place value^744b system for numbers and propagated it and the sign for a zero to Europe through the Arabs in the 12th century A. D., there is hardly any compelling reason for saying that it would not have been possible for them to arrive at their own eccentric and epicycle system (of which Prof. Neugebauer makes so much) independently of any other people to explain the One more observation must be made here. The Vedānga-Jyotiṣa⁶⁰ says 'The sun and the moon start towards the north in the month of Māgha at the beginning of Śraviṣṭhā (i e. Dhaniṣṭhā) and the Sun starts towards the south in the middle of Āślesā in the month of Śrāvaṇa' i e. winter solstice was in the beginning of Dhaniṣṭhā In the Bṛhatsamhitā Varāhamihira tells us that in his day the two ayanas of the Sun took place at the beginning of Karkataka and of Makara respectively, that indeed at some time in the past Uttarāyana began at the beginning of Dhaniṣṭhā and dakṣiṇāyana commenced in the middle of Āśleṣā and that therefore it was so declared in former śāstraṣ This shows that, between about 505 A. D. when Varāha planned and probably wrote his Pañca-siddhāntikā and the observation contained in the Vedānga-Jyotiṣa, the commen-cement of Dakṣināyana had shifted from the middle of Āślesā to the last quarter of Punarvasu i e in all about 23 degrees and 20 minuteṣ Varāhamihira makes no effort to explain thiṣ It is therefore quite reasonable to argue that he was probably not aware of the theory of the precession of the equinoxeṣ Autho-rities are not in complete agreement as to the yearly extent of precessioṇ Taking it at 50 2 seconds per year, the total number of years between Varāha and the date of the observation in Vedānga Jyotisa would be about 1673 and deducting 505 years (the time of Varāha's epoch for a siddhānta calculation) the observation would refer itself to about 1168 B. C. If Varāha and his predecessors had borrowed scientific astronomy directly from the Greeks, they should have been quite aware of the precession of equinoxes, since precession is said to have been discovered by Hipparchus, and was adopted by Ptolemy.⁶¹ This consideration has special force in view of the fact that Varāha believed that the constellation of the Saptarsis (Ursa Major) was in the Maghās at the time when Yudhisthira ruled, that that star group remains for one hundred years in each of the 27 nakşatras and that therefore to complete one cycle through all nakşatras the star group of Saptarsis required 2700 yearṣ⁶² There are other serious difficulties also in holding that the Sanskrit scientific astronomical treatises were acquainted with or borrowed from Ptolemy's work. Numerous discrepancies in essential matters exist between Ptolemy's work and Hindu astronomical works such as the assignment of different dimensions to the epicycles of the planets by Ptolemy and by Hindu writerṣ There- fore, it is altogether improbable that the Hindu works were directly based on Ptolemy's work. Nor is there any direct evidence to show that Hindu works were based on Hipparchus or the works of other Greek writerṣ No such Greek works are now available nor are even Greek elementary manuals of astronomers available which can be said to agree with Hindu scientific workṣ That an extensive Sanskrit literature on astronomy has perished is clear from Varāha-mihira's works and Utpala's quotations in his commentaries on the Br. S. and Brhajjātaka. Modern Western writers would do well to observe at least a non-committal attitude instead of repeating ad nauseum that Hindu scientific astronomy was derived from Greeks on slender similarities between the two systems and on obscure and ill-understood passages and extracts in old astronomical works (vide E. Burgess in J. A. O S. vol. VI at p 480).

After having briefly indicated the astronomical knowledge to be gathered from Vedic works, it is now necessary to show that astrological knowledge is also found in the Vedic texts from the oldest timeṣ The human mind is very curious to know the future and is very prone to regard certain days, times and appearances as auspicious or favourable and others as inauspiciouṣ Various means were adopted by ancient peoples to pry into the future. The word astrology is now generally understood⁷⁴⁷ to mean the predictions about what would befall an individual based on the configurations of the Sun, the moon and the planets at the time of his birth. But this was not the sense or at least the only sense in which the word was used in very ancient timeṣ Astrology known to us from the ancient Assyrians was concerned almost wholly with the interpretation of celestial phenomena and planetary configurations and the predictions about the immediate future in relation to the country, its people, its government or king, in such matters as the crops, floods, storms, invasions or other calamitieṣ The events in the heavens, in the sky and even on the earth were supposed to intimate the thoughts of the gods, and to convey indications about impending happeningṣ This may be called natural astrology. Horoscopic astrology is a later development. Predictions were also derived by skilled diviners from various other happenings such as dreams, the flight and cries of birds, and the interpretation of the mysterious signs on the livers⁷⁴⁸ of the sheep killed in sacrifices to gods in Babylon and Rome. The first thing that we notice is that even in the Ṛgveda we have frequent references to ‘auspiciousness of days’ (sudinava ahnām) in Ṛg. III. 85, III. 23.4, VII. 88.4, X. 70.1, (‘sudinatvam- ahnām’ in Ṛg. II. 21. 6 and ‘sudinesvahnām’ in Ṛg. IV. 37.1). A few of these may be translated here. ‘O Indra! establish amongst us abundance of wealth, freedom from injury to our bodies, sweetness of speech and luckiness of days’ (Ṛg. II. 21.6); ‘(The sacrificial post) when planted on an auspicious day goes prospering in the sacrifice attended by many men’ (Ṛg III 85). 'O Agnī! I establish thee on the best place of the earth (the uttaravedi), the place of worship and for libation, securing luckiness of day; may you shine opulently on the (river) Dṛṣadvatī, on the concourse of people, on the river Apaya and on Sarasvatī (Ṛg III, 23,4)⁶⁷.

There are several other passages in which a wish is expressed that the days would be auspicious or lucky for sacrificers etc. Vide Ṛg. IV. 4 7, V. 60 5, VII. 11. 2, VII. 18. 21, I. 124.2 (May new dawns like the past ones shine for us with wealth and lucky days), X. 39 12 ⁶⁷

It has already been seen above (note 726) that in Ṛgvedic times cows were driven (by way of dowry) to the bridegroom's house on Aghās (Maghās) and the bride was carried in a chariot to the bridegroom's house after the marriage on the Arjuni (or Phalguni) nakṣatra In accordance with this the nakṣatras on which marriage should be celebrated are enumerated in the Bauḍ gr. as Rohini, Mrgaśīrṣa, Uttarā-Phalguni and Svāti.

It has already been shown above (on p 506) how Agnyādheya (the setting up of the sacred fires) was to be performed on one of seven nakṣatras or in spring, summer and autumn according to the varṇa (class) of the performer (vide Kathaka S. 8.1, Śāt Br. II. 1.2, Tai Br.I 1 2 6-7). But an exception was recognized in the case of one performing a Soma sacrifice. It was provided that whenever a man had a desire to perform a Soma sacrifice he might establish the sacred fires in any season and that would bring prosperity to hiṃ⁶⁸

In ancient Vedic passages no clear line of demarcation appears between what may be called natural astrology and individual astrology. For example, in the Tai. Br.⁷⁵¹ it is provided that people plough their fields on Anurādhā nakṣatra, of which Mitra is the presiding deity. The Pāraskaragṛhya prescribes in the same strain that a man should put the ploughshare (in his field) on an auspicious day or on Jyeṣṭhā nakṣatra of which Indra is the presiding deity (and rains are in the hands of Indra). On the other hand, the same Brāhmaṇa⁷⁵² (Taittirīya) provides that if a man desires that his daughter should be dear to her husband he should get her married when the moon is in Niṣṭyā (Svāti) nakṣatra and that if he does so his daughter becomes dear to her husband and never comes back to her father’s house. The nakṣatras from Kṛttikā to Viśākhā have been declared to be Devanakṣatras and whatever rites are performed on them are declared to have been performed on a holy day (puṇyāha). Even as early as the Atharvaveda⁷⁵³ it appears to have been believed that a boy born on Jyestha or on Vicṛt (i. e Mūla nakṣatra) or on a day called tiger-like (on an evil or terrible nakṣatra) might himself die or bring about the death of his father or mother. The two verses may be translated as follows: ‘(the boy) is born on Jyeṣṭhāgunī (i. e. Jyeṣṭhā) or on Vicṛt which belongs to Yama; guard him against being uprooted, may (Agni) take him beyond all evil results in order that he may reach the long life of a hundred autumnṣ This valiant son was born on a tiger-like day and nakṣatra; may he not, while he grows, kill his father or his mother that gave him birth.’

‘Thus it appears that some nakṣatras were called puṇya (auspicious or holy) as in Tai. Br. I, 5. 2. 1 or III. 1, 2, 8, while some others (like Jyesthā, Mūla) were held to be pāpa (evil) nakṣatraṣ

From a passage in the ⁷² Br. Up. it appears that certain nakṣatras were called male “if a man desires ‘May I reach greatness’ he should observe milk diet for twelve days beginning in the northward passage of the Sun, in the bright half of a month and on a favourable day he offers into the fire on a male nakṣatra &c.”

From the above examples it will be apparent that prognostications were based in very early Vedic times on the nakṣatras either of birth or on nakṣatras deemed auspicious or inauspiciouṣ Puṣya appears to have been regarded as a very auspicious nakṣatra long before Pāṇini, who mentions another name of it as ‘Sidhya’. But in these early times it does not appear that any rules had been arrived at about the influence of planets (except perhaps of Jupiter in Puṣya) in certain nakṣatras or about horoscopes with planets in nakṣatras or rāśis (signs of the zodiac) or in certain ‘houses’. In those days prognostications were confined mainly to nakṣatras, days and natural phenomena and bodily markṣ For example, Pāṇini I. 4. 39 (‘राज्ञीशोर्यस्य विप्रश्नः’) provides a rule for a diviner considering the good or bad luck of a persoṇ The काशिका explains ‘विविधः प्रश्नः विप्रश्न । स कस्य मनति यस्य शुभाशुभं पृष्ठ्यते । देवदत्ताय राज्यं गृष्टः सन् देवदत्तस्य दैवं पर्यालोचयति ।’. In पाणिणि IV. 3. 73 ‘अयणायनादित्यः’ it is provided that the affix अण् (and not ठक् ) is applied in the sense of ‘तत्र भवः’ or ‘तस्य व्याख्यानः’ to the words in the व्ययणगण, which contains among others the words अशुभिया, उत्पात and निमित्त (i. e. नैमित्तिक and औत्पातिक would mean ‘one who expounds the future consequences indicated by उत्पात i. e. earthquake &c. and निमित्त throbbing &c.). Under पाणिणि III. 2.53 the काशिका gives the examples जायाज्ञातिसिक्कालकः, पतिव्नी पाणिरेखा (line on the palm).

We find from certain verses of the Ṛgveda that the cries of such birds as kapiñjala were deemed even in those ancient times to indicate coming events, auspicious or otherwise; ⁷³ (the bird) crying again and again and voicing (indicating) coming event sends forth his speech as an oarsman propels a boat; O bird! may you be auspicious to us and may no unfavourable sign reach you from any quarter; O bird! may you that are auspicious and whose cry forebodes good cry to the south of (our) houses; may no thief master us nor may any one declare that we may meet danger.' Br. S. 98. 14 provides that birds indicate to a person going on a journey the evil results of actions, good or evil, done by him in former liveṣ The Yoga-yātrā of Varāhamihira (chap. 14) and Adbhutasāgara pp. 569-582 deal at length with śaluna (prognostications from the sight, flight or cries of birds and other animals). Yogayātrā (14, 2 and 26) provides that certain birds and animals when they are to the right or southern side of a man starting on a journey indicate auspicious results and that when a cāsa bird with something in its mouth flies to the right side of a man that is an indication of welfare.

The result of the dependence on ideas of lucky and unlucky days and nakṣatras was that some people began to make observations and deduce conclusions and a lore called 'nakṣatra-vidyā' arose. When Nārada approached the great teacher Sanatkumāra for knowledge, the latter questioned him as to what he already knew and then Nārada enumerated, a long list of lores (including ⁷⁴ the four Vedas, Itihāsa-purāṇa), one of which is 'nakṣatravidyā' ('the science of nakṣatras' i. e. astronomy and astrology). It can be easily imagined how credulous people in ancient times as even in these days consulted those who professed to know what the stars foretold and were often deceived or felt frustrateḍ Hence arose even in early times a prejudice against star-gazers, astrologers and the like. One of the earliest references to this prejudice against star-gazers in Sanskrit literature is found in the Tai Br. III. 4 4 and Vāj. S. 30. 10 and 20, where the⁷⁵ 'nakṣatradarśa' (star-gazer) is made over as a victim to prajñāna and the 'ganaka' (calculator of the movements of stars and planets) is consigned to aquatic animals along with the headman of the village. Among the long list of brāhmaṇas that should not be invited for religious rites in śrāddhas, Manu (III 162) includes one who maintains himself by the practice of astrology (nakṣatrair-yāsca jīvati) and in (VI. 50) Manu prohibits ascetics from desiring to secure alms by foretelling the results of portents (like earth-quakes) or of bodily⁷⁶ movements (such as the throbbing of the eye or arm) or by nakṣatravidyā (astrology) or aṅgavidyā (palmistry) or by casuistry or by telling what the śāstra ordains on a (disputed) point. The ancient sūtras of Hārita and of Śaṅkhalikhita declare that a nakṣatrajīvin (one who lives by practising astrology) and a 'nakṣatradeśavṛtti' (who makes his livelihood by conveying the message of nakṣa-tras) respectively are unfit to sit in a row with other brāhmaṇas (q by Kṛtyakalpataru on śrāddha p. 88) Similarly, Sumantu (in a prose passage q on śrāddha by Kṛtyakalpataru p. 91) states the same about a 'mūlyaśamvatsarika' (who practises astrology for money). The Viṣṇudharma-sūtra (chap. 82.7) includes those who maintain themselves by astrology (nakṣatra-jīvinah) among those who are not to be invited for śrāddha riteṣ Similarly, the Tevijjasutta (S. B. E vol. XI pp 196–197) and Mahāsīla in Dīghanikāya (I. p. 68) condemn for Buddhist monks maintenance by such low arts as guessing at the length of a man's life or by foretelling future events (such as eclipses, falling meteors, victory and defeat &c.). But the mere study of constellations is allowed by Buddha (in S. B. E vol. XX pp. 292–294). Among obstacles to gain⁷⁷ Kauṭilya enumerates many such matters as passion of love, anger, timidity and desire, and winds up with two fine verses characteristic of the great genius that placed Candragupta Maurya on the throne of Magadha. ‘The desired object (or wealth) eludes that childish man that is excessively in search of what the stars portend: for the desired object is (itself) the star that governs (success) in securing it; what will stars do? Men striving (to attain their ends) will secure their objects after hundreds of efforts; wealth is caught by wealth just as elephants are bound by other elephants (opposed to them)' From the above it is quite clear that several centuries before Christ an astrologer (who maintained himself on money acquired by the practice of astrology) was very much condemneḍ

What Kauṭilya regards as reprehensible is extreme reliance on and pursuit of nakṣatra astrology, but it is not to be supposed that he ignored prognostications altogether. About the king’s purohita (priest) he lays down the following:⁷⁸ ‘the king should appoint as priest a person whose family and character are highly spoken of, who has well studied the Veda together with the six angas, the divine and other portents and the science of the government of people and who can prevent divine and human calamities by means contained in the Atharvaveda, the king should follow him as a pupil does his teacher or a son his father or a servant his master’ Yāj (I, 313), who is later than Kauṭilya by some centuries, also lays down in almost identical words that ‘the king should appoint as purohita one who is proficient in astrology, endowed with all requirements declared in śāstras, and is proficient in the science of government and the propitiatory and magic rites of the Atharvaveda'.

Another set of texts indicates another stage in the develop-ment of astrology based on nakṣatras, which seems to have been somewhat on the lines of the later horoscopic system of 'houses'. Traces of it exist though they are not very ancient. The Vaikhānassmārta⁷⁹ sūtra (IV 14) refers to nakṣatras called Janma, Karma, Saṅghātika, Samudayika and Vaināśika and these terms are explained in the Yogayātrā of Varāha and in the Viṣṇudharmottara-purāṇa.⁸⁰ The Yogayātrā remarks⁸¹ 'the nakṣatra on which a man is born is called ādya (first), the tenth from it (from ādya) is called karma, the 16th nakṣatra from the ādya is called ‘saṅghātika’ (pertaining to a group or a collection of human beings), the 18th (from ādya) is called Samudaya (collection) and the 23rd (from ādya) is called Vaināśika (lit. pertaining to death or destruction), the 25th (from ādya) is called mānasa (pertaining to the mind). In this way all persons are concerned with six nakșatras (1st, 10th, 16th, 18th, 23rd and 25th), they say that the King is concerned with nine nakșatras, the three additional ones being those connected with his jāti (caste), his country and with the nakṣatra on the day of his coronatioṇ The Yogayātrā and Viṣṇudharmottara (I. 78. 14–16) further provide 'when the nakṣatra of one's birth is affected by evil (star or aspect) the results are the appearance of disease, loss of money, and disputes; if the nakṣatra called karma is affected then one's undertakings do not succeed; if the Saṅghātika (16th) is affected then there is treachery; when the Samudayika (18th) is affected then there is loss of accumulated wealth; when the Vaināśika (23rd) is affected, one's desired objects perish; when Mānasa (25th) is affected, there is anxiety and unhappinesṣ The Nārada-purāṇa,⁸¹ after defining the above, remarks that one should not commence any auspicious act on these. When the (six) nakșatras are not affected (by evil stars or aspects) a person is healthy, enjoys happiness, his body is well-nourished and he is endowed with wealth; but if the six nakșatras are affected he perishes and the king also (meets the same fate) if the six along with the extra three are affected When⁸² the naksatra on which a king is crowned is affected by evil planets or aspects, one should predict loss of the kingdom, if the naksatra of the country is affected trouble to the country and capital is indicated and if the naksatra of the king's caste is affected then one should predict king's illnesṣ The naksatras according to the caste of the king are as follows⁸³. the three Pūrvās (Phalguni, Pūrvāsādhā and Pūrvābhādrapadā) and Krttikā are naksatras of the king of the brāhmaṇa class; the three Uttarās (Uttarā Phalguni, Uttarāsādhā and Uttarābhādrapadā) and Pusya are naksatras for a king of the kṣatriya caste; Revati, Anurādhā, Maghā and Rohiṇī, of agricultural class; Punarvasu, Hasta, Abhijit and Aśvinī are naksatras of the vāṇik (trader) clasṣ The countries governed by the naksatras are set out in chap. 14 of the Brhat-saṃhitā Herein Varāha differs from Ptolemy in two respects: (1) Varāha does not mention countries governed by rāśis, but countries governed by naksatras; (2) Varāha confines himself to India, while Ptolemy in his Tetrabiblos (1 3 pp. 157-159, Loeb Classical Library) deals with all countries then knowṇ This is an important circumstance against the theory that Varāha's astrology is borrowed from Ptolemy or later Greek writerṣ If he had known Ptolemy's work he could have easily followed him even as to countries outside India. The whole of India is divided into nine parts, the Madhyadeśa and the regions in the eight quarters from the East to the North-east, each part being under groups of three naksatras from Krttikā onwardṣ Vide also Viṣṇudharmottara I 86. 1-9. When the group of three naksatras in each of nine divisions is affected by the Sun, Mars or Saturn, the countries falling under any of the three naksatras of the group suffer calamities The Mārkaṇḍeya-purāṇa (chap 58. 10-54 in B. I. edition, chap. 55 in Venkatesvara Press edition) also specifies the countries in the nine groups, but the names differ to some extent There is some divergence about the nomenclature also According to Parāśara and the Visnudharmottara (I. 87 7) the 4th nakṣatra from the nakṣatra of birth is called Mānasa A nakṣatra⁸⁴ is said to be affected ( upahata ) when the Sun or Saturn occupies it or when Mars is retrograde in it or occults it or an eclipse ( of the Sun or Moon ) occurs in it or a meteor strikes it or when the moon continuously affects it ( by occulting or occupying its middle or goes to the southern part of it) The Visnudharmottara (I. 89. 1–13), Yogayātrā IX. 13–18, and Parāśara (quoted by the Adbhuta-sāgara pp 271–274) prescribe certain śānti rites for averting the evil effects of the above noted nine nakṣatras being affecteḍ⁸⁵

It should be noted that in the astrology depending on twelve ṛṣis and twelve bhāvas (places or houses) karma is the name given to the 10th house from the first ( just as in the case of nakṣatra astrology ) and mṛtyu ( i e vināśa ) is the name of the 8th bhāva.

The Mahābhārata and the Rāmāyaṇa contain numerous passages where the planets in relation to certain nakṣatras are stated to indicate misfortunes to people in general, to warring armies and to individuals A few examples may be cited by way of illustratioṇ When in the sanguinary battle between Rāvaṇa and Rāma, the former seemed to be getting the better of Rama, the Rāmāyaṇa states⁸⁶ 'Mercury stood covering the Rohini nakṣatra which is presided over by Prajāpati and which is the favourite of the moon and thereby indicated evil fortune to people'. Similarly, it is said 'Mars stood covering the nakṣatra Viśākhā in the sky, which is presided over by Indra and Agni and which is the nakṣatra of the Kosalas'. In the Mahābhārata numerous statements are made about the position of the planets, the nakṣatras and tithis, which it is almost impossible to reconcile. Vide H of Dh. vol III, pp 903-923 for consideration of the astronomical data in the Mahābhārata. Here we are concerned only with the beliefs about certain omens and portentṣ In the Bhisma-parva we read⁸⁷ 'a white celestial body stands traversing Citrā nakṣatra, one sees therein specially the destruction of the Kurus; a very frightful comet stands covering Puṣya-nakṣatra; this great graha will bring about terrible evil to both armies A white blazing graha resembling fire emitting smoke stands covering the bright Jyeṣṭhā-nakṣatra whose presiding deity is Indra; a cruel comet standing between Citrā and Svāti afflicts Rohiṇī and the Sun and the Moon'.

There are several statements about Mars that are more or less irreconcilable.⁸⁸ For example, the Udyogaparva says 'Mars having been retrograde in Jyeṣṭhā seeks (to reach or afflict?) Anūrādhā presided over by Mitra, as if bringing death'; while Bhisma-parva remarks 'Mars is retrograde in Maghā and Jupiter is in Śrāvaṇa and Saturn afflicts the nakṣatra presided over by Bhaga (i. e. Pūrvā Phalguni). About Saturn several⁸⁹ statements are made 'a refulgent and malignant planet, Saturn, afflicts the nakṣatra (ruled by Prajāpati i. e. Rohiṇī) and will afflict people more'; 'Saturn stands afflicting Rohiṇī'; 'Jupiter and Saturn are near Viśākhā'.

One very remarkable feature of the Mahābhārata passages is that while they put forward dozens of times the positions of the Sun, the Moon and planets in reference to nakṣatras, not a single passage gives the position of the planets in relation to rāśis, the signs of the Zodiac, or week-days (such as Tuesday, Sunday &c.).

The Atharvana Jyotisa furnishes a somewhat different scheme of nakṣatra astrology. It says,⁹¹ the 10th nakṣatra from the naksatra of a man's birth is called karma, the 19th (from janma-naksatra) is called garbhadhanaka (naksatra of conception), the 2nd, 11th and 20th constitute the group called sampatkara (bringing about prosperity), the 3rd, 12th and 21st (from 'janmanaksatra') constitute the group of vipatkara (bringing about ill-luck or distress), the 4th, 13th and 22nd are called ksemya (causing prosperity), the 5th, 14th and 23rd are called 'pratvara (pratyari?), 6th, 15th and 24th constitute (the group called) sadhaka (that accomplish), the 7th, 16th and 25th are called naidhana (relating to death), the 8th, 17th and 26th are maitra (friendly), the 9th, 18th and 27th constitute a highly friendly group. These are nine groups (each made up of three naksatras from among 27 naksatras and each one in each group being separated by the number 9 from the next in the same group). These names make a further approach to the scheme of twelve bhāvas⁹² viz. janma (which corresponds in name and import to tanu or lagna), sampat (corresponds to the 2nd bhāva called dhana), karma (is same as 10th bhāva), naidhana (corresponds to 8th bhāva called vinasa or mrtyu), maitra (corresponds to the 4th bhāva called suhrt), ksemya (corresponds to the name of the 11th bhāva called aya or labha). The Atharvana-Jyotisa then provides at some length what should be done or not done on these nine groups and their constituentṣ The above mentioned words (vipatkara, ksemya &c.) occur also in Brhad-yogayātrā. (folio 5 b, IV. 17), in Visnudharmottara II. 166 at end and in the Tantrika work Śāradatilaka ⁷⁷⁴. It should be noted that the Atharvana-Jyotiṣa gives at least five names that are the same as the corresponding bhāvas in extant Jātaka workṣ It is difficult to state the date when the extant Atharvana Jyotiṣa might have been composeḍ It mentions week-days but does not enumerate the twelve zodiacal signs, it refers to the doctrine of Bhṛgu (9.1). Verses 1–4 of Atharvana Jyotiṣa (chapter 13) are the same as Manu III. 46–49, similarly, Atharvana Jyotiṣa 12 8–9 are almost the same as Manu IV. 41–42. It is quite possible that the present text is a recast of an older work. In any case the present text of the Atharvana Jyotiṣa cannot be placed earlier than the 2nd or 1st century B.C and may be a little later still. But it appears that the present Atharvana Jyotiṣa only collects together the ideas then current and therefore the five names (janma, sampat, naidhāna, mitra and karma) could very well have been current centuries before the present Atharvana Jyotiṣa text. Similarly, it is difficult to assign an exact date to the Viṣṇu-dharmottara-purāṇa. It is in the nature of an encyclopaedia of the then knowledge of several lores and its present text may be assigned to some period between the 4th and sixth century A.D. From the passage of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (in note 754) it would be seen how auspicious times were prescribed for rites to be performed by an individual. The Brāhmaṇas and Kalpasūtras prescribed the auspicious nakṣatras and seasons for solemn Vedic sacrificeṣ The gṛhya and dharma sūtras prescribed for domestic rites auspicious times, which were either the same or similar to those prescribed in the Brāhmaṇas, Br. Up. and the Kalpasūtraṣ A few examples may be cited here. The Āśvalāyana (I 13 1), Āpastamba (VI 14.9), Baudhāyana (I. 10. 1) and Pāraskara (I 14) and other gṛhyasūtras provide that the rite of Puṁsavana (that would produce male issue) was to be performed in the third month after conception on Tiṣya (Puṣya) nakṣatra or on a day on which the moon would be in a male nakṣatra.⁹⁴ The Bhāradvājagṛhya expressly mentions Tiṣya, Hasta, Anurādhā, Uttarā Bhādrapadā as the proper nakṣatras for puṁsavana As regards caula (tonsure) Āpastamba-gṛhya (VI 16. 3) prescribes that it should be performed in the third year after birth on Punarvasu nakṣatra The name of the nakṣatra may be noted, which literally means 'fresh wealth or new growth.' The Kauśika-sūtra mentions 'pāpanakṣatra' (in 46 25) and puṁnakṣatra (lucky nakṣatra) in 35. 2. There are varying provisions about marriage. The Āp. gr says that all seasons are proper for marriage, excepting the two months of Śiśira (viz. Māgha and Phālguna) and excepting the last month (Āṣāḍha) of summer, and all nakṣatras declared to be auspiciouṣ⁹⁵ The sūtra also quotes an ancient gāthā stating that persons for choosing a girl should be sent out on Invakās (i e Mṛgaśīrṣa) and then they are greeted with success As regards marriage the Gobhila-gṛhya provides a simple rule that it should be performed on an auspicious (puṇya) nakṣatra, while the Pāraskara⁹⁶ is more elaborate viz. one should take a maiden's hand in marriage in the northward passage of the sun, in the fortnight of the increasing moon, on an auspicious day and on Uttarā Phālgunī, Hasta, Citrā, Uttarāṣāḍha, Śravaṇā, Dhaniṣṭhā, Uttarā-bhādrapadā, Revatī, Aśvinī, Svāti, Mṛgaśīras and Rohiṇī nakṣatraṣ The Baudhāyana-gṛhya⁹⁷ declareṣ all months are proper for marriage; some (sages) say that the months of Āṣāḍha, Māgha and Phālguna are to be avoided; the nakṣatras for marriage are Rohiṇī, Mṛgaśīrṣa, Uttarā Phālgunī and Svāti; while for other auspicious rites the nakṣatras are Punarnasu, Tisya, Hasta, Śroṇā (Śravaṇa) and Revati The Āśvalāyana-gṛhya generalises the auspicious times for several important saṁskāras as follows: ⁹⁸ 'the rites for caula, upanayana, godāna and marriage are to be performed in the northward passage of the sun, in the fortnight of the waxing moon and on an auspicious nakṣatra; some (sages) hold that marriage may be performed at all times'. Aśv further provides that the maiden after marriage was to observe silence and to begin speaking after seeing the Polestar, Arundhatī and the constella- tion of the Seven Sages This generalisation is carried further by the Pūrvamīmāṁsā-sūtra which provides ⁹⁹ 'all rites in honour of the gods are to be performed in the northward passage of the sun, on a day in the bright half of the month and on an auspicious day'.

It will be seen clearly from the above discussion that an auspicious nakṣatra was the sine qua non in almost all Vedic rites and also in ordinary domestic rites in the times of the Brāhmaṇas and sūtras (several centuries before the Christian era), the tithi was rarely mentioned, the week-day was not mentioned nor the name of any rāśi (zodiacal sign) nor is there any reference to the planets Jupiter and Venus in most sūtras even when prescribing proper times for upanayana or marriage.

This requirement of finding out an auspicious day or nakṣatra for the celebration of a marriage or other domestic rite or for engaging in any undertaking was said in mediæval Sanskrit works to be a search for an auspicious muhūrta It is therefore necessary to hold a discussion on the meaning and history of the word muhūrta.