I have already written about my interpretation of the quotation. I will elaborate it further.
1. Who is अभिजित्स्पर्धमाना, रोहिण्या कन्यसी स्वसा? Because of mention of Krittika in the last shloka, Dr. Vartak, Shri. Oak and myself also, have been treating Krittika as the one who went to tapastapta vana. The first shloka actually mentions the name Devi. Taking Dr. Vartak’s interpretation as correct, we look for Krittika going to Summer Solstice. S.S. was near Dhanishtha around 14500BC. It was near Krittika-Rohini way back in 22500 BC and will be again so in future, in AD 3500. That is obviously not relevant. Iyengar has mentioned that both Rohini and Jyeshtha were once called Rohini. If this is correct, does Devi stand for younger sister of Jyeshtha and not of Rohini? i. e. Vishakha or Anuradha? Summer Solstice would be near them around about 9500BC. Based on this possibility, I offer an alternative interpretation that Vishakha (or Anuradha), not Krittika, was competing for recognition as No.1, because start of year fixed earlier from Dhanishtha had lost relevance. Indra says, ‘Bhrahma had created time beginning from Dhanishtha and beginning from Rohini also happened’ Did he refer to Rohini or to Jyeshtha,- alternate Rohini? He probably means that the alternative of starting year from Winter Solstice,( near Rohini around 9500BC,) was also ‘proposed’ or ‘considered’ or ‘being observed by some’.
2. Indra also is worried or confused that Nakshatra has dropped or moved from sky. ‘च्युत’ can literally be translated as ‘moved’ also. (One of the adjectives of Lord Vishnu is ‘अच्युत’! ) If recognition of 27 Nakshatras along the ecliptic and time keeping with their help was set up by Brahma and Dhanishtha was given first place, Summer Solstice being then near Dhanishtha, this can be considered to have occurred sometime around 14,500BC. At that time Abhijit was the only prominent star close enough to CNP to help in mapping the sky and time keeping. Although it was not anywhere near the ecliptic and was not part of the chain of 27, it was then given a pride of place along with the 27 nakshatras. However, the picture had changed over the centuries. Abhijit had initially moved closer to CNP for some milenia and came within 5 degrees of CNP around 12000 BC and although it started moving away from CNP thereafter, it still remained close enough to be relevant, for some further centuries, but by around 9500BC it has moved away from CNP considerably, now daily drops down close to the horizon (as seen at places in North India) and as time passes it will surely start actually dipping below the horizon every day! So what to do with it? Indra is naturally worried.
3. Around 9500 BC therefore, (a)Summer Solstice has moved from Dhanishtha close to Vishakha-Anuradha, (b) Winter Solstice, alternative starting point for year, is near Krittika-Rohini and (c)Abhijit has moved a long way away from CNP! Brahma’s system is in a crisis! Indra sends him an SOS with Skanda. I suggest that the event in the shlokas occurred around 9,500 BC.
4.The shlokas dont explicitly state what Brahma decided but apparently, Abhijit was ‘dismissed’, and year start shifted to Winter Solstice so, naturally, Krittikas ‘went to heaven’ and are shining brightly! (Vishakha-Anuradha lost their claim)
After stating my full interpretation of the four shlokas, I have a question. We now-a-days reckon Nakshatras from Ashvini. Since when? When was a Cardinal Point near Ashvini to cause this? Did Indra report to Brahma and year-start was shifted to Ashvini by Brahma? If so, when? Vernal Equinox was near Rohini in 3000 BC from data given by Shri. Oak in his book (29000BC + 26000 years). It would have moved backwards, near Ashvini around 500 AD. I invite Shri Oak to speculate on this.
With reference to my comment of 21st July, I am adding a schematic picture to explain what I mean by Relevance of Abhijit when it was near CNP, which it lost when it moved away.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
With reference to your post, I have the following observations:-
1) Calling "Jyeshtha" as "Rohini" as mentioned by Iyengar is highly debatable. By doing so, we are taking doubt on Vyas' knowledge and capabilities which is not a good sign. Vyas clearly says he wants to preserve the history of Kuru clan and has recorded (rather collected) every piece of evidence- either by observing the sky or by observing seasons or other natural phenomena. Taking doubt on him is certainly not going to serve any purpose.
2) Cardinal point does not necessarily mean vernal equinox. It could also mean summer solstice, winter solstice or even automnal equinox. I found that winter solstice was near Ashvini during 6500 BCE. Similarly, automnal equinox and summer solstice would have been near Ashvini during 13000 BCE and 20000 BCE respectively (approximate estimation). Any one of these 4 cardinal points is perfect candidate for the new year. Therefore, it is not conclusive to decide the antiquity of the Ashvini-starting nakshatra circle if we continue to rely only on cardinal points. If someone who has studied more texts finds any other evidence, it might be possible to date this event.
3) According to Shri. Oak, it was Abhijit who went to vana to perform tapa by becoming pole star. But, in the first 2-3 lines, you have said Shri. Vartak, Shri Oak and Shri. Phadnis all three have considered Krittika went to vana. This is incorrect- since Shri. Oak himself has given his version of translation in one of the comments on the previous blog posts.
4) I may add, however, that you have a point in saying "Abhijit is a masculine name and Abhijit could be a brother of Krittika". But, if we say that- "It was Abhijit with whom Krittika (daughterlike sister of Rohini) contested for seeking seniority and went to Vana"- then Krittika must remain isolated from the normal day to day routine since she was busy in performing tapa. If this was indeed the case, there must be some shloka/stanza to verify Krittika remaining isolated for the duration of her tapa. I am a novice when it comes to reading ancient texts and interpretataions of such texts.
But, this is where Shri. Oak's version looks logically correct- Abhijit went to vana to perform tapa. He remained isolated (remained as pole star) from the normal life (isolated from the performing diurnal motion from east to west) as long as he was the pole star.
I would like to know your thoughts and comments.
Regards,
Sameer
1. Whether jyeshtha was also called Rohini is a moot point. I noticed Mr. Iyengar's claim in Oak's book. 'If it is correct', I offered an alternative explanation of Devi. have not commented on Vyasa anyway. He has written many 'KOOT Shlokas, this could be one!
2. Other cardinal points were near Ashvini long back. May be, Ashvini became first nakshatra in 6500 BC. 20000BC is 'prior' to Brahma fixing Dhanishtha as first nakshatra in 14500BC Indra does not mention Ashvini being first nakshatra anytime so I was looking for a date subsequent to the time of Indra-Skanda dialogue.
3. Shri. oak has obviously made a mistake. 'Abhijit spardhamana is Devi, going to vana for Tapa. Dr. Vartak has correctly translated.
4. Abhijt is not a brother of Rohini. It is far away from Ecliptic and the nakshatras thereon.
5. Shri. Oak cannot have a version different from what the Shloka clearly states. It is meaningless.
Sameer,
IN (3) Shri Phadnis may have a point. I have provided 'improvised' interpretation. Of course I still like how going to 'Vana' for 'Tapa' fits well for Abhijit.
In any case, I feel that both you and Shri Phadnis will like my improvised interpretation.
Since it is not clearly stated who 'DEVI and/or younger sister of Rohini is and since so far 'she' is identified with Abhijit (me), Krittika (Phadnis, Vartak), Anuradha (Phadnis), one more identification (Dhanistha) would not hurt since it fits well with it aligning with the point of summer solstice.
--
(4) Abhjit is far away from the ecliptic, however, the fact remains that ancients considerd it to be a nakshatra as part of 27/28 that were employed to track position of moving bodies.. first and formost ...the moon (hence 27/28) and then all other.. sun and planets.
Regarding.. Masculine nature of Abhijit.. all I can say is that all nakshatras (of 27/28 series) were considers 'sisters', 'wives'.'houses', so feminine..point well taken.
Even then, both of you may also want to consider...
There are names (in our times.. in Marathi...that remain on the borderline)..e.g. Kiran, Pankaj, Kamal, etc.
--
Also Nakshatras such as Punarvasu, Pushya, or Shravan may be considered masculine, are they not? (only food for thought.. not for serious discussion).
--
Appa, you may recall Marathi drama - Samshay Kallol...(Go Ba Deval?)..that has certain nakshatra characters as masculine and others as feminine.. (again only humor value).
1. I cant say I like your improvisation based on wrong translation!
Devi, kanyasi, svasa, spardhamaanaa, all point away from Abhijit.
2. Anuradha as a candidate for going to tapastapta vana is purely based on Iyengar's claim that Jyeshtha was also called Rohini. I have no views on the sustainability of that claim. However, Summer Solstice did go to Jyeshtha or Anuradha, 'after being at Dhanishtha' when Brahma set year-start at Dh. So it is a better candidate than Krittika or Rohini where S. S. will reach only in future.
3. Is there any reference saying 'such and such planet was in Abhijit at so and so time, as generally said about the 27 Nakshatras?
4. Sanshayakallol uses only names of MONTHS for the MALE characters, Ashivin, Vaishakh, Phalgunrao, even Bhadvya. Nakshatra names only for females, Magha, Revati, Krittika etc.
The Shloka mentions about Devi going to Tapastapta Vana, meaning 'water heated by hot season'. No one had gone to Vana for Tapa. Dr. Vartak had correctly interpreted it based on correct meanings of Tapas (hot season) and Vana (water)
Regarding Vernal Equinox being close to Ashvini around 500-550-600 AD, the rashichakra beginning from Mesha, and Nakshatrachakra beginning from Ashvini, were both coinsiding with Vernal Equinox at that time. Due to precision the Vernal Equinox (and the Rashichakra of the western world) have now moved back by about 19 degrees over the 1400-1500 years. Indian astronomers (astrologers?) still begin their rashi and nakshatra chakras from the old starting point on the ecliptic. (Nirayana Panchanga)
It looks like rashi chakra was adopted by Indians with Mesha and Ashvini beginning together, from Vernal equinox around 550 AD.
I wonder who issued the 'fatwa' to give first place to Ashvini at that time but it happened. Thereafter there have been no Indra and Skanda or Brahma to take note of the shift of vernal Equinox from Ashvini backwards to Revati and rule that the first place in the Nakshatras should now be Revati and not Ashvini. In a few hundred years we sill have to give that place of honour to Uttara-Bhadrapada. Brahma and Indra however have retired so who will issue the 'Papal Bull' or 'Fatwa'?
My improvised interpretation takes DEVI = Dhanishtha. This does not require wrong translation. Vartak translation is just fine.
In that case: Dhanistha is going to vana for tapa ... as interpreted by Phadnis or Vartak.. to summer to heat water.... as Dhanistha was going to summer solstice around 14000 BCE.
Taittirya brahmna lists Abhijit as Nakshatra between U. Ashadha and Shrav
Summer Solstice was at Dhanishtha in the past when Brahma created the 'system'. Thereafter it moved away from Dhanishtha. When Indra talks to Skanda, it had moved away from and not towards Dhanishtha. So Dhanishtha is definitely not a Candidate for 'Devi'. Idle speculation or so called improvisation is meaningless.
About Abhijit being counted among Nakshatras the need to do so is not clear. I invite Shri. Oak to produce, if possible, a strip map of the Ecliptic showing the 27 Nakshatras, and the far-away Abhijit. Is there a significant gap on the ecliptic, between U.Ashadha and Shravan? If Krittika is omitted does a big gap not open out between Bharani and Rohini? Why the people who identified Nakshatras would leave out krittika? Is it far away from Ecliptic? How were the ancestors designating the position of a planet if it was in the big gap between Bharani and Rohini? Only the strip map of Ecliptic will throw light on these questions. I am afraid it is way beyond my abilities to produce one.
I firmly believe that Abhijit had a utility value when it was close to CNP as sky could be divided by meridian lines through Abhijit and between each Nakshatra and planets or stars could be designated in a particular nakshatra depending on which slice of the sky they belonged to. When Abhijit moved away from CNP it lost this significance.
I have added a schematic picture to display what I mean by Abhijit's utility when near the CNP.
Shri Phadnis writes..
"Summer Solstice was at Dhanishtha in the past when Brahma created the 'system'. Thereafter it moved away from Dhanishtha. When Indra talks to Skanda, it had moved away from and not towards Dhanishtha. So Dhanishtha is definitely not a Candidate for 'Devi'. Idle speculation or so called improvisation is meaningless."
--
And this poses a problem (conflict/inconsistency) for your timeline of 9000 BCE.
Let's look at the sequence...
(1) DEVI began competing with Abhijit and went to summer solstice.
(2)Abhijit fell from the sky and now Indra asks Skandha to discuss with Brahma to make correction to calendar.
(3) AT THAT TIME..Brahma made correction by giving first rank to Dhanistha. (and Rohini was in this first position prior to Dhanistha).
(4) krittka went to heaven.
Now out of these 4 verses, Shri Phadnis is assigning timing of ~9000 BCE for (1), (2) and (4). Correct?
However, he is forced to jump to ~14500 BCE in explaining (3)!!!
Shri Phadnis writes...
"3. Is there any reference saying 'such and such planet was in Abhijit at so and so time, as generally said about the 27 Nakshatras?"
--
My response..
although indirect, yes, Mars is described as approaching Shravana and then aligning along Brahmarashi (my identification of Brahmarashi = Abhijit, with corroborative evidence both in Ramayana and Mahabharata).
The Right declination position of Abhijit (during Mahabharata time - 5561 BCE) is between nakshatra Shravana & Dhanistha.
Shri. Oak, you are sadly mistaken. Brahma had set his system with Dhanishtha at first place as Summer Solstice was near Dhanishtha, long back, before Indra Skanda dialogue. Read carefully again, धनिष्ठादि तदा कालो ब्रह्मणा परिनिर्मितः Both तदा and परिनिर्मितः (past passive participle) clearly say so. The sequence of events is, 1)Brahma set his system with Dhanishtha at SS,2)Then a)SS shifted from Dhanishtha, b)Abhijit fell c)WS near Rohini was an alternative year-start and d)question arose whether to shift start of year to winter solstice or keep it at SS and give first rank to DEVI i. e. Anuradha (Jyeshtha's younger sister who had gone to tapastapta vana) as SS was now near Anuradha. 3.Indra asks for Brahma's decision. 4.Year-start shifted to WS, now near Krittika who naturally got first rank and were happy. Anuradha and Abhijit lost the case.
Shri Phadnis write..
"Shri. Oak, you are sadly mistaken. Brahma had set his system with Dhanishtha at first place as Summer Solstice was near Dhanishtha, long back, before Indra Skanda dialogue. Read carefully again, धनिष्ठादि तदा कालो ब्रह्मणा परिनिर्मितः Both तदा and परिनिर्मितः (past passive participle) clearly say so. The sequence of events is, 1)Brahma set his system with Dhanishtha at SS,2)Then a)SS shifted from Dhanishtha, b)Abhijit fell c)WS near Rohini was an alternative year-start and d)question arose whether to shift start of year to winter solstice or keep it at SS and give first rank to DEVI i. e. Anuradha (Jyeshtha's younger sister who had gone to tapastapta vana) as SS was now near Anuradha. 3.Indra asks for Brahma's decision. 4.Year-start shifted to WS, now near Krittika who naturally got first rank and were happy. Anuradha and Abhijit lost the case.?"
--
My response:
Really?
This is precisely the reason I requested you to provide your translation.(you provided Vartak translation which I am ok with)
--
(1) Who is stating the first verse - i.e. Devi competing with Abhijit and thus going to summer solstice? My answer is Indra, yours?
(2) Who is stating the second verse - i.e. I am puzzled/confused (Who is this 'I' in the "I am confused' and thus this 'I' asks Skandha to go to Brahma. My answer is Indra.
(3) At this/that time, Brahma began calendar with Dhanistha as #1 (Rohini used to be #1 in the past). I (Oak) take this statement as stated by Markendeya to Yudhishthir.. as he narrated this ancient story/metaphor. I am willing to stand corrected.
(4) When Indra said this, Krittika went to 3rd heaven. Again I (Oak) take this statement as stated by Markendeya to Yudhishthir as he narrated this ancient story/metaphor.
--
Wouldn't you find interesting that Anuradha or Vishakha, transition from SS to WS as the beginning of new year.. none of it is alluded, even indirectly.
I have already given my full translation of the four shlokas, consecutively, in my post of 5th July. I have also stated my interpretation based on my translation.
I agree that your candidate for going to tapastapta vana is Abhijit and not krittika. After seeing the correct translation is he still your candidate? If so, so be it. Mine was krittika, initially, based on 'Rohinyah Kanyasi svasa'
I have done some speculation about 'who is Devi', based on Iyengar's statement, which you have yourself quoted. I hold no brief for him. But my speculation makes sense. I dont claim it as Gospel Truth. Take it or leave it.
My view is that first three shlokas are by Indra and the fourth by Markandeya. Referring to context pre and post the quoted four shlokas from Mahabharata may throw some light on this. I dont have my GP books now. Perhaps you can look up the context.
The fourth shloka begins with 'एवमुक्ते तु शक्रेण ...' Obviously the first three sholkas say what Shakra said. Rest of the fourth shloka says what happened thereafter, so it is what Markandeya told Yudhishthira.
A last thought on the subject. We all have been translating इच्छन्ती ज्येष्ठतां देवी as 'Devi seeking seniority'. If my speculation that Devi refers to Anuradha, younger sister of Jyeshtha,(i. e. alternate Rohini) is correct, इच्छन्ती ज्येष्ठतां could simply mean 'wanting to take over the position of Jyeshtha.' Actually, Summer Solstice had already moved from Dhanishtha to Jyeshtha and now Devi (Anuradha) was moving to Summer Solstice and taking over from Jyeshtha! रोहिण्यादि अभवत् पूर्वम् could also mean 'start of year had already shifted to Jyeshta, alternate Rohini, as S.S. was at Jyeshtha.'
Jyeshtha and Rohini are almost at opp. points on Ecliptic and one being called 'Jyeshtha Rohini' and the other 'Kanishtha Rohini' is not an impossibility!
For all I know, Iyengar's claim may have some basis.
Post a Comment