Comments on References.

1. Exp 28, Ref. Nos. 9, 27, 28, 29 and 64

Ref 9 and 27 are identical. व्यावृत्तं लक्ष्म सोमस्य is the wording in both cases. This has been translated by K. M. Ganguli slightly differently for the two shlokas.

(A)The sign of the deer in the Moon hath deviated from its usual position. and (B)The spot on the lunar disc hath changed its position.

Both these description are rather obscure in meaning. What can cause the spot on moon’s surface to deviate? These two translations are literal. In any case, the translations do not describe the event as a Lunar Eclipse. Also no tithi is mentioned in the two references. In my opinion these references do not describe a lunar eclipse, but some persisting change in the appearance of the moon, whatever the cause.

On the other hand, Ref. 28 which quotes Vyasa talking to Dhritarashtra, is far more explicit. Ganguly translates it as -

‘On (even) the fifteenth night of the lighted-fortnight in (the month of) Kartika, the moon, divested of splendor, became invisible, or of the hue of fire, the firmament being of the hue of the lotus.’ I don’t see where-from the word lotus comes. Fire and lotus are not really समवर्ण ' the word used in the ref. for the sky, meaning ‘of the same colour as moon’. Moon is called अग्निवर्ण. So both moon and sky were reddish, moon had lost its प्रभा and was अलक्ष्य or invisible. This seems to say that on Kartik Purnima a lunar eclipse had occurred. When was kartik purnima? 1st Oct.? Or 30th Sept ? Shri. Oak says he found a ‘doubtful’ eclipse on 30th Sept. Is that the same eclipse Ref. no 28 describes? Maybe. There is another problem here. From 30th Sept the first day of war proposed, 16th Oct., is 16 days away! Was 16th Oct. then an Amavasya? 16 days after Purnima? Vyasa has not made any comment on this unusually long Paksha. If Purnima was NOT 16 days before amavasya it wont be on 30th Sept. So what Shri. Oak has found does not clearly validate what the reference says!

Ref 29 talks about the Lunar Eclipse on the next Purnima, which came after only 13 days from Kartik Amavasya, or 30th Oct. Shri. Oak has validated this with his software. So we can accept it. However Shri. Oak himself has pointed out that the eclipse in question occurred during the day and was visible at kurukshetra for only a short time, in the final stages, after sunset.

My question is – If war began on 16th Oct., how is Vyasa, on the previous day, in his talk with Dhritarashtra, talking about the Lunar Eclipse of 30st Oct. as if the event had already occurred? Even 15 days later, when it did occur, it was visible only marginally!Shri. Oak has simply ignored this glaring discrepancy. An interpretation can be made from Vyasa referring to the second lunar eclipse in past tense, that the war must have actually started not on 16th Oct. but some day after 30th Oct. If the first day is to be claimed as an Amavasya, then it must be next amavasya, 30 days later.

Shri. Oak mentions that Ref. 64 points to lunar eclipse on 30th Oct (or Margashirsha Purnima). He has given no translation of the reference. 30th October was 14th day from start of war or 15th day of war when Drona died. The reference is from Karnaparva near end of the battle between Arjuna and Karna on 17th day. One translation I could get is as follows.

'Beholding king Yudhishthira the just, arrived there like the resplendent full Moon freed from the jaws of Rahu and risen in the firmament, all creatures became filled with delight.' This is just an UPAMA in my view. Mahabharat is full of such upamas. Since Rahu does not catch full moon and cause Lunar Eclipse, ‘full moon freed from jaws of Rahu’ seems erroneous.

If one accepts that there were three eclipses, two lunar with one solar in between and there were only 13 days between the solar and second lunar and Vyasa expresses his wonder about the unusually small gap between them, on the day prior to beginning of war, the straight inference is that war began, some days AFTER the second Lunar Eclipse and NOT on the day of the Solar Eclipse!