The picture shows the position as we see today, when Saptarshis go accross the meridian line. Vasishtha is on the meridian, Arundhati is a little behind.
The picture shows the position as was seen at Mahabharata time. Arundhati has gone beyond meridian and Vashishtha is on meridian.
After the talk, one friend raised a question whether the time of the war could be stretched far back, at the start of the Epoch of Arundhati. I e-mailed him later giving my view that it should be somewhere near the time when Arundhati was maximum ahead of Vasishtha.
In my view, since the time people started taking note of Saptarshis (and Arundhati), Vasishtha-Arundhati were far too close together to conclude who was ahead.
Saptarshis got their names, probably some time after Rama era. (Vasishtha, Atri, Arundhati were on earth at Rama times). When slowly but surely, Arundhati moved ahead sufficiently, people may have started questioning who is ahead. Vyasa or someone else, a keen observer, became convinced that she was definitely ahead, by the time of Mahabharata war and Vyasa recorded that conclusion. This has to be somewhere around the time of maximum aheadness, which is just about half minute. What Vyasa recorded was the observation, ‘no longer together, but now, definitely ahead’. Mahabharat war cant be stretched back to the beginning of the Epoch of Arundhati on the basis of what he has said.
I end my comments on this topic with this post and will take up the next one.
Thursday, July 16, 2015
Epoch of Arundhati -- Cont.
I have no access to elaborate software like Shri. Oak. Once I became aware of the fact that the Celestial North Pole moves in a circular path in the sky, completing a round in 26000 years, I looked at the issue graphically in my own way. I also had occasion to give couple of lectures on this subject. I felt that most of the listeners may not quickly grasp the mathematical approach of Shri. Oak (Investigating deltaRA between Arundhata and vasishtha) if I try to explain it in the short time of a lecture and may lose interest. I prepared a few slides to present the issue pictorially. I found that many listeners got the essence of the problem and the solution and some said so at the end of the lecture. I was happy.
I show below a few of the slides. The pictures are of course not to scale or accurate but give a fair idea to viewer. I hope readers would like them.
This picture shows the view of saptarshi as we see today. They help us to locate the polestar. Arundhati is very close to Vasishtha and is not very bright and cant be seen easily. We can see it only in a blown up view below.
This picture gives an idea of how close the two are today for a naked-eye viewer and how Arundhati is very faint. When Arundhati was maximum ahead of Vasishtha, that was only about 40% of what it is behind today. One can imagin the difficulty of noticing it with naked eye in those days.
Saturday, July 11, 2015
Epoch of Arundhati.
I will now move on to the next chapter of Shri. Oak’s book.
After having stated my detailed interpretation of the quotation from Mahabharat, it is time to move on. I will end my writing on this topic with this post.
I must say that I found this chapter most fascinating. The way Shri. Oak relentlessly followed up his idea that Arundhati may possibly have been actually ‘ahead’ of Vasishtha at some time in the past, since Vyasa says so is most commendable. He has the advantage over the old scholars of access to modern technical tools. I am sure if Dr. Vartak had the same, he would not have left it to Shri. Oak to solve the puzzle. He did the next best thing. He invited new young scholars to unravel it and Shri. Oak has done the rest.
When I first came to know that someone has used computer and software for research in Mahabharat, I was amazed. I had been taking keen interest in Mahabharat since we purchased the Marathi translation volumes and I retired and had time on my hand. My own interest was in many new aspects of all old and familiar stories, which I started to notice. I made notes, gave lectures and ran a blog (this same one, earlier in Marathi), but I had taken no interest in the astronomical references. My blog proved quite of interest for readers, especially younger ones, and I was happy. Then one reader drew my attention to Shri. Oak’s book. My own old acquaintance with astronomy had gone quite rusty which Shri. Oak helped me brush up. I could then understand his unraveling of the ‘Mystery of Arundhati.’ His identification of the time-span when Arundhati was actually ahead of Vasishtha is convincing. Whether the world of Mahabharat Researchers will accept his conclusion and the insistence that the war must have taken place only within that time –span or Epoch as Shri. Oak calls it, is another matter.
More about this later.
Thursday, July 9, 2015
Fall of Abhijit End.
At one stage of my discussions with Shri. Oak on this subject he had said that his main purpose of elaborating on this topic was to show that there was a long tradition of visual astronomy in India stretching far back of Mahabharat time. I would say that the quotation fulfills that purpose. Although my conclusion on the timing of the Indra – Skanda dialogue is different from Shri. Oak and Dr. Vartak too, one or two things emerge.
1. Brahma set up the system of marking time and gave first place to Dhanishtha. Dr. Vartak and Shri. Oak have interpreted this to be in 14500 BC as Summer Solstice was near Dhanishtha at that time and it would be an appropriate start for the year. I agree.
2. If one considers a later date around 8500 BC when Autumnal Equinox was at Dhanishtha, for Brahma’s action, it is still far back enough, but the quotation (Devi going to Tapastapta Vana) cannot be properly interpreted for any time after 8500BC as Summer Solstice will be nowhere near either Krittika –Rohini or Vishakha-Anuradha (My alternative candidate for Devi). So we have to stick to ‘Summer Solstice at Dhanishtha’
3. So the event, about which Markandeya talks to Yudhishthira, (Indra’s SOS), is itself in sufficient antiquity – around 9500 BC - and Brahma setting up start of year from Dhanishtha at Summer Solstice is much more so.
I wonder though whether the world-at-large will ever admit that Indians’ use of Visual Astronomy stretched that far back.
I just noticed from Kalanirnay hanging on the kitchen wall that on 22nd June, Sun entered the Ardra Nakshatra. Should we say that Ardras have gone to TapastaptaVana? After about 3000 years Sun will enter Krittika on 22nd June.
Monday, July 6, 2015
Fall of Abhijit Contd….
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.
Sunday, July 5, 2015
Fall of Abhijit contd …..
As Shri. Oak in his various comments has suggested that I should give my translation of the four shlokas and then my interpretation I will try to do so. I lost contact with Sanskrit after SSC (1950) so what I say is based on what I remember about Sanskrit Grammar.
1. अभिजित्स्पर्धमाना तु रोहिण्याः कन्यसी स्वसा
इच्छन्ती ज्येष्ठतां देवी तपस्तप्तं वनं गता.
Dr. Vartak has translated this correctly. I would say,
‘Daughterlike (younger) sister of rohini, DEVI, contesting with abhijit for seniority has gone to water heated by hot season.’
Tapas also means hot season and that is appropriate here instead of penance. Vana = water is very rarely used but fits nicely here.
2. तत्र मूढोस्मि भद्रं ते नक्षत्रं गगनाच्च्युतम्
कालंत्विमं परं स्कंद ब्रह्मणासह चिन्तय
‘Here I am confused, bless you, (also) Nakshatra has fallen (or moved) from sky
Skanda, please think of this time (event) along with Brahma (discuss with him)’
3. धनिष्ठादिस्तदा कालो ब्रह्मणा परिनिर्मितः
रोहिण्याद्यः अभवत्पूर्वम् एवम् संख्या समाभवत्
‘Bhrahma had then created time beginning from Dhanishtha. Earlier, beginning from Rohini also happened. This is the available information.’
(I am not able to give any meaning other than what Dr. Vartak has given for the phrase – एवम् संख्या समाभवत् – It appears appropriate)
4. एवमुक्ते तु शक्रेण त्रिदिवं कृत्तिकागताः
नक्षत्रं शकटाकारं भाति तद्वन्हिदैवतम्
‘ On Shakra (Indra) saying this, Krittikas came to heaven (आगताः)
The nakshatra having Agni as devata and of chariot shape shines.’
It would be necessary to check how the last word in first line is written in the original text.
कृत्तिका गताः (two words) does not make sense. Is it a single word कृत्तिकागताः ? I have read it as कृत्तिकाः आगताः with sandhi and therefore preferred ‘came’ rather than ‘went’ used by Dr. Vartak.
The shlokas say a lot in few words as per style of Sanskrit shlokas and one has to read between words and lines. After the third shloka, nothing is said about what Brahma decided about Chyuta nakshatra or about change if any in start of year from Dhanishtha. Fourth shloka simply gives end result that krittikas came (or went) to heaven and (now) it shines. It says nothing about Abhijit’s fall or moving from sky or its being dropped from list of Nakshatras.
Now I will move on to my understanding of the events. Before that, however, I must acknowledge my debt to Dr. Vartak and Sri. Oak, as my interest in this matter is entirely on account of Shri. Oak’s book. I had not noticed these shlokas, leave aside trying to interpret them, when I read Mahabharat. From Shri. Oak’s book, it is seen that eminent scholars like C. V. Vaidya were puzzled by this reference and others had ignored it. (So I may be excused!) I noticed something from Iyengar’s writing quoted by Oak which I will refer in my comments. Dr. Vartak translated the shlokas mostly correctly. His spotting the rarely used meaning ‘water’ for ‘vana’ is commendable. His interpretation of Chyuta Nakshatra, or fall of Abhijit as its progressive movement ‘towards’ CNP is not correct in my view and leads to giving excessive antiquity to the event.
Shri. Oak, in spite of having access to Dr. vartak’s correct translation, has taken liberties with the shlokas! He assumes that it was Abhijit which went to Vana for Tapa. His entire effort to build a timeframe for the event described in the shlokas is therefore vitiated and is meaningless.
Thursday, July 2, 2015
Fall of Abhijit - pictorial representation
I show below two pictures which demonstrate what I consider as Fall of Abhijit.
Please ignore the second picture above. As pointed out by Shri. Oak the position in 9000BC is more relevant. So I have modified the second picture to show both year 9000BC and 6000BC Well before 6000BC Abhijit was probably dropped from Nakshatra list by Brahma.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)