Chapter III and IV
Kritikas
Agrahayana
Tilak in the Kritikas chapter tries to show, if the
Vedic priests made any correction to calendars due to precession of equinoxes
and corresponding shift in the cycle of seasons. He finds out the astronomical
references in other puranic texts like Taittiriya Samhita, brahaman, surya
siddhant etc. He reasons out the interpretations drawn by Bentley, Colebrooke,,
Weber , Biot, Max Muller and others in placing the position of Vernal equinox
in Revati ( Nakshatra).
He considers the most logical method, as considered by
Vedic priests, is the method of observation. The position of Sun, Moon is
observed wrt landmarks, ie, nakshatra/asterisms and not the zodiac signs. He
states that the change in the position of vernal equinox necessitates the
corresponding change in the position of winter solstice. To this he gives out
the references to later vedic works wherein two possible explanations emerge
that kritika nakshatra, either coincided with winter solstice or vernal
equinox. He shows that a system existed when the year commenced in the winter
solstice in the month of Magha and vernal equinox in the last quarter of
Bharni/ beginning of Kritika.
He describes how the narration, in puranic texts, on
the topic of nakshatra of Gods and those of Yama nomenclature automatically
fixes the position of kritika at the beginning of devayana/vernal equinox at
the time when the vedic works were compiled. His commentary on these passages
gives the direct evidence of the coincidence of the Kritika with the vernal
equinox in the days of Taittiriya Samhita.
He criticises Bentley’s views and arguments and places
the antiquity of Taittiriya Samhita as 2350 BC. In doing so he says, Quote “I
cannot also understand why scholars should hesitate to assign the Vedic works
to the same period of antiquity which they allow to the Chinese and the
Egyptians. “Unquote.
In the chapter Agrahayana, he gives out the arguments
of scholars and their interpretation of the texts, regarding, what could be the
beginning of the year, In particular those of Sayana( 14th century)
who based his arguments on the two-fold character of the seasons. He shows what
should be the correct interpretation of the texts and discusses how
etymological speculation coupled with lexicographer’s explanation of critical
words leads to incorrect conclusions. Even some of native astronomers also
misinterpreted the texts.
Tilak explains why Margashirsha could not have been
the first month of the solstical year. He explains that by placing the year in
Agrahayana/Margashirsha the other cardinal points in the zodiac (Two equinoxes
and two solstices) must also correspond to the position of nakshatra mentioned
in the texts. Thus, leading to, the theory of liberation of equinoxes. He
claims by ordinary process of reductio ad absurdum one is compelled to discard
the theory that full moon in Margashirsha once began the year at winter
solstice.
He compares the Parsi calendar, Avesta, with ancient
Hindu calendar and shows how some feasts related to pitri paksha and
Fravashinam /month of manes in Avesta start at the same time. He concludes that
if properly understood Margashirsha was the first in the cycle of nakshatra and
showing that vernal equinox was near it.
Comments
Post a Comment