Quantcast
Channel: Bharatkalyan97
Viewing all 11198 articles
Browse latest View live

Citrābhāsam is Indus Script cipher. Throne, lotus, cobrahood, eight-angled pillars in Ancient sculptures signify metalwork wealth

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/y8663epq

This is an addendum to: 

 

Ayodhya: Carved stone pillars, Hindu sculptures, broken idols and a Shivling excavated during Ram Mandir construction work, May 2020

Image result for amaravati album
The hypertexts are: kambha 'pillar' PLUS khambhaṛā 'fish-fin' pair atop rebus: aya 'fish' rebus: aya 'iron' PLUS kammaa 'mint,l coiner, coinage' PLUS feet PLUS throne, turban: ayo kammaṭa 'metal mint' PLUS paṭa aḍi 'throne, turban, slab' PLUS 'anvil' = hypertext, paṭṭaḍi 'metal anvil workshop'.

ayo kammaṭa dvāra 'entrance to metal mint' is an expression used in Mahāvamsa. XXV, 28,
The expression has been wrongly translated as iron-studded gate. It is indeed a reference to the entrance to metal mjint workshop, as signified by the 'srivatsa'  ayo kammaṭa hypertext adorning the torana of the gateways of Bharhut and Sanchi. 
The centre-piece shows a pair of twigs with ingots? on the base, flanked by srivatsa hieroglyph multiplex. nIla? Blue steel ingots? The displayed flowers (lotuses? tAmara 'lotus' rebus: tAmra 'copper'), tree branch with badarI berries (kUTI 'badarI twigs, rebus: kuThi 'smelter').
Itihāsa  of Bhārata bronze-age, ayo kammaṭa dvāra, 'metals mint workshop entrance' (Mahāvamsa. XXV, 28); paṭṭaḍi 'metal anvil workshop' based on Amaravati, Bharhut, Begram, Sanchi, Bodh Gaya ancient sculptural friezes (ca. 3rd cent. BCE), Indus Script (4th millennium BCE) & Atharva Veda Skambha Sukta (AV X.7)(undated, Bronze_Age).

The monograph demonstrates the signifiers of two Indus Script hypertexts on iconographs of Amaravati, Bharhut, Sanchi sculptural friezes.

The hypertexts are:

ayo kamma
a dvāra, 'entrance mint workshop'  
paṭṭaḍi 'metal anvil workshop'.

Hieroglyph: फडा (p. 313) phaḍā f (फटा S) The hood of Coluber Nága &c  स्फट [p= 1269,3] m. a snake's expanded hood L. phaṭa n. ʻ expanded hood of snake ʼ MBh. 2. *phēṭṭa -- 2. [Cf. phuṭa -- m., °ṭā -- f., sphuṭa -- m. lex., °ṭā -- f. Pañcat. (Pk. phuḍā -- f.), sphaṭa -- m., °ṭā -- f., sphōṭā -- f. lex. andphaṇa -- 1. Conn. words in Drav. T. Burrow BSOAS xii 386] 1. Pk. phaḍa -- m.n. ʻ snake's hood ʼ, °ḍā -- f., M. phaḍā m., °ḍī f. 2. A. pheṭphẽṭ. (CDIAL 9040) పటము (p. 695) paṭamu paṭamu. [Skt.] n. A cloth, వస్త్రము. A picture. గెరిపటము a paper kite, పతంగి.  The hood of a serpent, (See hoods of cobra adorning the worshipping naga-s). 

Ta. patam cobra's hood. Ma. paṭam id. Ka. peḍe id. Te. paḍaga id. Go. (S.) paṛge, (Mu.) baṛak, (Ma.) baṛki, (F-H.) biṛki hood of serpent (Voc. 2154). / Turner, CDIAL, no. 9040, Skt. (s)phaṭa-, sphaṭā- a serpent's expanded hood, Pkt. phaḍā- id. For IE etymology, see Burrow, The Problem of Shwa in Sanskrit, p. 45. (DEDR 47)

Rebus: Factory, guild: फड (p. 313) phaḍa m ( H) A place of public business or public resort; as a court of justice, an exchange, a mart, a counting-house, a custom-house, an auction-room: also, in an ill-sense, as खेळण्या- चा फड A gambling-house, नाचण्याचा फड A nachhouse, गाण्याचा or ख्यालीखुशालीचा फड A singingshop or merriment shop. The word expresses freely Gymnasium or arena, circus, club-room, debating-room, house or room or stand for idlers, newsmongers, gossips, scamps &c. 2 The spot to which field-produce is brought, that the crop may be ascertained and the tax fixed; the depot at which the Government-revenue in kind is delivered; a place in general where goods in quantity are exposed for inspection or sale. 3 Any office or place of extensive business or work,--as a factory, manufactory, arsenal, dock-yard, printing-office &c. फडकरी (p. 313) phaḍakarī m A man belonging to a company or band (of players, showmen &c.) 2 A superintendent or master of a फड or public place. See under फड. 3 A retail-dealer (esp. in grain).  फडनीस (p. 313) phaḍanīsa m ( H) A public officer,--the keeper of the registers &c. By him were issued all grants, commissions, and orders; and to him were rendered all accounts from the other departments. He answers to Deputy auditor and accountant. Formerly the head Kárkún of a district-cutcherry who had charge of the accounts &c. was called फडनीस.(Marathi) பட்டரை¹ paṭṭarai n. See பட்டறை¹. (C. G. 95.) பட்டறை¹ paṭṭaṟai n. < பட்டடை¹. 1. See பட்டடை, 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14. 2. Machine; யந்திரம். 3. Rice-hulling machine; நெல்லுக் குத்தும் யந்திரம். Mod. 4. Factory; தொழிற்சாலை. Mod. 5. Beam of a house; வீட்டின் உத்திரம். 6. Wall of the required height from the flooring of a house; வீட்டின் தளத்திலிருந்து எழுப்ப வேண்டும் அளவில் எழுப்பிய சுவர். வீடுகளுக்குப் பட்டறை மட்டம் ஒன்பதடி உயரத்துக்குக் குறை யாமல் (சர்வா. சிற். 48). பட்டறை² paṭṭaṟai , n. < K. paṭṭale. 1. Community; சனக்கூட்டம். 2. Guild, as of workmen; தொழிலாளர் சமுதாயம். (Tamil)


Bronze Age veneration of Atharva Veda Skambha Sukta (AV X.7,8)


 

These two sculptural friezes demonstrate the venerate of Skambha of Atharva Veda Skambha Sukta. It is a fiery pillar of light topped by 'srivatsa' deciphered in Indus Script tradition:  khambhaṛā 'fish-fin' rebus: kammaṭa 'mint, coiner, coinage' PLUS dula 'pair' rebus: dul 'metalcasting' PLUS aya 'fish' rebus: aya 'iron' ayas 'alloy metal'. Thus, the hypertext message is: dul aya kammaṭa 'cast metal mint'. The feet emerging out of the pillar: meṭṭu, meḍ 'step' rebus: मृदु mṛdu, mẽṛhẽt, meḍ 'iron' (Samskrtam.Santali.Mu.Ho.) phaṇi 'cobra's hood' rebus: lead or tin. 

Citrābhāsam is explained as 'reflective' rendering in writing --

in picture (writing or sculpture). Thus, the expression आभास ābhāsa

'rebus metonymy/metaphor' is equally applicable to writing system and

a sculptural rendering will be elaborated in the context of the expression in Mahavams'a:

http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2016/08/bharhut-besnagar-sculptural-makara.html

ayo-kammaTa dvAra = aya 'iron' PLUS kammaTa 'mint' PLUS dvAra 'gateway'.

 The words ayo, and kammaTa used in the Mahavams'a expression (Mahavamsa, XXV, 28)

are signified on Sanchi gateway northern Torana using the technique of

citra-ābhāsa चित्र + -भास:

 Fish-fin PLUS fish PLUS mollusc: ayo 'fish' rebus: aya 'iron' ayas 'metal' PLUS 

khambhaṛā 'fin' rebus: kammaTa 'mint, coiner, coinage'

PLUS sippi 'mollusc' rebus: sippi 'artificer' PLUS tAmarasa 'lotus' rebus: tAmra 'copper'

PLUS dala 'leaf' rebus: dhALa 'large ingot'. This metonymy explains the orthography on the northern gateway of Sanchi torana on sculpturalfriezes. The sippi 'artificer' is shown standing next to the hieroglyph-multiplex, hypertextto signify the detailed, technical specifications of the work carried out in the mint:copper work, ingot production, metal casting (artificer's work).

The winged tigers flanking the sculptural metaphors signify: kola 'tiger' rebus:

kol 'working in iron' PLUS khambha 'wing'rebus:kammaTa 'mint'. Thus, iron mint.

The centre-piece is (perhaps) spoked wheel atop elephants: Ara 'spoke' rebus: arA 'brass' PLUS eraka 'nave of wheel' rebus: eraka 'molten cast' arka 'copper' PLUS karibha, ibha 'elephant' rebus: karba, ib 'iron'.

Thus, iron, copper, brass metal work.

 The gateway proclamation by the device of citra-AbhAsa चित्र + -भास

 is an announcement of metalwork competence provided by

the mint-workers & metal artificers at Besnagar (Sanchi).

 The rebus renderings of hieroglyphs in sculptural medium is acontinuum from Indus Script cipher tradition of rendering hieroglyphsas hypertext inscriptions read rebus.



Buddhist monument at the Sanchi Hill, Raisen district of the state of Madhya Pradesh, India. Torana North. T. Carved decoration of the Northern gateway to the Great Stupa of Sanchi. Torana Panels:Chhaddanta,Sujata's offering, Vessantara Jataka, East Columns: Shakra's visit, Royal procession,Bimbisara's visit, West Column: Foreigners, Monkeys, Kapilvastu.

The same composition or hypertext of ayo-kammaTa 'fish PLUS fish-fin' occurs on Bharhut Stupa torana of Eastern Gateway, where the centre-piece is flanked by two such compositions or hypertexts.

Eight-cornered pillars

Yupa of  Sarasvati Vaidika civilization is yajñasya ketu (RV 3.8.8), a proclamation emblem of performance of a Soma Samsthā yajña. Such a yajña yields bahusuvarṇakam; 'many gold pieces' and thus, a wealth-producing metallurgical enterprise performed with śraddhā, 'dedication, devotion' and prayers.

The evidence of yajñakuṇḍa PLUS epigraphs conclusively establish the link of Sarasvati Civilization with Veda traditions and brilliant metallurgical contributions of the Bronze Age made by artisans of the Civilization. Consistent with the purport of Indus Script Corpora, the epigraphs constitute data archives of wealth-production by metallurgists.

The Binjor Yupa is  अष्टाश्रि [p= 117,1] mfn. having eight corners S'Br. The octagonal shape provides for श्री [p= 1098,2] (= √1. श्रि) , to burn , flame , diffuse light RV. i , 68 , 1; f. (prob. to be connected with √1. श्रि and also with √1. श्री in the sense of " diffusing light or radiance " ; nom. श्र्/ईस् accord. to some also श्री) light , lustre , radiance , splendour , glory , beauty , grace , loveliness (श्रिय्/ and श्रिय्/ , " for splendour or beauty " , " beauteously " , " gloriously " cf. श्रिय्/असे ; du. श्रियौ , " beauty and prosperity " ; श्रियआत्मजाः , " sons of beauty "i.e. horses [cf. श्री-पुत्र] ; श्रियःपुत्राः , " goats with auspicious marks ") RV. &c; prosperity , welfare , good fortune , success , auspiciousness , wealth , treasure , riches (श्रिया , " according to fortune or wealth ") , high rank , power , might , majesty , royal dignity (or " Royal dignity " personified ; श्रियोभाजः , " possessors of dignity " , " people of high rank ") AV. &c; N. of लक्ष्मी (as goddess of prosperity or beauty and wife of विष्णु , produced at the churning of the ocean , also as daughter of भृगु and as mother of दर्पS3Br. &c; mfn. diffusing light or radiance , splendid , radiant , beautifying , adorning (ifc. ; » अग्नि- , अध्वर- , क्षत्र- , गण- , जन-श्री &c ) RV. iv , 41 , 8. [The word श्री is frequently used as an honorific prefix (= " sacred " , " holy ") to the names of deities (e.g. श्री-दुर्गा , श्री-राम) , and may be repeated two , three , or even four times to express excessive veneration. (e.g. श्री-श्री-दुर्गा &c ) ; it is also used as a respectful title (like " Reverend ") to the names of eminent persons as well as of celebrated works and sacred objects (e.g. श्री-जयदेव , श्रीभागवत) , and is often placed at the beginning or back of letters , manuscripts , important documents &c ; also before the words चरण and पाद " feet " , and even the end of personal names.]

The portion that is above the caṣāla (ring) made of wheat-dough (cf.śat. Br. V.2.1.6 gaudhūmam caṣālam bhavati) represents Heaven. This is clear from the rite of ascending to the caṣāla, made of wheat-dough, in the Vajapeya sacrifice. The sarificer ascends to it with the help of a ladder (niśrayaṇī); and, while doing so, calls upon his wife, ‘Wife, come; let us ascend to Heaven’. As soon as he ascends and touches the caṣāla, he utters, ‘We have reached Heavven, O gods’ (ib., 12). According to Sāyaṇa on the Taiit.Sam. I.7.9.1, the sacrificer stretches his hands upwards when he reaches the caṣāla and says, ‘We have reached the gods that stay in heaven’ (udgṛhītābhyām bāhubhyām). Even out of the context of the Vajapeya, when the yūpa is erected (say in the Paśubandha), it is addressed, ‘For the earth you, for the mid-region you, for heaven you (do we hoist you)’ (Taitt. Sam. I.3.6.1-3; cf. śat. Br. III.7.1.5-6).

बहुसुवर्णकbahusuvarṇaka aṣṭāśri yupa, Vaidika roots of Śivalinga Rudra bhāga; Binjor 4MSR Epigraphia Indus Script deciphered 

https://tinyurl.com/y9hukh9p


A pictorial asymmetric encryption algorithm for private keys using Indus Script hieroglyphs

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/ycwstzfz

One of the objectives of the new discipline announced ce.ai (Civilization Epigraphy—Artificial Intelligence) is to strengthen data encryption systems for improved data security.

Examples of hieroglyph layering in Indus Script Corpora. These images show elephant, tiger and buffalo layered to create a composite hypertext which signifies iron, smelter, pewter alloy.

How Indus Script hieroglyphs and hypertexts can be used for Asymmetric encryption; the idea of semantic value

Egyptian hieroglyphs use the first syllable of the rebus word to construct Coptic words. Indus Script hieroglyphs DOES NOT use the first syllable but the entire rebus word which has a semantic value different from the hieroglyph (picture) value. For e.g. ibha hieroglyph signifies an elephant; the rebus reading of ib has the semantic value ‘iron ore, iron’. Thus, when an elephant is used in a message, the rebus Meluhha reading is ib ‘iron’.

This cipher of Indus Script makes the hieroglyphs more advanced than Egyptian hieroglyphs.

Egyptian hieroglyphs assign phonetic values to each hieroglyph and read rebus in starting syllables of Coptic words.

Inds Script hieroglyphs add an additional ‘semantic’ layer to the phonetic values assigned to each hieroglyph. They identify similar sounding words (also called homonyms) to convey substantive information far removed from the value of the pictorial used in the hieroglyph. For e.g. when an elephant hieroglyph is used, the pictorial value is ibha 'elephant' but the rebus substantive ‘semantic’ value is a similar sounding word ib 'iron'. Thus, elephant hieroglyph signifies 'iron'.

This additional layer of rebus readings of words is an advancement over the Egyptian hieroglyphs which use straight forward syllabic values as phonetic values of each hieroglyph. 

On theother hand, Indus Script uses the 'semantic' values of the rebus word to convey the REAL message. Thus, when an elephant is shown on a seal, it is not the ibha 'elephant' which is traded but ib 'iron' is traded.

Asymmetric encryption uses two keys in a matched pair to encrypt and decrypt data—a public key and a private key. 

Most cryptographic protocols that use asymmetric encryption only use it for key exchange. Key exchange is any cryptographic method used to share cryptographic keys between two entities. In this context, asymmetric encryption uses key exchange to share a symmetric key. The cryptographic protocol then uses the symmetric encryption to encrypt and decrypt data because symmetric encryption is much more efficient.

Source: Encryption - Cybersecurity Glossary

I suggest the use of Civilizational Epigraphy (AI) algorithm to create the private key. Each hieroglyph can be assigned a privately shared number. The combination of these numbers can constitute the private cryptographic key.

For e.g. use Sign 418 as the cryptographic key with privately shared values for each of the component hieroglyphs. For e.g. assign value of a,b,c,…z to each hieroglyph; creating a number of base 26; make a hash function to form the key; the key can be used as the private cryptographic key. This is comparable to the algorithm used to create ‘tiny URLs’. The assignment of values to each of the 5 signs within Sign418 (Hypertext) can be frequently altered to strengthen the encrypted data values.

“There are several techniques to implement a URL shortening. Keys can be generated in base 36, assuming 26 letters and 10 numbers. In this case, each character in the sequence will be 0, 1, 2, ..., 9, a, b, c, ..., y, z. Alternatively, if uppercase and lowercase letters are differentiated, then each character can represent a single digit within a number of base 62 (26 + 26 + 10). In order to form the key, a hash function can be made, or a random number generated so that key sequence is not predictable. Or users may propose their own custom keys. For example, https://example.com/product?ref=01652&type=shirt can be shortened to https://tinyurl.com/exampleshirt.

Source: TinyURL - Wikipedia

Vizhinjam artefacts link with Sarasvati-Sindhu Civilization aṣṭāśri rudrabhāga of a Śivalinga

$
0
0

This is an addendum to:

Export processing zone of Sarasvati civilization, metal workshops at Binjor 4MSR and Indus Script Corpora http://tinyurl.com/hb38h6l
Binjor Yupa of Sarasvati Vaidika civilization is yajñasya ketu (RV 3.8.8), a proclamation emblem of performance of a Soma Samsthā yajña.

A momentous discovery at Binjor is the yajna kunda with an octagonal yupa. aṣṭāśri Octagonal shape of the Śivalinga Rudra bhāga signifies aṣṭadhātu.



This is a signature tune of a Soma SamsthA performed at the site on the banks of Vedic River Sarasvati.
See: http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2016/07/a-defining-discovery-of-binjor.html

A remarkable discovery is the octoganal brick which is a yaṣṭi.in a fire-altar of Bijnor site on the banks of Vedic River Sarasvati. Thi yaṣṭi attests to the continuum of the Vedic tradition of fire-altars venerating the yaṣṭi as a baton, skambha of divine authority which transforms mere stone and earth into metal ingots, a manifestation of the cosmic dance enacted in the furnace/smelter of a smith. Bhuteswar sculptural friezes provide evidence to reinforce this divine dispensation by describing the nature of the smelting process displaying a tree to signify kuTi rebus: kuThi 'smelter' with kharva 'dwarf' adorning the structure with a garland to signify kharva 'a nidhi or wealth' of Kubera. A Bhutesvar frieze also indicates the skambha with face signifying ekamukha linga rebus:




mũhe 'ingot' (Santali) mũhã̄ = the quantity of iron produced at one time in a native smelting furnace of the Kolhes; iron produced by the Kolhes and formed like a four-cornered piece a little pointed at each end; mūhā mẽṛhẽt = iron smelted by the Kolhes and formed into an equilateral lump a little pointed at each of four ends;kolhe tehen mẽṛhẽt ko mūhā akata = the Kolhes have to-day produced pig iron (Santali) kuti 'tree' rebus: kuthi 'smelter'.
.
After Plate 8 in Kumar et al opcit. Śivalinga found in Vizhinjam 1st cent. CE? The octagonal shape of Rudrabhāga compares with the aṣṭāśri octagonal yupa found in Binjor Yajna kunda (ca. 2500 BCE).

Vizhinjam a port city of Ay Velir kings & also a military base. There is a rock cut temple made by Ay Kings in 8th century.

Interestingly the temple has Veenadhara Dakshināmoorthi in the sanctum which is quite unique. The outer wall has Tripurantaka on one side and Śiva & Parvathy on the other with Śiva in dancing pose. The temple seems to be unfinished, may be due to the recurring wars.




Source: https://twitter.com/tskrishnan/status/1339019289148321793


Takshasila copper seal is a catalogue of metalwork wealth

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/yc26pc7o 

Indus Script hieroglyphs on the copper seal are:

1. Mountain range

2. crucible

3. svastika

4. Heap of pebbles

The rebus readings are:

ḍang 'hill range' rebus: dhangar 'blacksmith' 

OP. koṭhārī f. ʻ crucible ʼ Rebus: kuṭhāru 'armourer' కొఠారు [ koṭhāru ] Same as [ koṭhī ] koṭhī. [H.] n. A bank. A mercantile house or firm (Telugu)B. kuṭhrī, Or. koṭhari; -- with -- lla -- : Sh. (Lor.) kotul (ṭh?) ʻ wattle and mud erection for storing grain ʼ; H. koṭhlā m.,  f. ʻ room, granary ʼ

svastika sattva 'svastika symbol' rebus: jasta, sattva 'zinc'

A (गोटा) gōṭā Spherical or spheroidal, pebble-form. (Marathi) Rebus: goTa 'laterite ferrite ore'.

4th Century B.C :: Copper Seal From Takshasila (Indian Museum)

The Indus Script Demystified: Origins, Character and Disappearance -- JM Kenoyer (14 Dec. 2020)

$
0
0
Dr. Jonathan Mark Kenoyer delivers the 23rd Gulestan and Rustom Billimoria Endowment  Lecture at the Asiatic Society of Mumbai, Dec. 14, 2020. A deep exploration of the Indus script and its evolution in the context of Indus civilization and other neighbouring Bronze Age cultures and their writing systems. Profusely illustrated, and including the latest research by leading scholars. 
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuOVXGBZ7gE (1:05:12)

Significance of Indus Script inscription on an animal figurine of Banawali

$
0
0

 https://tinyurl.com/ydelx2eo

Animal figurine from Banawali, Haryana. It also contains the Indus Script. Mature Harappan Period ~2700-2000 BCE. Via Krishnendu Das

Unfortunately, the figurine is broken and it is tough to identify the animal. But, it is significant that there are two clear Indus Script hieroglyphs inscribed on the body of the figurine.

One guess is that this figurine may signify a tiger. Together with this identification, the inscribed Indus Script hieroglyphs can be read rebus in Meluhha;

Tiger? Hieroglyph: kola 'tiger' rebus: kol 'working in iron' kolhe 'smelter'
khareḍo 'a currycomb' rebus kharada खरडें 'daybook'; kharādī ' turner' (Gujarati)
mēḍa 'platform' rebus meḍ 'iron'.

Thus, the message of the Indus Script inscription conveys iron smelted (acco\unted) in daybook..

Sealings from Alişar Höyük, Turkey, (ca. 3rd m. BCE) are Indus Script hieroglyphs of smelter & metalwork wealth resources

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/ya7b78b2

The following Indus Script hieroglyphs can be identified in the set of 23 sealings of  Alişar Höyük, Turkey, perhaps dated to 3rd m. BCE.

khond 'square' rebus: koṇḍa 'fire trench with live coals' ; agnikunda 'sacred fire altar'.

dhakka 'lid of pot' rebus: dhakka 'blazing, bright metal'

Dotted circles signify धवड  dhavaḍa 'smelter' : dhã̄ī 'strand' rebus: dhatu 'mineral ore'.वृत्त [p= 1009,2] mfn. turned , set in motion (as a wheel) RV.; a circle; vr̥ttá ʻ turned ʼ RV., ʻ rounded ʼ ŚBr. 2. ʻ completed ʼ MaitrUp., ʻ passed, elapsed (of time) ʼ KauṣUp. 3. n. ʻ conduct, matter ʼ ŚBr., ʻ livelihood ʼ Hariv. [√vr̥t11. Pa. vaṭṭa -- ʻ round ʼ, n. ʻ circle ʼ; Pk. vaṭṭa -- , vatta -- , vitta -- , vutta -- ʻ round ʼ; L. (Ju.) vaṭ m. ʻ anything twisted ʼ; Si. vaṭa ʻ round ʼ, vaṭa -- ya ʻ circle, girth (esp. of trees) ʼ; Md. va'ʻ round ʼ GS 58; -- Paš.ar. waṭṭəwīˊkwaḍḍawik ʻ kidney ʼ ( -- wĭ̄k vr̥kká -- ) IIFL iii 3, 192?(CDIAL 12069) வட்டம்போர் vaṭṭam-pōr, n. < வட்டு +. Dice-play; சூதுபோர். (தொல். எழுத். 418, இளம்பூ.)வட்டச்சொச்சவியாபாரம் vaṭṭa-c-cocca-viyāpāram, n. < id. + சொச்சம் +. Money-changer's trade; நாணயமாற்று முதலிய தொழில். Pond. வட்டமணியம் vaṭṭa-maṇiyam, n. < வட் டம் +. The office of revenue collection in a division; வட்டத்து ஊர்களில் வரிவசூலிக்கும் வேலை. (R. T.) వట్ట (p. 1123) vaṭṭa vaṭṭa. [Tel.] n. The bar that turns the centre post of a sugar mill. చెరుకుగానుగ రోటినడిమిరోకలికివేయు అడ్డమాను. వట్టకాయలు or వట్టలు vaṭṭa-kāyalu. n. plu. The testicles. వృషణములు, బీజములు. వట్టలుకొట్టు to castrate. lit: to strike the (bullock's) stones, (which are crushed with a mallet, not cut out.) వట్ర (p. 1123) vaṭra or వట్రన vaṭra. [from Skt. వర్తులము.] n. Roundness. నర్తులము, గుండ్రన. వట్ర. వట్రని or వట్రముగానుండే adj. Round. గుండ్రని.


धाव (p. 250) dhāva m f A certain soft, red stone. Baboons are said to draw it from the bottom of brooks, and to besmear their faces with it.  धवड  dhavaḍa m (Or धावड) A class or an individual of it. They are smelters of ironधावड (p. 250) dhāvaḍa m A class or an individual of it. They are smelters of iron. धावडी (p. 250) dhāvaḍī a Relating to the class धावड. Hence 2 Composed of or relating to iron. 
Archival photo of 23 modern sealings, made from ancient stamp seals with primarily geometric motifs and of varying sizes, that were excavated by OI archaeologists at the ancient city of Alişar Höyük in Turkey.



Alishar Hüyük was occupied beginning in the Chalcolithic Period, through the Bronze Age and the Hittites, and into Phrygian times. A number of Hittite-era cuneiform tablets in Old Assyrian of the Cappadocia type were found there. (J. Gelb, Inscriptions from Alishar and Vicinity, Oriental Institute Publications 27, The University of Chicago Press, 1935)...Evidence of the first known settlement at Cadir Hoyuk has been radio-carbon dated to the Early Chalcolithic (5300-4500 BC); nevertheless the occupation may well be even earlier than that, and go back to Neolithic (ca. 5500 BC).Cadir Hoyuk appears to have flourished during the Middle and Late Bronze Age (2000-1100 BC), continuing into the Iron Age. Alişar Hüyük - Wikipedia

Nine treasures of Kubera identified as rebus readings in Indus Script cipher tradition

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/ycuudgro

மகாபதுமம் makā-patumam , n. < mahā-padma. 1. One of nine treasures of Kubēra; குபேரன் நவநிதிகளுள் ஒன்று. 2. A great number; ஒரு பேரெண். (பிங்.) 3. White lotus; வெண்டாமரை. (யாழ். அக.) 4. A temple of 176 towers and 22 storeys; 176 சிகரங்களையும் 22 மேனிலைக் கட்டுக்களையுமுடைய கோயில். (சுக்கிரநீதி, 230.)

The semantics of the expression mahā-padma explains why the Hindu temples from early times are adorned with hieroglyphs of kīrtimukha (proclamation of muh 'ingots' wealth), makara, kacchapa (kassa) etc.

kīrtimukha -- Kr̥ṣṇa temple, Hampi


makara, Halebidu, Karnataka


பதுமம் patumam , n. < padma. 1. Lotus. See தாமரை. அறுவர் மற்றையோரும் . . . பயந்தோ ரென்ப பதுமத்துப்பாயல் (பரிபா. 5, 49). 

பதுமை² patumai , n. < pratimā. 1. Puppet, doll; பாவை. 2. Idol; விக்கிரகம். எந்தை பிரான் வடிவத்தோடு பொருந்து பதுமையை (உபதேச கா. சிவவிரத. 404).

In the ancient tradition Kubera’s nava nidhi or Padma Nidhi are counted as nine or eight:

महापद्मादि-रत्नविशेषे सेवधौ स च नवविधः “महापद्मश्च पद्मश्चशङ्खो मकरकच्छपौ । मुकुन्दकुन्दनीलाश्व खर्वश्चनिधयो नव” इति शब्दार्णवः …

मार्कण्डेयपु० ६० अ० उक्तं यथा“मार्कण्डेय उवाच । षष्मिनी नाम या विद्यालक्ष्मीस्तस्याश्च देवता । तदाधाराश्च निधयस्तान् मेनिगदतः शृणु । तत्र पद्ममहापद्मौ तथा मकरकच्छपौ ।मुकुन्दकुन्दौ नीलश्च शङ्खश्चैवाष्टमो निधिः ।

--वाचस्पत्यम्

Navanidhi (nine ratna or treasures) are: mahāpadma, padma, śankha, makara, kacchapa, mukunda, kunda, nīla, kharva

Padmanidhi (8 treasures) are: padma, mahāpadma, makara, kacchapa, mukunda, kunda, nīla, śankha (Nīla is added to make the navanidhi or 9 treasures of Kubera).

The treasures identified as Indus Script hieroglyphs in the Corpora of Indus Script inscriptions are:

Makara (composite consisting of fish, crocodile,  elephant trunk which are wealth account categories: aya ‘fish’ rebus: aya ‘iron’ ayas ‘alloy metal’; kara ‘crocodile’ rebus: khar ‘blacksmith’; ibha ‘elephant’ rebus: ib ‘iron’); (dh)makara ‘composite animal’ rebus: dhmākara, dhamaka ‘bellows blower, blacksmith’

Padma is tāmarasa ‘lotus’ rebus: tāmra ‘copper’

Mahāpadma is ‘A temple of 176 towers and 22 storeys; 176 சிகரங்களையும் 22 

மேனிலைக் கட்டுக்களையுமுடைய கோயில். (சுக்கிரநீதி, 230.)’

Kacchapa is  kassa 'turtle' rebus: kãsā 'bell-metal' Hieroglyph: kassa ‘turtle’: kacchapa m. ʻ turtle, tortoise ʼ MBh. 2. *kacchabha -- . [By pop. etym. through kaccha -- for kaśyápa -- VS. J. Charpentier MO xxvi 110 suggested equivalence in MIA. of kassa -- = kaccha -- to explain creation of kacchapa -- ~ kassapa -- . But K. kochuwu, unless a loan from Ind., points to *kakṣapa -- , which would make the formation earlier.] 1. Pa. kacchapa -- m. ʻ tortoise, turtle, °pinī -- f., Pk. kacchava -- m., °vī -- f., K. kochuwu m. (see above), S. kachãũ°chū̃ m., L. kachū̃ m., P. kacchūkacchūkummã̄ m. (< kūrmá -- 1), N. kachuwā, A. kācha, B. kāchim, Or. kechu°chokẽchukaï˜cha°cakachima

°cima, Mth. kāchu, Bhoj. Aw. lakh. kachuā; H. kachuā°chwā m., °uī°wī f. ʻ tortoise, turtle ʼ, kach -- mach m. ʻ dwellers in the water ʼ (< mátsya -- ) whence kacchkach m. ʻ turtle, tortoise ʼ, M. kāsavkã̄s° m., Ko. kāsavu. 2. Pk. amg. kacchabha -- , °aha -- m., °bhī -- f.; Si. käsum̆bu°ubu H. Smith JA 1950, 188; -- G. kācbɔ m., °bī f. with unexpl. retention of -- b -- and loss of aspiration in c. Addenda: kacchapa -- . 1. A. kācha (phonet. -- s -- ) ʻ tortoise ʼ AFD 217. 2. *kacchabha -- (with -- pa -- replaced by animal suffix -- bha -- ): Md. kahan̆bu ʻ tortoise -- shell ʼ.(CDIAL 2619)

Rebus: OMarw. kāso (= kã̄ -- ?) m. ʻ bell -- metal tray for food, food.

kaṁsá1 m. ʻ metal cup ʼ AV., m.n. ʻ bell -- metal ʼ Pat. as in S., but would in Pa. Pk. and most NIA. lggs. collide with kāˊṁsya -- to which L. P. testify and under which the remaining forms for the metal are listed. 2. *kaṁsikā -- . 1. Pa. kaṁsa -- m. ʻ bronze dish ʼ; S. kañjho m. ʻ bellmetal ʼ; A. kã̄h ʻ gong ʼ; Or. kãsā ʻ big pot of bell -- metal ʼ; OMarw. kāso (= kã̄ -- ?) m. ʻ bell -- metal tray for food, food ʼ; G. kã̄sā m. pl. ʻ cymbals ʼ; -- perh. Woṭ. kasṓṭ m. ʻ metal pot ʼ Buddruss Woṭ 109. 2. Pk. kaṁsiā -- f. ʻ a kind of musical instrument ʼ; K. kanzü f. ʻ clay or copper pot ʼ; A. kã̄hi ʻ bell -- metal dish ʼ; G. kã̄śī f. ʻ bell -- metal cymbal ʼ, kã̄śiyɔ m. ʻ open bellmetal pan ʼ. kāˊṁsya -- ; -- *kaṁsāvatī -- ? Addenda: kaṁsá -- 1: A. kã̄h also ʻ gong ʼ or < kāˊṁsya -- . (CDIAL 2576) It is possible that the word in Tamil for ‘gold, money’ is cognate with these etyma of Indian sprachbundகாசு³ kācu , n. prob. kāš. cf. kāca. [M. kāšu.] 1. Gold; பொன். (நி.) 2. Necklace of gold coins; அச்சுத்தாலிகாசும் பிறப்புங் கலகலப்ப (திவ்திருப்பா. 7). 3. An ancient gold coin = 28 gr. troy; ஒரு பழைய பொன்னாணயம். (Insc.) 4. A small copper coin; சிறுசெப்புக்காசுநெஞ்சே யுனையோர் காசா மதியேன் (தாயுஉடல்பொய். 72). 5. Coin, cash, money; ரொக்கம்எப்பேர்ப்பட்ட பல காசா யங்களும் (S.I.I. i, 89). 6. Gem, crystal bead; மணிநாண்வழிக் காசுபோலவும் (இறை. 2, உரைபக். 29). 7. Girdle strung with gems; மேகலாபர ணம்பட்டுடை சூழ்ந்த காசு (சீவக. 468). 8. (Pros.) A formula of a foot of two nēr acaiveṇpā; வெண்பாவின் இறுதிச்சீர்வாய்பாட்டுள் ஒன்று. (காரிகைசெய். 7.) 9. The hollow in the centre of each row of pallāṅkuḻi; பல்லாங்குழி யாட்டத்திற் காய்கள் சேர்தற்குரிய நடுக்குழிகள்.

1)      కంచరవాడు (p. 224) kañcaravāḍu kanṭsu. n. Bell metalకంచుకుండ a bowl or vessel or bell metalకంచువాద్యము a cymbal made of bell metalకంచుతీసినట్లు as... 
2) కంచము (p. 223) kañcamu kanṭsamu. [Tel.] n. A metal plate or dish. కంచుకంచము a dish made of bell metal. మా కంచములో రాయి వేసినాడు he threw a stone into our place, i.e., took away our bread, he disturbed us. మందకంచము a dish which as a rim. ఆకుకంచము a dish which has none. 

     కంసర  kaṃsara or కంసలల kamsara. [Tel.] n. Smithery; working in gold: adj. Of the goldsmith caste. కంసలది a woman of that caste. కంసలపని the business of a gold-smith. 

3) కంసము kaṃsamu kamsamu. [Skt.] n. Bell metal.కంచు
4) కాంస్యము  kāṃsyamu kāmsyamu. [Skt.] n. Bell metalకంచు

4) కంసాలి  kaṃsāli or కంసాలవాడు kamsāli. [Tel.] n. A goldsmith or silversmith. 

5) కంచరవాడు kañcaravāḍu or కంచరి kanṭsara-vaḍu. [Tel.] n. A brazier, a coppersmith. కంచుపని చేయువాడుకంచరది a woman of that caste. కంచరిపురుగు kanṭsari-purugu. n. A kind of beetle called the death watch. కంచు kanṭsu. n. Bell metal. కంచుకుండ a bowl or vessel or bell metal. కంచువాద్యము a cymbal made of bell metal. కంచుతీసినట్లు as bright or dazzling as the glitter of polished metal. Sunbright. ఆమె కంచుగీచినట్లు పలికె she spoke shrilly or with a voice as clear as a bell. 

 కాంచనము (p. 265) kāñcanamu kānchanamu. [Skt.] n. Gold. కాంచనవల్లి a piece of gold wire. కాంచనాంబరము tissue, gold cloth. 

Kāñcana काञ्चन a. (-नी f.) [काञ्च्-ल्युट्] Golden, made of gold; तन्मध्ये च स्फटिकफलका 

काञ्चनी वासयष्टिः Me.81; काञ्चनं वलयम् Ś.6.8; Ms.5.112. -नम् 1 Gold; समलोष्टाश्मकाञ्चनः Bg. 14.24. (ग्राह्यम्) अमेध्यादपि काञ्चनम् Ms.2.239. -2 Lustre, brilliancy. -3 Property, wealth, money. (Apte).  kāñcaná ʻ golden ʼ MBh., n. ʻ gold ʼ Mn.Pa. kañcana -- n. ʻ gold ʼ, °aka -- ʻ golden ʼ; Pk. kaṁcaṇa<-> n. ʻ gold ʼ; Si. kasuna ʻ gold ʼ, kasun -- ʻ golden ʼ. (CDIAL 3013) காஞ்சனம்¹ kāñcaṉam n. < kāñcana. Gold; பொன். (திவா.) 

కాంచనము kāñcanamu kānchanamu. [Skt.] n. Gold. కాంచనవల్లి a piece of gold wire. కాంచనాంబరము tissue, gold cloth. kassa 'turtle' rebus: kãsā 'bell-metal' kamaṭha 'turtle' rebus: kãsā kammaṭa 'bell-metal coiner, mint, portable furnace'.

Orthography of Sign 391 spoked wheel, axle, knave, spokes in the context of Meluhha dialectical words related to metalwork catalogue, has been explained as a rebus rendering of the word kunda 'a treasure' kundana 'fine gold'. Hieroglyph, knave of spoked wheel: kunda 'knave of wheel, axle' rebus: kunda 'Kubera's treasure'; kundaṇa 'fine gold' PLUS eraka 'nave of wheel' rebus: eraka 'molten cast' PLUS ārā 'spokes' rebus: āra 'brass'. Thus, gold, brass, metalcasting articles. څرخ ṯs̱arḵẖ, s.m. (2nd) ( P چرخ ). 2. A wheeled-carriage, a gun-carriage, a cart. Pl. څرخونه ṯs̱arḵẖūnah. څرخ ṯs̱arḵẖ, s.m. (2nd) A wheel (Pashto) rebus: arka ‘sun’s rays’ arkasal ‘goldsmith workshop’ arka ‘copper, gold’.

Rebus: kundār turner (A.); kũdār, kũdāri (B.); kundāru (Or.); kundau to turn on a ... engraver' 

Field symbol: spoked wheel within a fisted hand:  kunda 'knave of wheel, axle' rebus: kunda 'Kubera's treasure'; kundaṇa 'fine gold' arā 'spokes' Rebus: āra 'brass' eraka 'knave of wheel' Rebus: eraka 'moltencast' PLUS muṣṭi 'fist' rebus: muṣṭika 'goldsmith'. PLUS मुष्टिक'fist' rebus: मुष्टिक goldsmith.

Thus, muṣṭika kunda goldsmith working with moltencast brass, fine gold. There are two nidhi-s (treasures) of Kubera called kunda and mukunda

In Bharatiya tradition, both nidhi-s, kunda and mukunda also signify the name of विष्णु.

ముకుందబల్లెము mukunda-ballemu. n. A halberd or broad bladed spear. kuntam 

குந்தம்5 kuntamn. < kunta. 1. Javelin for throwing; barbed dart; எறிகோல். வைவா ளிருஞ்சிலை குந்தம் (சீவக. 1678). 2. Spear, lance; வேல். குந்தமலியும் புரவி யான் (பு. வெ. 4, 7). 3. Pike, stake; குத்துக்கோல். பூந்தலைக் குந்தங் குத்தி (முல்லைப். 41).मुकु m. = मुक्ति (a word formed to explain , मुकुन्- as " giver of liberation " ; others assume मुकुम् ind. )  मुकुन्द m. (cf. मुकु) N. of विष्णु(sometimes transferred to शिव)(महाभारतभागवत-पुराण). of a partic. treasure (मार्कण्डेय-पुराण)

It is, therefore, possible that a phonetic, dialectical Meluhha variant expression of muṣṭika kunda is mukunda with the same meaning as for the word कुन्द N. of विष्णु MBh. xiii. 7036 

kharva 'nidhi, wealth, karba 'iron'; kharvaṭ may refer to an anvil.

नील mf(आ or ई; cf. Pāṇ. 4-1, 42 , Vārtt., Vām. v, 2, 48 )n. of a dark colour, (esp.) d°-blue or d°-green or black, RV.  &c. &c.; dyed with indigo, Pāṇ. 4-2, 2 , Vārtt. 2, Pat. ; नील m. the sapphire, L.  (with मणि, R. iii, 58, 26 ) (Monier-Williams)

शङ्खः śaṅkhaḥशङ्खम् śaṅkham [शम्-ख Uṇ.1.102] 1 The conch-shell, a shell; न श्वेतभावमुज्झति शङ्खः शिखिभुक्तमुक्तोऽपि Pt.4.110; शङ्खान् दध्मुः पृथक् पृथक् Bg.1.18;  One of the nine treasures of Kubera Rebus: शङ्खः śaṅkhaḥ A bracelet (made of conch-shell); अवघ्नन्त्याप्रकोष्ठस्थाश्चक्रुः शङ्खाः स्वनं महत् Bhāg.11.9.6.  


Bangle inscribed with Indus Script  karã̄ n. pl. wristlets, banglesRebus: khãr 'blacksmith, iron worker' (Kashmiri).karnaka 'rim of jar' rebus: karnaka 'scribe, accountant, supercargo'.kárṇaka 'helmsman' karṇika 'scribe, accountant'.


Rosetta stone for Indus Script, a surface-find copper anthropomorph reported by Sanjay Manjul, Archaeological Survey of India

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/y9hqb6pq

Sanjay Manjul, Director, Institute of Archaeology, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) presented the image of a Copper anthropomorph in his lecture at India International Centre on 26 Aug. 2015.

[quote]The Enigmatic Copper Anthropomorph: From Harappa to the Historical
Illustrated lecture by Dr. Sanjay Manjul, Director, Institute of Archaeology

Chair: Dr. Himanshu Prabha Ray
 
A composite copper Anthropomorphic figure along with a copper sword was found by the speaker at the Central Antiquity Section, ASI, Purana Qila in 2005. This composite copper Anthropomorph is a solitary example in the copper hoard depicting a Varah head. The Anthropomorphic figure, its inscription and animal motif that it bears, illustrate the continuity between the Harappan and Early Historical period. [unquote]

Though the copper anthropomorph was reportedly taken from the Central Antiquity Section, ASI, Purana Qila in 2005, the provenance has not been firmly established. It may be deemed to be a surface find somewhere in Haryana and brought into the Archives. 

The importance of this copper anthropomorph which is a composite hypertext, there is an earlier anthropomorph found in Sheorajpur, dated to ca. 2nd millennium BCE with an inscribed hieroglyph of a 'fish' on the chest of the copper anthropomorph.. 



Scores of copper anthropomorphs have been found in the Copper Hoard Culture sites in the Ganga-Yamuna doab (though without any inscription).

This monograph deciphers these anthropomorphs. which are Indus Script hypertexts fused into the artifacts. The composite copper anthropomorph is unique since together with Indus Script hieroglyphs (of 'unicorn', boar, ram's horns), a Brāhmī inscription is incised on the chest of the ram (with curved horns and spread legs).

Thus, this particular anthropomorph is closest to a Rosetta stone for Indus Script since the message on the artifact is presented in two scripts. Brāhmī  and Indus Script.

We do not know when the Brāhmī inscription was incised on the artifact. The reading and meaning of the Brāhmī inscription as a Majitha member of assembly is consistent with the decipherment of Indus Script hieroglyphs/hypertexts presented in this monograph. Majhi refers to a boatman. Indus Script hypertext refers to a steersman. Majitha is the name of a locality in Punjab.

The decipherment demonstrates that the Copper anthropomorphs were used as professional calling cards of artisans/merchants of Sarasvati-Sindhu Civilization engaged in wealth-producing activities of metalwork and documenting their work in wealth accounting ledgers using Indus Script.

Scores of copper anthropomorphs have been found in the Copper Hoard Culture sites in the Ganga-Yamuna doab (though without any inscription).

This monograph deciphers these anthropomorphs. which are Indus Script hypertexts fused into the artifacts. The composite copper anthropomorph is unique since together with Indus Script hieroglyphs (of 'unicorn', boar, ram's horns), a Brāhmī inscription is incised on the chest of the ram (with curved horns and spread legs).

Thus, this particular anthropomorph is closest to a Rosetta stone for Indus Script since the message on the artifact is presented in two scripts. Brāhmī  and Indus Script.

We do not know when the Brāhmī inscription was incised on the artifact. The reading and meaning of the Brāhmī inscription as a Majitha member of assembly is consistent with the decipherment of Indus Script hieroglyphs/hypertexts presented in this monograph. Majhi refers to a boatman. Indus Script hypertext refers to a steersman. Majitha is the name of a locality in Punjab.

The decipherment demonstrates that the Copper anthropomorphs were used as professional calling cards of artisans/merchants of Sarasvati-Sindhu Civilization engaged in wealth-producing activities of metalwork and documenting their work in wealth accounting ledgers using Indus Script.

Anthropomorphic figure. Sheorajpur, Kanpur Dist. Inscribed with fish hieroglyph. ca. 2nd millennium BCE. 4 kg; 47.7 X 39 X 2.1 cm. State Museum,   Lucknow (O.37)

Hieroglyphs on this copper anthropomorph are: ram’s horns; spread legs; fish incised on chest. Rebus Meluhha reading: merchant, accountant, steersman, coppersmith

 

Hieroglyph: ram: Pk. meḍḍha -- , meṁḍha -- (°ḍhī -- f.), °ṁḍa -- , miṁḍha -- (°dhiā -- f.), °aga -- m. ʻ ram ʼ; N. meṛhomeṛo ʻ ram for sacrifice ʼB. meṛā m., °ṛi f., Or. meṇḍhā°ḍā m., °ḍhi f., H. meṛhmeṛhāmẽḍhā m., G. mẽḍhɔ, M. mẽḍhā m., Si. mäḍayā. 2. Pk. meṁṭhī -- f. ʻ sheep ʼ; H. meṭhā m. ʻ ram ʼ(CDIAL 10310) 

Rebus:  meḍh ‘helper of merchant’ (Gujarati)

Hieroglyph: Spread legs: कर्णक m. du. the two legs spread out (AV. xx , 133) Rebus: karṇī m. ʻ village accountant ʼ karṇi ‘scribe’ as in kul karṇi ‘village scribe’ कर्णिक a steersman  कारणी kāraṇī, कारणीक kāraṇīka a (कारण S) That causes, conducts, carries on, manages. Applied to the prime minister of a state, the supercargo of a ship &c (a representative of the ship's owner on board a merchant ship, responsible for overseeing the cargo and its sale.). 2 (Marathi) kāraṇika m. ʻ teacher ʼ MBh., ʻ judge ʼ Pañcat. [kā- raṇa -- ]Pa. usu -- kāraṇika -- m. ʻ arrow -- maker ʼ; Pk. kāraṇiya -- m. ʻ teacher of Nyāya ʼ; S. kāriṇī m. ʻ guardian, heir ʼ; N. kārani ʻ abettor in crime ʼ; M. kārṇī m. ʻ prime minister, supercargo of a ship ʼ, kul -- karṇī m. ʻ village accountant ʼ. (CDIAL 3058) Pa. kaṇṇadhāra -- m. ʻ helmsman ʼ; Pk. kaṇṇahāra -- m. ʻ helmsman, sailor ʼ; H. kanahār m. ʻ helmsman, fisherman ʼ(CDIAL 2836) मेधा f. mental vigour or power , intelligence , prudence , wisdom (pl. products of intelligence , thoughts , opinions) RV.

aya ‘fish’ rebus; aya ‘iron’ ayas ‘alloy metal’ ayo mēdhā 'metal expert’; karṇika कर्णिक'steersman'

 

The hieroglyphs on this copper anthropomorph are: ram’s horns, spread legs, boar on head, ‘unicorn’ on chest,

A Brāhmī inscription is also inscribed on chest.

He is a worker in iron, wood; merchant; engraver; worker in fine gold and ornament gold; steersman; supercargo; scribe.

 meḍ 'body', meḍho 'ram' rebus: mẽṛhẽt, meḍ 'iron' (ram hieroglyph, (human) body hieroglyph) meḍh ‘helper of merchant’ (Gujarati)

कर्णक m. du. the two legs spread out AV. xx , 133 , 3 rebus: कर्णिक having a helm; a steersman (Monier-Williams)  karṇī m. ʻ village accountant ʼ karṇi ‘scribe’ as in kul karṇi ‘village scribe’

ayas 'alloy metal' (fish hieroglyph)

कोंद kōnda ‘engraver' (one-horned young bull hieroglyph); kundana 'fine gold' (Kannada). Singhin ‘forward-thrusting, spiny horned’ rebus: singi ‘ornament gold’

bāṛaï 'carpenter' (boar hieroglyph)

bari barea 'merchant' (boar hieroglyph) 

Brāhmī inscription inscribed on chest reads: Symbol of Majhitha, ‘merchant, smith working with fine gold, ornament gold, boatman, member of assembly, assayer of metals’

samjñā 'symbol, sign' 

kī ma jhi tha 'of Majhitha'

Sha (?) Da Ya शद   sad-a  'produce (of a country)'.-shad-ya, m. one who takes part in an assembly, spectator

Majhitha

A cognate word signifies boatman: *majjhika ʻ boatman ʼ. [Cf. maṅga -- ?] N. mājhimã̄jhi ʻ boatman ʼ; A. māzi ʻ steersman ʼ, B. māji; Or. mājhi ʻ steersman ʼ, majhiā ʻ boatman ʼ, Bi. Mth. H. mã̄jhī m.(CDIAL 9714).மஞ்சி2 mañci, n. 1. cf. mañca. [M. mañji.] Cargo boat with a raised platform; படகு.  Thus, a majhitha artisan is also a boatman. 

The word manjhitha may be derived from the root:  मञ्ज्   mañj मञ्ज्1 U. (मञ्जयति-ते) To clean, purify, wipe off. Thus, the reference is to a locality of artisans engaged in purifying metals and alloys. Such purifiers or assayers of metal are also referred to as पोतदार pōtadāra m ( P) An officer under the native governments. His business was to assay all money paid into the treasury. He was also the village-silversmith. (Marathi) This is the closest to a Rosetta stone because this is inscription in two scripts: a Brāhmī inscription is superimposed which validates the Indus Script decipherment. 

மார்படி கிணறு, svastika-shaped stepwell built by Kamban Araiyan, Pallava reign in ca. 800 CE – a continuum of Sarasvati-Sindhu Civilization tradition of stepwells & svastika hieroglyph

$
0
0

 https://tinyurl.com/y7tsojfu

Moovar Koil, a Chola era temple in Kodumbalur, 45km from Tiruchirapalli. ..


According to the Sanskrit inscription in Grantha script on the south wall of the middle shrine, the temple with three vimanas enshrining Shiva lingas constructed by Bhuti Vikramakesari, the Irukkuvel chief of Kodumbalur together with a monastery for the Kalamukha (a medieval Saivite ascetics) …Pundarikakshan Perumal temple in Thiruvellarai (near Trichy) …a stepwell (3784 sq.ft.) designed like a swastika.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/72329093.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

மார்படிகிணறு, built in Pundarikaksha temple, Kanchipuram

 

The first rock-cut step wells in India (Gujarat) is dated to ca. 200-400 CE.  Step wells at Dhank (550-625 CE) and Bhinmal (850-950 CE)…and in Tamil Nadu (8thcent.CE)…Pallavas constructed by Pallava King Dantivarman (800 CE); architect mentioned in inscription is Kamban Araiyan… a svastika stepwell, saravana theertham, Thiruvellarai, Thiruchirapalli; nadavavi kinaru, Pundarikaksha temple, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu; Saravana Theertham, Valeeswarar temple Marpidugu Perunkinaru…http://openarchive.icomos.org/1830/1/01_historic%20wells%20Documentation.jpg

http://openarchive.icomos.org/1830/2/02_historic%20wells%20Documentation.jpg

 மார்பு mārpu , Tank; தடாகம். மார்பின்மைபடி . . . குலவரை (பரிபா. 15, 9)அடி aṭi Stand, support, foundation; அடிப்பீடம். புஷ்கரபத்திமடல்அடியோடுமொன்று (S.I.I. ii, 15) கிணறு kiṇaṟu , n. perh. கீள்-. [M. kiṇaṟu.] Well; கேணிவகை. உவரில்கிணற்றின்கட்சென்றுண்பர் (நாலடி, 263). Ta. kēṇi small tank, well, ditch, trench; kiṇaṟu well. Ma. kēṇi temporary well or tank, hole dug in a river's bed, a mine; kiṇaru

 well. Ka. kēṇi temporary well or tank, hole dug in a river's bed. (DEDR 1998)

Sarasvati hieroglyph

Choice of Svastika shape for the well is significant. It is a sacred hieroglyph.

பல்லவ மன்னர் தந்திவர்மர் காலத்தில் கம்பன் அரையன் என்பவரால் ’மாற்பிடுகு பெருங்கிணறு’ எனும் மன்னரின் பட்டப்பெயரில் வெட்டப்பட்ட 1200 வருடங்கள் கடந்த ஸ்வஸ்திக அமைப்பு திருவெள்ளறை Courtesy: Sri Dev Raj in Facebook

paranthagan - Twitter Search / Twitter


The rebus reading in Meluhha of the hieroglyph:

Sattva ‘svastika hieroglyph’ rebus: sattva, jasta ‘zinc’

The drummer hieroglyph is associated with svastika glyph on this tablet (har609) and also on h182A tablet of Harappa with an identical text.

Drummer hieroglyph

ḍhol ‘drum’ (Gujarati.Marathi)(CDIAL 5608) Rebus: large stone; dul ‘to cast in a mould’. இடக்கை² iṭakkai , n. < ḍhakkā. Large double drum; பெருமுரசுவகை. Rebus ḍhakkā. ‘blazing, bright metal’

dhollu ‘drummer’ (Western Pahari) Rebus: dul ‘cast metal’. The 'drummer' hieroglyph thus announces a cast metal. The technical specifications of the cast metal are further described by other hieroglyphs on side B and on the text of inscription (the text is repeated on both sides of Harappa tablet h182).

kola 'tiger' Rebus: kol 'alloy of five metals, pancaloha' (Tamil). kul ‘tiger’ (Santali); kōlu id. (Telugu) kōlupuli = Bengal tiger (Te.) कोल्हा [ kōlhā ] कोल्हें [kōlhēṃ] A jackal (Marathi) Rebus: kol, kolhe, ‘the koles, iron smelters speaking a language akin to that of Santals’ (Santali) kol ‘working in iron’ (Tamil) kōla1 m. ʻ name of a degraded tribe ʼ Hariv. Pk. kōla -- m.; B. kol ʻ name of a Muṇḍā tribe ʼ.(CDIAL 3532)  Ta. kol working in iron, blacksmith; kollaṉ blacksmith.  Ma. kollan blacksmith, artificer. Ko. kole·l smithy, temple in Kota village. To. kwala·l Kota smithy. Ka. kolime, kolume, kulame, kulime, kulume, kulme fire-pit, furnace;(Bell.;U.P.U.) konimi blacksmith(Gowda) kolla id. Koḍ. kollë blacksmith. 

Te. kolimi furnace. Go. (SR.)kollusānā to mend implements; (Ph.) kolstānā, kulsānā to forge; (Tr.) kōlstānā to repair (of ploughshares); (SR.) kolmi smithy (Voc. 948). Kuwi (F.) kolhali to forge.(DEDR 2133)

Count of five svastika as a Meluhha expression

Count of five svastika; an alternative to the reading mōṝẽ 'five' rebus: munda 'Toda village or assembly’ 

The Meluhha gloss for 'five' is: taṭṭal Homonym is: ṭhaṭṭha brass (i.e. alloy of copper + zinc). Glosses for zinc are: sattu (Tamil), satta, sattva (Kannada) jasth जसथ्।रपुm. (sg. dat. jastas ज्तस), zinc, spelter; pewter; zasathज़स््थ्or zasuth ज़सुथ्।रपm. (sg. dat. zastasज़्तस),zinc, spelter, pewter (cf. Hindī jast). jastuvu; रपू्भवःadj. (f. jastüvü), made of zinc or pewter.(Kashmiri). Hence the hieroglyph: svastika repeated five times. Five svastika are thus read: taṭṭal sattva Rebus: zinc (for) brass (or pewter). jasta = zinc (Hindi) yasada (Jaina Pkt.)

*ṭhaṭṭha1 ʻbrassʼ. [Onom. from noise of hammering brass?]N. ṭhaṭṭar ʻ an alloy of copper and bell metal ʼ. *ṭhaṭṭhakāra ʻ brass worker ʼ. 1.Pk. ṭhaṭṭhāra -- m., K. ṭhö̃ṭhur m., S. ṭhã̄ṭhāro m., P. ṭhaṭhiār°rā m.2. P. ludh. ṭhaṭherā m., Ku. ṭhaṭhero m., N. ṭhaṭero, Bi. ṭhaṭherā, Mth. ṭhaṭheri, H.ṭhaṭherā m.(CDIAL 5491, 5493). Hieroglyphs, allographs: தட்டல்taṭṭal Five, a slang term; ஐந்துஎன்பதன்குழூஉக்குறி. (J.) Rebus: தட்டான்¹ taṭṭāṉ, n. < தட்டு-. [M. taṭṭān.] Gold or silver smith, one of 18 kuṭimakkaḷ, q. v.; பொற்கொல்லன். (திவா.) Te. taṭravã̄ḍu goldsmith or silversmith. Cf. Turner,CDIAL, no. 5490, *ṭhaṭṭh- to strike; no. 5493, *ṭhaṭṭhakāra- brassworker; √ taḍ, no. 5748, tāˊḍa- a blow; no. 5752, tāḍáyati strikes.

*ṭhaṭṭha ʻ brass ʼ. [Onom. from noise of hammering brass? -- N. ṭhaṭṭar ʻ an alloy of copper and bell metal ʼ. *ṭhaṭṭhakāra ʻ brass worker ʼ. 2. *ṭhaṭṭhakara -- 1. Pk. ṭhaṭṭhāra -- m., K. ṭhö̃ṭhur m., S. ṭhã̄ṭhāro m., P. ṭhaṭhiār°rā m.2. P. ludh. ṭhaṭherā m., Ku. ṭhaṭhero m., N. ṭhaṭero, Bi. ṭhaṭherā, Mth. ṭhaṭheri, H. ṭhaṭherā m.(CDIAL 5491, 5493).

Count of five signifies monde ‘five’ rebus: mod ‘village dairy’, maṉṟu ’assembly, court’

Rebus: Ta. maṉṟu hall of assembly, golden hall of Chidambaram, court of justice, arbitration court, cow-stall, herd of cows, raised platform under a tree for village meetings, centre of a garden, junction of four roads or streets; maṉṟam hall, assembly, court, meeting place under a tree in a village, open space used for riding horses, plain, open space, central place in a battlefield, Chidambaram, house, cowshed, long street; maṉṟal marriage, long street; maṉṟaṉ Śiva; maṉṟ-il courtyard of a house; maṉṟu (maṉṟi-) to fine, punish. Ma.mannu place of judgement or assembly; mannam standing place, place of judgment or discussion. Ko. manḏToda mund (i.e. village); burning place for dry funeral; mandm (obl. mandt-) meeting. To. moḏ (obl. moṟt-)locus of tribal activity, including village with dairy, dairy apart from village, and funeral place; patrilineal clan. Ka. mandu hamlet of the Todas on the Nilagiri. Koḍ. mandï village green.(DEDR 4777)

jasta, sattva mund 'svastika, 'zinc' assembly'

dul mũhã̄ कर्ण karṇa metal casting zinc ingot account

Pictorial motif of five svastika

jasta, sattva 'svastika glyph' rebus jasta, sattva 'zinc' PLUS mōṝẽ 'five' rebus munda 'Toda village or assembly'

Text message on h182

dul mũhã̄ ' metal casting, bun ingot' .

dul 'two' rebus: dul 'metal casting'

karṇī, 'Supercargo responsible for cargo of a merchant vessel'; karṇika 'scribe, account'.

Sign 403 is a duplication of 'oval or rhombus' hieroglyph Sign 267 which has the shape of a bun ingot: mũhã̄ 'bun ingot' . Duplication signifies dula 'two' rebus: dul 'metal casting'. Thus Sign 403 reads: dul mũhã̄ ' metal casting, bun ingot' .

This semantics is reinforced by the two linear strokes || dula 'two' rebus: dul 'metal casting'

Sign 342: kanda kanka 'rim of jar' कार्णिक'relating to the ear' rebus: kanda kanka 'fire-trench account, 

karṇika 'scribe, account' karṇī 'supercargo',कर्णिक helmsman'.

Hieroglyph: कर्ण the handle or ear of a vessel RV. viii , 72 , 12 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa ix (कात्यायन-श्रौत-सूत्र)&c Rebus: कर्ण the helm or rudder of a ship R. कर्णी f. of ° ifc. (e.g. अयस्-क्° and पयस्-क्°) Pa1n2. 8-3 , 46" N. of कंस's mother " , in comp. Rebus: karṇī, 'Supercargo responsible for cargo of a merchant vessel'.

 

Temple tanks, stepwells; inscription refers to Kamban Araiyan, architect, Tiruvellarai Svastika மார்படிக் கிணறு stepwell

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/y7jbu7dy

This is an addendum to: 

 

 https://tinyurl.com/y7tsojfu


No. 40.

(A. R. No. 541 of 1905).

Tiruvellarai, Lalgudi Taluk, Trichinopoly District.

On the margin of a well called ‘Nalumulaikkeni’.

This inscription records the construction of a well called Marppidugu[12]-Perunkinaru at Tennur in Tiruvellarai by Kamban Araiyan, the younger brother of Visayanallulan of Alambakkam, in the 4th year of Dantivarman. The well is designed in the form of a svastika and it is reached by a flight of steps from each of the four directions.

Published in Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XI, p. 157.

Note 12: Marpidugu was also the surname of the Telugu-Chola king Punyakumara (Ep. Rep. For 1936, p. 56.) பிடுகு piṭuku , n. [T. K. piḍugu.] Thunderbolt; இடி. பெரும்பிடுகு (S. I. I. ii, 341).

No. 41.

(A. R. No. 348 of 1914).

Kunnandarkoyil, Pudukkottai State.

At the north end of the rock-cut cave of the Parvatagirisvara temple.

This is dated in the 5th year of Vijaya-Dantipottaraiyar and records the construction of a tank called ‘ Vali-eri ‘ by Vali-Vadugan alias Kalimurkka-Ilavaraiyan, a servant of Marppiduvinar alias Peradi-Araiyar.

Published[13] in the ‘Inscriptions (Texts) of the Pudukkotttai State,’ No. 17.

Note 13: See also Jl. Of S. I. Association, July 1911, p. 36.


“The Tiruvellarai inscription says Kamban Arayan is the brother of Vijayanalluzhan of Alambakkam. In the Chola period, the Marpidugu Eri came to be called Madurantaka Pereri.”

A site of notable monuments - The Hindu

The correct reading of the expression Marpidugu is: மார்புக் கிணறு 

kiṇaṟu , n. perh. கீள்-. [M. kiṇaṟu.] Well; கேணிவகை. உவரில் கிணற்றின்கட் சென் றுண்பர் (நாலடி, 263). மார்பு mārpu Tank; தடாகம். மார்பின்மை படி . . . குலவரை (பரிபா. 15, 9).

"The Pundarikakshan Perumal Temple or Thiruvellarai Temple in Thiruvellarai, a a village in the outskirts of Tiruchirappalli in the South Indian state of Tamil Nadu, is dedicated to the Hindu god Vishnu. Constructed in the Dravidian style of architecture, the temple is glorified in the Divya Prabandha, the early medieval Tamil canon of the Azhwar saints from the 6th–9th centuries AD. It is one of the 108 Divyadesam dedicated to Vishnu, who is worshipped as Pundarikakshan and his consort Lakshmi as Pankajavalli. ..According to legends, the temple is said to have been built by Sibi Chakravarthy, king of Ayodhya in Treta Yuga 15 lakh years ago. This temple is older than Srirangam temple. The temple has three inscriptions in its two rock-cut caves, two dating from the period of Nandivarman II (732–796 AD) and the other to that of Dantivarman (796–847). It also has Pallava sculptural depictions of Narasimha and Varahatwo of the ten avatarss of Vishnu. A granite wall surrounds the temple, enclosing all its shrines and six of its seven bodies of water. The rajagopuram, the temple's gateway tower, is unfinished. A swastika shaped temple tank built in 800 AD by Kamban Araiyan during the reign of Dantivarman is outside the temple complex. The Vijayanagar and Nayak kings commissioned paintings on the walls of the shrine of Pudarikakshan, some of which are still present.

Pundarikakshan is believed to have appeared to Garuda (vahana of Vishnu), Sibi Chakravarthy, sage Markandeya and Hindu gods Bhoomadevi, Brahma and Shiva. Six daily rituals and three yearly festivals are held at the temple, of which the chariot festival, celebrated during the Tamil month of Chaitra (March–April), is the most prominent. The festival is unique in the state as a community feast is offered, a custom stretching back many centuries. The temple is maintained and administered by the Hindu Religious and Endowment Board of the Government of Tamil Nadu."



Swastika tank, with stepped entrances in all four sides, was built in 800 CE "The rectangular walls around the temple enclose all the eight shrines and six of the seven water bodies associated with the temple. Besides the main shrine for Pundarikakshan and Pangayavalli, the temple has shrines for AzhwarsGarudaRamanujar and Uyyakondar. The seven water bodies are Divya Theertham, Kanda Kshree Theertham, Theertham, Chakkara Theertham, Pushkala Theertham, Padma Theertham and Varaaha Manikarnika Theertham."

Tiruvellarai. Swastika well, also known as Marpidugu   Perunkinaru, was  dug by Kamban Araiyan. One inscription  found in this well is in poetical form and describe the immortal life of man. It belongs to 8th century CE.

Location: 25 km from Tiruchirappalli en-route to Turaiyur

404 error | Department Of Archaeology (tnarch.gov.in)

See: Srivari.com - 108 Divya Desam - Chozha Tirupathigal (Tiruvellarai temple)

Thiruvellarai Swastik Well by Dantivarma Pallava and Pundarikakasha Perumal Temple

நன்றி: புகைப்படம் பராந்தக சோழன் முகநூல்
நன்றி: புகைப்படம் பராந்தக சோழன் முகநூல்
நன்றி: புகைப்படம் தி இந்து
Thiruvellarai (திருவெள்ளரை) Pundarikaksha Perumal (புண்டரிகாட்ஷப் பெருமாள்) Temple, Manachanallur Taluk, Tiruchirapalli district is the most ancient Vaishnavite shrine located about 20 km. from Tiruchirapalli and lying on the Tiruchirapalli - Thuraiyur Road.  It is the fourth among the 108 Divya Desams (திவ்ய தேசம்) (Azhwars (ஆழ்வார்கள்) or holy Vaishnavite saints, who invoked Lord Vishnu with the hymn of Nalayira Divya Prabandham (நாலாயிர திவ்யப் பிரபந்தம்) or 4000 holy hymns compositions in 108 shrines. Thiruvellarai Divya Desam or Vaishnavite shrine was invoked by Periyazhwar (பெரியாழ்வார்) and Thirumangai Azhwar (திருமங்கை ஆழ்வார்). The shrine is believed to be much older than Sri Rengam, the First Divya Desam. The temple is dedicated to Lord Pundarikaksha Perumal aka. Lord Senthamaraikkannan (செந்தாமரைக்கண்ணன்) (Lotus eyed Lord), a form of Vishnu who appears in a standing  posture in a separate sanctum. The sanctum of the prime deity can be worshiped through two gateways i.e, Dakshinayanam Gate (தட்ஷணாயன வாயில்) (open during Dakshinayana period) and Uttharayana Gate (உத்தராயண வாயில்) (open during Uttharayana period). His consort Goddess Pankajavalli (Pankayavalli) (பங்கஜவல்லி என்ற பங்கயவல்லி), a form of Goddess Lakshmi graces her devotees in a separate sanctum.  There is a huge and incomplete Rajagopuram (prime tower) with the flight of steps. There is an inner tower after Rajagopuram. The built-up temple is enclosed and fortified by huge walls. There are stone built rooms at the outer corridor and any sound produced around here will be echoed.

The temple was built on a whitish rocky hillock which is over 50 feet height from ground level. (White rock = venparai or Vellarai. வெண்பாறை = வெள்ளரை). It is believed that this temple was raised by the Pallava king during later part of 8th century A.D. At a later date medieval Cholas, later Pandyas, Vijayanagara kingdom and Nayakas of Madurai have greater contribution for the expansion of the temple structures. Besides the masonite structures of Thiruvellarai Pundarikaksha Perumal temple, there are two rock-cut cave temples excavated on a granite mound. The rock-cut caves bear the Pallava sculptural depictions of Lord Narasimha and Lord Varaha as well as three inscriptions: two of them assignable to Pallava king Nandivarman II (732 - 736 A.D.) and the third one assignable to that of  Pallava king Dantivarman (795 - 846 A.D.).

Thiruvellarai Sri Vinnagaram is referred to  as "periya Sri Koyil" (பெரிய ஸ்ரீ கோயில்) in the 8th regnal year (978 A.D.) inscriptions of  of Mathuranthaka Uthama Chola (மதுரந்தாக உத்தம சோழன்)  Another inscription of Rajaraja I (முதலாம் இராஜராஜன்) mentions "Thiruvallarai forming part of Pachil Kurram (பாச்சில் கூற்றம்) (like the present taluk), Rajaraja valanatu (இராஜராஜ வளநாடு) (like the present district)."

This post is about the unusually deigned well located at the back of the (beyond the compound wall of the) temple premises. This swastika (ஸ்வஸ்திகா) shaped well is surrounded by hedges and bushes.   It is protected by Tamil Nadu state department of Archaeology and  renovated with the financial assistance of 13th finance commission 2013-14.  The well together appears like the symbol 'Swastika.' Each wing of the Swastika has 51 steps leading to the water and, on descending down the 20th step, one has to take a right to reach the tank below. The supporting beams made of stones criss-cross the structure.  The peculiar feature of the well is that it ensures privacy for those taking bath in the four enclosures. Hence local people call it as Mother-in-law - Daughter-in-law Tank (மாமியார் மருமகள் குளம் அல்லது கிணறு) since when taking bath in this tank both of them would not be visible to each other. This peculiar shaped well was excavated by one Kamban Araiyan (கம்பன் அரையன்) from Alampakkam during the year 805 A.D. during the reign of Pallava king Dantivarman (746 - 847 A.D.). It was excavated under the instructions of Dantivarman. The well is named after 'Marpiduku' one of the royal titles king Dantivarman and popularly called as 'Marpiduku great well.'    There are statues of Nandhi (bull vehicle) and Nagas (serpents) found around the well. According to the hoarding kept there the well underwent renovation during the 13th century A.D. by Yosala Veera Ramanathan (யோசால வீர இராமநாதன்) and this renovation was carried out by Kudanthai Vanigan Uyyaneri Kaatinaan (குடந்தை வணிகன் உய்யநெறி காட்டினான்).
An inscription found on one of the side wall of the well speaks about the excavation of the great well:
No. 40 - (A. R. No. 541 of 1905) - Tiruvellarai, (then) Lalgudi Taluk, Trichinopoly District. On the margin of a well called 'Nalumulaikkeni' (நாலுமூலைக்கேணி) - This inscription records the construction of a well called Marppidugu-Perunkinaru (மார்பிடுகு பெருங்கிணறு) at Tennur (தென்னூர்) in Tiruvellarai by Kamban Araiyan (கம்பன் அரையன்), the younger brother of Visayanallulan (விசெயநல்லூழன்) of Alambakkam (ஆலம்பாக்கம்), in the 4th year of Dantivarman.  Published in Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XI, p. 157.  (Grantha and Tamil characters)

ஸ்வஸ்தி ஸ்ரீ பாரத்வாஜ கோத்திரத்தின் வழித்தோன்றிய
பல்லவ திலத குலோத்பவன் தந்திவர்மர்க்கு யாண்டு
நான்காவ தெடுத்துக் கொண்டு ஐந்தாவது முற்றுவித்தான்
ஆலம்பாக்க விசெய நல்லூழான் தம்பி கம்பன் அரையன்
திருவெள்ளரை தென்னூர் பெருங்கிணறு இதன் பியர்
மார்ப்பிடுகு பெருங்கிணறு

"The object of the inscription is to document the well known as Marpidugu Perungkinaru at Thiruvellarai Thennur. Kamban Araiyan (A Mutharaiyar chief), the younger brother of a certain  Viseya Nalluzhan of Alampakkam. Commencing the work from fourth year of Kulothbhavan Dantivarman of Pallavatilata (tilaka) family  which is said have sprung from the Bharathvaja Gothram and completed in his 5th year at Thiruvellarai Thennur and named it as 'Marpiduku Perungkinaru.'   

The section 2 of the inscription is the Tamil verse (தமிழ் செய்யுள்) and is composed in Asiriyappaa metre (ஆசிரியப்பா செய்யுள்). Here Kampan Araiyan speaks about the immortal life of humanbeing (மனித வாழ்க்கையில் நிலையாமை):

ஸ்ரீ கண்டார் காணா உலகத்திற் காதல் செய்து நில்லாதேய்
பண்டேய் பரமன் படைத்த நாள் பார்த்து நின்று நைய்யாதேய்
தண்டால் மூப்பு வந்து உன்னைத் தளரச் செய்து நில்லாமுன்
உண்டேல் உண்டுமிக்கது உலகமறிய வைம்மினேய் 

This poem in Tamil declares that no object in this world is permanent. I saw a person yesterday. Today I couldn't see him because he died. Human life is immortal and impermanent. In such a world of impermanence don't fix your love (likes) on the materialistic objects. Lord of Creation has made you to give birth on a specific day. As the human life is immortal, don't forecast future from your day of birth and confuse yourself emotionally. Before age could wither your body and to shrink,  consume (spend your wealth) reasonably well for your maintenance purposes and leave the remainder of your wealth for charity.   

Reference:
  1. கோயில் வளாகத்தில் மார்பிடுகு பெருங்கிணறு. குடவாயில் பாலசுப்ரமணியன். தினகரன் 25.1.2014
  2. திரு.எஸ்.இராமச்சந்திரன், கல்வெட்டறிஞர், ரீச் ஃபவுண்டேஷன் கல்வெட்டியல் வகுப்பு. 12.12.2014
YouTube Video by Subashini Tremmel

Frenchman Solves Linear Elamite Puzzle And Rewrites Writing History

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/yax3y5mf

"Kiririsha, the 'Lady of Liyan,' was worshiped principally in the south of Elam. Along with Khumban and In-shushinak, she formed the supreme triad of the Elamite pantheon. Pinikir, another goddess, was held in the same regard in the north of Elam, but "as the centre of the kingdom gradually shifted southward, she became less important, and gave place to the 'lady of Liyan', Kiririsha."

Kiririsha, strictly translated, means "the great goddess," in the Elamite language. This reflects a feature of the Elamite pantheon, and, likely, other ancient pagan religions of Western Asia—that of the "ill-defined character of the individual gods and goddesses. ...Most of them were not only ineffable beings whose real name was either not uttered or was unknown, but also sublime ideas, not to be exactly defined by the human race."

The king, Khumban-Numena, had "a chapel built at Liyan (an Elamite port on the Persian Gulf)...dedicated exclusively to Kiririsha."

Kiririsha was sometimes merely called "'the Great' or 'the divine mother'."

Edwards, F.B.A., I.E.S.; Gadd, C.J.; Hammond, F.B.A., N.G.L.; Sollberger F.B.A., E., eds. (1975). The Cambridge Ancient History, Third Edition, Volume II, Part 2, History of the Middle East and the Aegean Region c.1380-1000 B.C. Cambridge University Press. pp. 400–416.

Kiririsha - Wikipedia

A Frenchman Solves Linear Elamite Puzzle And Rewrites Writing History

The Linear Elamite script breakthrough took Francois Desset ten years to figure out. (Laboratoire Archeorient)

Every once in a while a scientist goes rogue, and it’s happened to a French archaeologist in Tehran who claims the Iranian plateau was the shared birthplace of writing with Mesopotamia, based on his decryption of the Linear Elamite script. And that folks is about as rogue as it gets in the world of history.

So, does the claim have a firm base? French archaeologist Francois Desset from the  University of Tehran  Department of Archaeology is a specialist in Near Eastern archaeology who has written a controversial new study based on his breakthrough work on the Linear Elamite script. The researcher has boldly suggested the Iranian plateau was the true birthplace of writing, “predating Mesopotamia,” which has long been known as the cradle of the cuneiform writing. According to a report in  Sciences et Avenir  Desset’s proof comes from “a 4400-year-old cuneiform bas-relief.” And Desset is so convinced of his findings that he states it’s “a cultural revolution in the history of writing in the world.”

The Linear Elamite script breakthrough took Francois Desset ten years to figure out. ( Laboratoire Archeorient )

Disputing Writing Origins With The Linear Elamite Script

The Tehran Times  reports that it took the French archaeologist a decade to decipher “the mysteries of the cuneiform inscription,” which was found on hand-carved clay tablets in the ancient city of  Susa in southwest Iran. And according to the Tehran Times article the discovery proves Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq / former  Babylon) was “not the world's first cradle of writing,” but that it developed in Persia at the same time.

Desset told  Sciences et Avenir:

"I did not get up one morning telling myself that I had deciphered Linear Elamite… it really took me ten years (...) but thanks to this work, I can now say that the script did not first appear in Mesopotamia alone but that two scriptures appeared at the same time in two different regions."

With its characteristic wedge-shaped impressions forming signs,  cuneiform is a logo-syllabic script that was used to write several languages of the ancient Near East from the early Bronze Age until the beginning of the Common Era. The Iranian Linear Elamite script was unearthed in 1901 AD, but no one could decipher it at that time. Now, claiming to have done so, Francois Desset says  "This could be a historical revolution, because scientists have long believed that the cradle of writing of the world is in Mesopotamia, in other words, present-day Iraq.”

Linear Elamite: The Context Of The “First” Written Language

Susa was once the capital city of the Elamite empire, and home of the later Achaemenian  King Darius I , around 522 BC. Elam, in the region of the modern-day provinces of Ilam and Khuzestan in Iran, was culturally united with ancient Mesopotamia. The Tehran Times article says it “was never a cohesive ethnic kingdom or polity but rather a federation of different tribes governed at various times by cities such as Susa,  Anshan, and Shimashki, until it was united during the Middle Elamite period, briefly, as an empire.” It is said that during later domination by the Akkadian dynasty (c. 2334-c. 2154 BC), Elamites may have adopted the Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform script.

Remains of the Elamite temple of god Kiririsha, and the Chogha Zanbil ziggurat, the oldest extant monument in Iran. ( Poliorketes / Adobe Stock)

“Proto-Elamite” is the oldest known writing system from Iran which is found on clay tablets. The  Elamite language  that was developed in the ancient country of Elam has only ever been found written on three historical documents. The earliest text is a figurative or pictographic script dating from the middle of the 3rd millennium BC. Documents from the second period, between the 16th and 8th century BC, are written in “Old Elamite.” The third text dates from the reign of the Achaemenian kings of Persia (6th to 4th century BC), and is written in Old Elamite with Akkadian and  Old Persian  inscriptions, called New Elamite.

The Elamite writing discovered on the 4400-year-old cuneiform bas-relief unearthed in 1901, that no one could decipher, is being described as holding evidence that might spark a “a historical revolution,” because it would mean Persia and current day Iran is also the home of writing, and not just Mesopotamia, was in present-day Iraq.

This Is Breaking News And More Insights Are Sure To Follow

Before the expected Linear Elamite archaeological “revolution” happens, the story, and the archaeologist’s “claim” will have to be peer reviewed. However, Desset’s Linear Elamite script  breakthrough is breaking news and “rewrites history” and as such will likely appear in many publications before the end of this year 2020 AD.


EXCLU. Un Français "craque" une écriture non déchiffrée de plus de 4000 ans, remettant en cause la seule invention de l'écriture en Mésopotamie

François Desset est parvenu à déchiffrer l’élamite linéaire, un système d’écriture utilisé en Iran il y a 4.400 ans. Dans sa version archaïque proto-élamite (dès 3300 avant J.-C.), celle-ci rejoint les deux systèmes d’écritures les plus anciens connus au monde, le proto-cunéiforme des Mésopotamiens et les hiéroglyphes égyptiens. De quoi modifier les connaissances que l’on avait jusque-là sur l’origine de l’écriture !L’annonce – très rare - a dû réjouir les mânes de l’abbé Barthélémy, de Sylvestre de Sacy ou encore de Champollion. L’archéologue français François Desset, du Laboratoire Archéorient à Lyon, a annoncé le 27 novembre 2020 qu’il avait réussi à déchiffrer des inscriptions vieilles de 4.400 ans ! Toutes étaient rédigées en élamite linéaire, une écriture utilisée par les Elamites qui peuplaient alors l’Iran. Les érudits réunis en ligne pour prendre connaissance de cette découverte depuis le département des biens culturels de l’Universita degli Studi di Padova de Padoue (Italie), ont été enthousiastes. Voici en effet plus d'un siècle que ce système d’écriture, utilisé sur le plateau iranien dans l’ancien royaume d’Elam (actuel Iran) entre la fin du 3ème millénaire et le début du 2ème millénaire avant notre ère, échappait au déchiffrement, comme c’est encore le cas pour le linéaire A crétois ou l’écriture de la vallée de l’Indus. Entre marques d’admiration et félicitations des confrères, le Français, fraîchement débarqué de l’Université de Téhéran (Iran) où il enseigne depuis 2014, a expliqué en anglais que : "Cette écriture avait été découverte pour la première fois sur l’antique site de Suse (Iran) en 1901 et que depuis 120 ans nous n’étions pas parvenus à lire ce qui avait été inscrit il y a 4.400 ans faute d’avoir trouvé la clé". Chose désormais faite cette année (grâce à l’opportunité offerte par la quarantaine dans son appartement à Téhéran et la collaboration de trois autres collègues, Kambiz Tabibzadeh, Matthieu Kervran et Gian-Pietro Basello).

 
François Desset, archéologue au Laboratoire Archéorient (Lyon), professeur à l'Université de Téhéran (Iran), encadré par des colonnettes funéraires retrouvées dans des tombes du 3e millénaire avant J.-C, au Balouchistan iranien. ©François Desset

"Des systèmes d'écriture contemporains"

Les plus anciens exemples d'écriture connus à ce jour proviennent de Mésopotamie (Irak actuel) et remontent à l’Age du Bronze, vers 3300 ans avant J.-C. : il s’agit des tablettes proto-cunéiformes. Or le déchiffrement de l’élamite linéaire remet en question cette suprématie ! "Nous découvrons en effet que vers 2300 avant J.-C., un système d'écriture parallèle existait en Iran, et que sa version la plus ancienne - appelée l’écriture proto-élamite, (3300 avant J.C. - 2900 avant J.-C.) – remontait aussi loin dans le temps que les premiers textes cunéiformes mésopotamiens ! précise François Desset. Aussi, je peux aujourd’hui affirmer que l’écriture n’est pas d’abord apparue en Mésopotamie puis plus tard en Iran : ces deux systèmes, le proto-cunéiforme mésopotamien et le proto-élamite iranien, ont en fait été contemporains ! Il n’y a pas eu une écriture mère dont le proto-élamite serait la fille, il y a eu deux écritures sœurs. D’autre part, en Iran, il n’y a pas eu non plus deux systèmes d’écritures indépendantes comme les spécialistes le pensaient jusque-là, avec le proto-élamite d’un côté et l’élamite linéaire de l’autre, mais une même écriture qui a été soumise à évolution historique et a été transcrite avec des variations au cours de deux périodes distinctes." 

Ce qui change complètement la perspective sur l’apparition du système d’écriture au Proche Orient puisqu’il est désormais plus exact de dire que l’Iran a développé son propre système d’écriture "en même temps" qu’en Mésopotamie et que le plateau iranien ne devrait plus être ignoré désormais dans les reconstitutions historiques traitant des origines de l’écriture...

  
En vert, l'aire de diffusion de l'écriture élamite linéaire au 4e/3ee millénaire avant J.-C. ©François Desset

C’est cette forme la plus récente de l’écriture iranienne (l’élamite linéaire) qui a pu être déchiffrée. Il s’agit, à l’heure actuelle, de quarante inscriptions provenant du sud de l’Iran, depuis l’antique ville de Suse, en passant par le Fars (avec la région de Kam Firouz et la plaine de Marv Dasht, juste à côté du célèbre site achéménide de Persépolis) puis le sud-est iranien avec Shahdad et le célèbre site de Konar Sandal / Jiroft. Contrairement au cunéiforme mésopotamien, qui est un système d’écriture mixte alliant des phonogrammes (signes transcrivant un son) à des logogrammes (signes transcrivant une chose, une idée, un mot), l’élamite linéaire présente quant à lui la particularité, unique au monde au 3ème millénaire avant J.-C., d’être une écriture purement phonétique (avec des signes notant des syllabes, des consonnes et des voyelles). Utilisée d’environ 3300 à 1900 avant J.-C., l’écriture iranienne a considérablement évolué entre ses textes les plus anciens (les tablettes Proto-Elamites) et les plus récents (les textes en élamite linéaire), avec notamment un processus "d’écrémage". Des 300 signes de départ permettant de noter les noms propres dans les tablettes proto-élamites (dont la grande majorité est conservée à l’heure actuelle au Musée du Louvre)il n’en restera que 80 à 100 par la suite en élamite linéaire, sa version la plus récente. Une centaine de signes utilisés donc en continu pendant quelque 1400 années et généralement écrits de la droite vers la gauche et du haut vers le bas. "Pour travailler, nous avons divisé la quarantaine de textes dont nous disposions en 8 corpus, en fonction des provenances et des époques. Car l’élamite linéaire a été utilisé de 2300 à 1900 avant J.-C. sous le règne de différents souverains et dynasties et dans différentes régions", poursuit l’archéologueLa plupart des textes sont des inscriptions royales assez répétitives, dédicacées à d’anciens dieux, du type : "Je suis [le nom], le grand roi de [nom], le fils de [nom du père]j’ai fait cet objet pour [nom du dieu ou d’une personne]".

Le déclic des "vases gunagi"

Pour François Desset, le "déclic" du déchiffrement s’est produit en 2017 lors de l’analyse d’un corpus de 8 textes rédigés sur des vases en argent, qualifiés de "vases gunagi", datés vers 2000-1900 avant J.-C. et venant de tombes de la région de Kam-Firouz (à l’heure actuelle conservés dans une collection privée à Londres). Comme ces vases présentaient des séquences de signes très répétitives, standardisées à vrai dire, l’archéologue a pu ainsi repérer les signes servant à noter les noms de deux souverains, Shilhaha et Ebarti II (ayant régné tous les deux vers 1950 avant J.-C.) et de la principale divinité vénérée alors dans le sud-ouest de l’Iran, Napirisha.

 
Inscription en élamite linéaire dans la partie supérieure de ce vase en argent provenant de Marv Dasht (Iran), daté du 3e millénaire avant J.-C. © François Desset

Cette première étape du déchiffrement, publiée en 2018, a abouti cette année au déchiffrement complet, qui sera publié scientifiquement en 2021Ainsi, à titre d’exemple, le décryptage d’un magnifique vase en argent découvert dans la région de Marv Dasht dans les années 1960 et conservé à l’heure actuelle au Musée National à Téhéran (Iran), où l'on peut désormais lire: "A la dame de Marapsha [toponyme], Shumar-asu [son nom], j’ai fait ce vase en argent. Dans le temple qui sera célèbre par mon nom, Humshat, je l’ai déposé en offrande pour toi avec bienveillance". Le résultat d’années de travail acharné. "Je travaille sur ces systèmes d’écriture depuis 2006, explique le chercheur à Sciences et AvenirJe ne me suis pas levé un matin en me disant que j’avais déchiffré l’élamite linéaire. Cela m’a pris plus de 10 ans et je n’ai jamais été certain que je parviendrais au but."

L’écriture élamite linéaire note une langue particulière, l’élamite. Il s’agit d’un isolat linguistique ne pouvant être rattaché à l’heure actuelle à aucune autre famille linguistique connue, à l'exemple du basque. "Jusqu’à ce déchiffrement, tout ce qui concernait les populations occupant le Plateau iranien provenait d’écrits mésopotamiensCes nouvelles découvertes vont enfin nous permettre d’accéder au propre point de vue des hommes et femmes occupant un territoire qu’ils désignaient par Hatamti, alors que le terme d'Elam par lequel nous le connaissions jusque-là, ne correspond en fait qu’à un concept géographique externe, formulé par leurs voisins Mésopotamiens".

 
Cône en terre cuite comportant des inscriptions en élamite linéaire datées d'environ 2500-2300 avant J.-C. ©François Desset

Cette percée du déchiffrement à des implications importantes dans trois domaines, a poursuivi François Desset: "sur l'histoire iranienne; sur le développement de l'écriture en Iran en particulier, et au Proche-Orient en général, avec des considérations sur la continuité entre les systèmes d'écriture proto-élamite et élamite linéaire; et sur la langue hatamtite (élamite) elle-même, désormais mieux documentée dans sa forme la plus ancienne et rendue désormais accessible pour la première fois par un système d'écriture autre que le cunéiforme mésopotamien (lire encadré).

Pour Massimo Vidale, le protohistorien italien organisateur de la conférence de Padoue, (dont Sciences et Avenir vient de publier les travaux sur le site d'"Hatra, la cité du Dieu-Soleil" (Irak), dans son magazine daté décembre 2020 actuellement en kiosque), "La France, par ce nouveau décryptage, maintient sa primauté dans le "craquage" des anciens systèmes d'écritures perdus !". Quant à François Desset, il s'est déjà lancé dans le déchiffrement de l'état le plus ancien de l'écriture iranienne, les tablettes proto-élamites, pour lesquelles il considère avoir désormais ouvert une "autoroute".   

A propos du déchiffrement des anciennes écritures

Il ne faut pas confondre langue (les sons parlés) et écriture (les signes visuels). Ainsi, un même système d’écriture peut être utilisé pour noter des langues différentes. Par exemple, l’alphabet latin permet actuellement de transcrire le français, l’anglais, l’italien ainsi que le turc par exemple. De la même façon, l’écriture cunéiforme des Mésopotamiens permettait de transcrire plusieurs langues comme l’akkadien (langue sémitique), le vieux perse (langue indo-européenne) ou bien encore l’élamite et le sumérien (isolats linguistiques). Inversement, une langue peut également être transcrite par différents systèmes d’écriture comme le persan (une langue indo-européenne) qui s’écrit à l’heure actuelle aussi bien avec l’alphabet arabe en Iran (et parfois l’alphabet latin avec le surprenant phénomène du fingilish), que l’alphabet cyrillique au Tadjikistan alors qu’il a été noté par le passé avec un système cunéiforme à l’époque achéménide (ca. 520-330 avant J.-C., pour le Vieux Perse) ou l’alphabet araméen à l’époque sassanide (3ème-7ème siècle de notre ère pour le Moyen Perse). Dans le cas de la langue élamite, elle était connue jusqu’à présent uniquement à travers l’écriture cunéiforme. Avec le déchiffrement de l’écriture élamite linéaire réalisé par François Desset, nous avons désormais accès à cette langue à travers un système d’écriture probablement développé exprès pour elle et reflétant donc mieux les subtilités phonologiques de cette langue que l’écriture cunéiforme.

Quelques grands "déchiffreurs" :

L’abbé Barthélémy (1716-1795) a en 1753 décrypté l’alphabet palmyréen, puis en 1754, l’alphabet phénicien.

Jean-François Champollion (1790-1832) a déchiffré les hiéroglyphes égyptiens.

Henry Creswicke Rawlinson (1810-1895) un des quatre co-déchiffreurs de l’écriture cunéiforme notant la langue akkadienne.

Michael Ventris (1922-1956) a déchiffré en 1952 le "linéaire B", l’une des trois écritures découvertes à Cnossos (Crète) utilisée au 2ème millénaire avant J.-C. pour noter une forme archaïque du Grec.

Un Français déchiffre une écriture de plus de 4000 ans - Sciences et Avenir


(191) The Elamites - The Early History of Elam and its People (Part 1) - YouTube

(191) The Elamites - Elam vs. Mesopotamia (Part 2) - YouTube

(191) The Elamites - The Middle Elamite Period (Part 3) - YouTube

The Elamites - The Early History of Elam and its People (Part 1)

If you've ever been curious about the ancient land of Elam and Elamite civilization, then you're in luck. In this program, "The Early History of Elam and the Elamites," we take a look at how Elamite civilization began as well as the beginnings of its perennial conflict with the city-states and empires of Mesopotamia. There's so much to learn about this fascinating and powerful culture of ancient Iran; this episode will give you a good foundation to begin your studies on ancient Elam and its people, the Elamites. Sources and Suggested Reading ► https://bit.ly/2XSoL7s

The Elamites - Elam vs. Mesopotamia (Part 2)

In Part 2 of this series on ancient Elam, we take a look at some of the conflicts and wars that developed between the Elamites and their neighbors in Mesopotamia during the Old Elamite Period. In addition, we'll also examine the unique system of the Sukkalmah and his co-regents. It's a pretty informative and action-packed episode on ancient history that you won't want to miss! Sources and Suggested Reading ► https://bit.ly/2K3Ax61

The Elamites - The Middle Elamite Period (Part 3)

In Part 3 of this series on ancient Elam, we continue our study of Elamite history by taking a look at the Middle Elamite Period. Though fascinating, it's also a period that's shrouded in mystery. Still, we know by some of the monuments and cities, such as Kabrak (Haft Tepe) and Dur Untash (Chogha Zanbil) that this was truly a remarkable civilization as well as a prosperous time for Elam. It was also a time of relative peace with the neighboring peoples of Babylonia and ancient Mesopotamia, at least until the intervention of the Assyrian king Tukulti-Ninurta. You wont' want to miss this episode on the history of ancient Elam! Sources and Suggested Reading ► https://bit.ly/2k7Z1lp

sādhya mentioned on professional calling card of Majhitha are worshipful ancestor gaṇa 'artisan/seafaring merchant guild'

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/yb44hatd

This is an addendum to:

 

https://tinyurl.com/y9hqb6pq

--sādhya = gaṇa-devatā (Rgveda)--यज्ञं अयजन्त पूजितवन्तः ।(सायण) are mentioned on Copper anthropomorph (ASI) in a super-imposed Brāhmī inscription

My conjecture is that the Brāhmī inscription has been inscribed on the copper anthropomorph of ancient times (ca. 2500 BCE of Sarasvati-Sindhu Civilization) which belonged to  sādhya or gaṇa. 

The legatee of this  sādhya or gaṇa from Majhitha is venerating the ancestor sādhya by superimposing the  Brāhmī inscription. This inscription signifies that the sādhya were gaṇa 'guild' of Meluhha artisans/seafaring merchants.

Brāhmī inscription inscribed on chest reads: Symbol of Majhitha, ‘merchant, smith working with fine gold, ornament gold, boatman, member of assembly, assayer of metals’

samjñā 'symbol, sign' 

kī ma jhi tha 'of Majhitha'

Sha (?) Da Ya शद   sad-a  'produce (of a country)'.-shad-ya, m. one who takes part in an assembly, spectator

On this inscription, the reference to Sha (?) Da Ya is also interpreted as a reference to sādhya = gaṇa-devatā (Rgveda) and signify a salutation and veneration of the worshipful gaṇa, 'guild' of artisans and seafaring merchants of Meluhha.

यज्ञेन यज्ञमयजन्त देवास्तानि धर्माणि प्रथमान्यासन् ।
ते ह नाकं महिमानः सचन्त यत्र पूर्वे साध्याः सन्ति देवाः ॥१६॥ RV x.90.16

सायणभाष्यम्--

पूर्व प्रपञ्चेनोक्तमर्थं संक्षिप्यात्र दर्शयति । "देवाः प्रजापतिप्राणरूपाः "यज्ञेन यथोक्तेन मानसेन संकल्पेन यज्ञं यथोक्तयज्ञस्वरूपं प्रजापतिम् "अयजन्त पूजितवन्तः । तस्मात्पूजनात “तानि प्रसिद्धानि “धर्माणि जगद्रूपविकाराणां धारकाणि "प्रथमानि मुख्यानि आसन् । एतावता सृष्टिप्रतिपादकसूक्तभागार्थः संगृहीतः । अथोपासनतत्फलानुवादकभागार्थः संगृह्यते । "यत्र यस्मिन् विराटप्राप्तिरूपे नाके "पूर्वे "साध्याः पुरातना विराडुपास्तिसाधकाः “देवाः "सन्ति तिष्ठन्ति तत् "नाकं विराट्प्राप्तिरूपं स्वर्ग “ते “महिमानः तदुपासका महात्मानः "सचन्त समवयन्ति प्राप्नुवन्ति ॥

sādhya m. (pl.) ‘they that are to be propitiated’, N. of a class of celestial beings (belonging to the gaṇa-devatā q.v., sometimes mentioned in the Veda [see, RV. x, 90, 16 ]; in the ŚBr.  their world is said to be above the sphere of the gods; according to Yāska [Nir. xii, 41 ] their locality is the Bhuvarloka or middle region between the earth and sun; in Mn. i, 22 , the Sādhyas are described as created after the gods with natures exquisitely refined, and in  iii, 195 , as children of the Soma-sads, sons of Virāj; in the Purāṇas they are sons of Sādhyā, and their number is variously twelve or seventeen; in the later mythology they seem to be superseded by the Siddhas See siddha; and their names are Manas, Mantṛ, Prâṇa, Nara, Pāna, Vinirbhaya, Naya, Daṉśa, Nārāyaṇa, Vṛṣa, Prabhu), RV.  

साध्यः, पुं, (साध्यमस्त्यस्येति । अर्शआदित्वादच् ।)गणदेवताविशेषः । इत्यमरः । १ । १ । १० ॥स तु द्वादशसंख्यकः । यथा, भरतः ।“साध्या द्वादशविख्याता रुद्राश्चैकादश स्मृताः ॥”तेषां नामानि यथा, --“मनो मन्ता तथा प्राणो नरोऽपानश्च वीर्य्यवान् ।विनिर्भयो नयश्चैव दसो नारायणो वृषः ।प्रभुश्चेति समाख्याताः साध्या द्वादश पौर्व्विकाः ॥”इति वह्निपुराणे गणभेदनामाध्यायः ॥ * ॥देवः । विष्कम्भादिसप्तविंशतियोगान्तर्गतैकविंश-योगः । इति मेदिनी ॥ तत्र जातफलम् ।“असाध्यसाध्यः किल साध्यजातःशूरोऽतिधीरो विजितारिपक्षः ।बुद्ध्या ह्युपायैः परिसाधितार्थःपरं कृतार्थः सुतरां विनीतः ॥”इति कोष्ठीप्रदीपः ॥--शब्दकल्पद्रुमः

साध्य पु० सिध--णिच्--यत् । “मनोमन्ता तथा प्राणोभरोऽपानश्च वीर्य्यवान् । निर्मयो नरकश्चैव दंशो नारायणोवृषः । प्रभुश्चेति समाख्याताः साध्या द्वादश देवताः”इत्युक्ते द्वादशसंख्यके १ गणदेवताभेदे ज्यो० उक्ते विष्क-म्भादिषु योगेषु २ एकविशे योगे च । ३ साधनीये त्रि०मेदि० । ३ अष्टादशविवादेषु प्रमाणादिना उद्भाव्येपदार्थे “प्रतिज्ञादोषनिर्मुक्तं साध्यं सत्कारणान्वितम् ।निश्चितं लोकसिद्धञ्च पक्षं पक्षविदोविदुः” इत्युक्ते व्यव-हारे साधनार्हे प्रतिज्ञेये ४ पक्षे पु० “ऋणादिषु विवादेषुस्थिरप्रायेषु निश्चितम् । उने वाप्यधिके चार्थे प्रोक्तेसाध्यं न सिध्यति” कात्या० । ५ अनुमित्यासाधनीये वह्न्यादौ च यथा वह्निमान् धूमादित्यादौ सिषा-धयिषितो वह्निः साध्यः । साध्यमस्यास्ति अर्श आद्यच् ।६ साध्यवति पक्षे पु० “साध्यनिर्देशः प्रतिज्ञे” ति गौ०सूत्रम् । साध्यवत्तया पक्षनिर्देश इति दीधितिकारःतन्त्रोक्ते ७ मन्त्रमात्रे ग्राह्यमन्त्रस्य स्वानुकूलताग्राहके३८ पृ० उक्ते अकथहचक्रस्थे द्वितीयपञ्चमादिकोष्ठस्थाद्यक्ष-रके “सिद्धः साध्यः सुसिद्धोऽरिः क्रमात् ज्ञेया मनीषिभिः”इत्युक्ते ८ मन्त्रभेदे । १० देवमात्रे मेदि० ।व्याकरणोक्तेलिङ्गसंख्यानन्वयिक्रियाभेदे क्रियाशब्दे २३१७ पृ० दृश्यम् ।“साध्यरूपा क्रिया तत्र धातुरूपनिबन्धना” हरिः ।“साध्यस्य साधनाकाङ्क्षा” हरिः । --वाचस्पत्यम्

Ancient Angkor as seen through the decades -- Dani Gill (14 Dec. 2020)

$
0
0

 
On December 14, 1992 – after miraculously surviving decades of war, strife and looting – Angkor Wat was officially listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Here, we've scoured through the pictorial archives to uncover some of ancient monuments more iconic moments
Angkor Wat as seen in June 2020, almost entirely empty of tourists due to Covid-19. Photo: Alastair McCready

Pre-covid-19, well over two million tourists per year would travel to Cambodia to sneak a glimpse into the ancient kingdom through the spyglass of Angkor Wat. The temple’s importance as a historical, cultural, and religious symbol stands steadfast to the north of Cambodia’s Siem Reap province, and serves as a reminder of the advanced civilisation that came before us.

December 14 marks 28 years to the day that Angkor Wat and the surrounding complex was given UNESCO status as a World Heritage Site. After succumbing to heavy looting at the hands of an organised crime ring between the 1970s and 1990s, this move by UNESCO allowed for area zoning, the establishment of the APSARA organisation that today oversees the site, as well as a new law on the protection of cultural heritage to come into being.

With this has come more stability for the temple complex, and in theory, ensures its protection for generations to come in the face of ne’er-do-wells, stampedes of tourists, and, ultimately, time.

From the construction of Angkor Wat in the 12th century by the Khmer King Suryavarman II, to the explosion of national and international tourism in the past decade, in the time in between Angkor Wat and the surrounding temple grounds have been party to their fare share of history.

After falling into disuse and disrepair in the 15th century, Angkor Wat was “rediscovered” by the French explorer Henri Mouhot in the 1840s. Entering the 20th century under French Colonial rule, the temple underwent restoration so that it could be positioned as a tourist attraction for wealthy Europeans. The French also constructed a life-sized replica of Angkor Wat in the metropole as part of the Paris Colonial Exposition in 1931, piquing the interest of Europeans.

Cambodia’s independence in 1953 brought more restoration works in the 1960s than the French had ever accomplished. But the 1970s brought brutal civil war and then Khmer Rouge rule from 1975-79, after which the decade-long Vietnamese occupation began. Despite the brutality of the war and foreign occupation, Angkor Wat was, somewhat astonishingly, left largely unharmed.

But in the approach to a new century, a different kind of threat was on the horizon – mass tourism.

A combination of Angkor Wat’s addition to UNESCO’s world heritage list, cheap flights, a growing Chinese middle class, and stability in Cambodia saw international tourism explode in the latter half of the 1990s and early 2000s . Tourists – largely from Korea, Japan, North America and Britain – arrived in droves to marvel at the ancient structure. In 1993, just over 7,500 people visited the site, whereas over one million people purchased tickets in 2010 alone.

Visitors to Angkor Wat continued to grow year-on-year at an average rate of close to 16% per annum between 2004-18, with this mass tourism taking its toll on the now-delicate sandstone structure and leading it to appear on Responsible Travel’s map of sites suffering from over tourism.

But in light of Covid-19 and the global tourism drop, however, Angkor Wat is now getting a much deserved rest and greater restoration works are able to take place. With its rich history and combined efforts from national and international governing bodies to secure its preservation, Angkor Wat will continue standing as a significant culture, religious, and historic structure for centuries to come.

In celebration of the anniversary of Angkor Wat becoming a UNESCO world heritage site, the Globe has poured through the archives to compile a collection of images dating from pre-1875, and spanning the decades between 1900 to 2020.

Pre-1897: Angkor-Wat Main entrance from the west-exterior facade. Photo: Emile Gsell, Colonial Office via Archives Nationales
Pre-1897: View from the top of the grand staircase. Photo: Emile Gsell, Colonial Office via Archives Nationales
Pre-1897: Exterior view of the gallery. Photo: Emile Gsell, Colonial Office via Archives Nationales

1907: A family at Angkor Wat. Photo: Sabai Adventures Cambodia.
1910: road to Angkor Wat. Photo: J.G. Mulder via Wikimedia Commons
1920s: Children carrying baskets on the entrance steps. Photo: Tadpole (René), Colonial Office via Archives Nationales
1931: The replica of the temple of Angkor Wat at the Colonial Exposition in Paris. Photo: Source
1936: Tourists visit carvings at Bayon Temple ruins. Photo: Robert Larimore Pendleton via UWM Libraries
1957: Former King of Cambodia Prince Norodom Sihanouk, praying near Angkor Wat. Photo: AFP
The 1950s brought about the end of the French Colonial rule in 1953, and beckoned in the administration of Prince Norodom Sihanouk. In March 1955, Sihanouk abdicated so that he could pursue a political career, while his father, Norodom Suramarit, assumed the throne.
1973: Princess Monique poses in front of the Angkor Wat Temple. Photo: Xinhua via AFP
The 1970 military coup headed by Lon Nol against Prince Norodom Sihanouk abolished the monarchy, with Cambodia’s royal family fleeing into exile in China and later North Korea. Sihanouk would ally with the Khmer Rouge in 1973, with he and Norodom Monineath (Princess Monique) returning to the Kingdom briefly and visiting territory held by the then-Maoist rebels. As the Khmer Rouge came to power in 1975, Angkor Wat during this time, somewhat miraculously, sustained minimal damage.
1989: A Vietnamese soldier stands guard at the Angkor Wat temple, ahead of the Vietnamese withdrawal from Cambodia later that year. Photo: Kraipit Phanvut via AFP
On January 7, 1979 Vietnamese troops entered Phnom Penh, effectively putting an end to four years of Khmer Rouge rule. That same year, the People’s Republic of Kampuchea was established by the Salvation Front. A lot then happens between 1979 and the eventual Vietnamese withdrawal a decade later, including the ascendancy to power of Hun Sen as prime minister in tenure that continues to this day, as well as continued guerilla warfare as Khmer Rouge troops flee into hiding.
1995: A Cambodian monk watches the beginning of a full solar eclipse with safety glasses. Photo: Doug Niven via AFP
The early 1990s is marked by relative peace in the Kingdom; the Paris Peace Agreement is signed in 1991 officially marking the end of the Cambodian -Vietnamese War, the monarchy is restored in 1993, and the remaining Khmer Rouge guerrillas surrender in 1998. UNESCO’s addition of Angkor Wat to the World Heritage List in 1992 brings about an increase in regulated tourism to the temple complex.
1999: Cambodian dancers perform at Angkor Wat. Photo: Rob Elliott via AFP
The turn of the century sees Cambodia enjoy increasing national stability and an economy growing consistently at around 7% per annum. Millions of Cambodians would be lifted out of absolute poverty during this time, but this era would also see the cementing of political power in the hands of Hun Sen’s Cambodian People’s Party.
2019: tourists visit Angkor Wat. Photo: Tang Chhin Sothy via AFP
With Cambodia’s sustained stability, cheap airfares and a growing Chinese middle class, 2010 and the years that followed saw a substantial increase in tourism to Angkor Wat.
2020: Angkor Wat, emptied of virtually all its foreign tourists since March, has returned to a level of tranquility not seen since the 1990s. Photo: Alastair McCready
Entering the new decade, 2020 saw Angkor return to scenes not seen for decades as the Covid-19 global pandemic brought international tourism to a screeching halt in March and the ancient park was emptied of hordes of international tourists. In a silver lining, the visitor downturn has seen the park largely reclaimed by domestic, Cambodian tourists – many of whom are enjoying the wonders of the park by bicycle.

Prayer to Varuna to cure yakṣma affliction of Aitareya Mahidāsa; a signifier of the chalcolithic (ca. 7th m. BCE) working with metals

$
0
0

yakṣma m. sickness, disease in general or N. of a large class of diseases (prob. of a consumptive nature), RV. ; AV. ; VS. pulmonary disease, consumption, TS. ; Kāṭh. yakṣman 
m. pulmonary consumption, consumption, KātyŚr. Sch. ; MBh.

híṁsati ʻ harms, kills ʼ SāmavBr. (3 pl. híṁsanti RV.). [√hiṁs]Pa. hiṁsati ʻ hurts, kills ʼ, Pk. hiṁsaï; M. poet. hĩsṇẽ ʻ to kill ʼ.(CDIAL 14073) 

I submit that the mantra of samaveda refers to and prays for armour of stone, alloy metal, copper, silver, gold. I submit that this is a prayer for these wealth resources for Aitareya Mahidāsa to be cured of pulmonary disease which is afflicting, hurting him. As an agent of Rudra, Varuna is invoked with particular reference to Rudra as the coppery one. (Milakkhu, mleccha 'copper' as in milakkhu rajanam, 'copper coloured' (Pali)

Courtesy: manasataramgini from the tweet:

The yajumati spell against tuberculosis of mahidāsa aitareya from the sāmaveda tradition. The spell is directed to varua to protect against tuberculosis. The appearance of the disease is consistent with him being seen as an agent of rudra. The white horse, the term tāmra (coppery) are seen elsewhere in incantations to rudra.

கயம்⁶ kayam , n. < Pkt. khaya < kṣaya. 1. Decay, wane, diminution; தேய்வு. தீவினைபின்னுவாமதியென . . . கயந்தருங்கொல் (திருச்செந். பு. செயந்திபுரவை. 11). 2. Deficiency, defect; குறைபாடு. (சூடா.) 3. Loss, destruction, ruin; கேடு. (சூடா.) 4. Consumption, tuberculosis. See க்ஷயரோகம். கயக்கொடும்பிணியினால் 

(உபதேசகா. சிவத்து. 87).க்ஷயகாசம் kṣaya-kācam , n. kṣaya + kāša. Pulmonary tuberculosis, phthisis; காசநோய்வகை.ராஜயக்ஷ்மா rāja-yakṣmā , n. < id. + yakṣmā. = ராஜநோய் rāja-nōy , n. id. +. Tuberculosis; க்ஷயரோகம். (பதார்த்த. 1219.)கசம்⁴ kacam , n. kṣaya. Tuberculosis; க்ஷயரோகம்.


Ancient World Map System in Purāṇas -- Arun Kumar Upadhyay

$
0
0

 https://tinyurl.com/y8d5hmpu

Ancient World Map System in Purāṇas

-Arun Kumar Upadhyay, Bhubaneswar

Abstract-Map was called Māpa or Parilekha. It needed latitude, longitude, direction which was measured with Nakṣatra, so it was called Nakshā, popular term. World map was in 2 systems-(1) Quadrant system with 4 parts each in north and south hemispheres. (2) Dvīpa system-7 Dvīpas (continents) and oceans. There were 2 systems of reference points-(1) 60 time zones separated by 1 Daṇḍa or 6 degrees longitude with zero point at Lankā. Zonal points or additional points were also called Lankā. (2) Merus in space, on earth for quadrants and continents and additional local references. At least 50 places named Lankā and Meru still remain with same name.

1. Ancient mapping-Basic methods of mapping are given in texts of astronomy starting with Sūrya-siddhānta. This is called Tri-praśna-adhikāra, i.e. Chapter on 3 problems-Latitude, longitude, direction. On that basis, shapes of continents, countries are given and cardinal towns separated by 90 degree longitude are indicated in all purāṇas and texts of astronomy. Actual maps have been called Parilekha or Māpa (measure). For latitude etc, Nakṣatra (stars) are to be observed; so maps are popularly called Naksha. Manu-smṛti (8/245-265), Artha-śāstra of Kauṭilya (chapter 3/9) indicate fixing boundaries of villages. Signs of border were called Sīmā-linga (Manu-smṛti, 8/249, 254) which has become Sīmālī in revenue maps.

2. Quadrant system-Earth has been described in 2 ways, it has been called a lotus of 4 petals (in north), or descriptions of Dvīpas (continents) with oceans as boundaries. First, the quadrant system is described. In north part of earth, 4 petals are called Bhārata, Bhadrāśva in east, Ketumāla in west and Kuru on opposite direction.

(विष्णु पुराण २/२)-भद्राश्वं पूर्वतो मेरोः केतुमालं च पश्चिमे। वर्षे द्वे तु मुनिश्रेष्ठ तयोर्मध्यमिलावृतः।२४।

भारताः केतुमालाश्च भद्राश्वाः कुरवस्तथा। पत्राणि लोकपद्मस्य मर्यादाशैलबाह्यतः।४०।

There were 2 sets of cardinal points, one in Purāṇas starting with Brahmā (Svāyanbhuva Manu) and the other of Sūrya-siddhānta, starting with Vivasvān, father of Vaivasvata Manu. This is followed by all astronomy texts.

(1) Brahmā system (29102 BC) in purāṇas.

(2) Vaivasvata Manu system (13902 BC) in Sūrya-siddhānta by Vivasvān (Sun).

Ref.                East (+900)            West (-900)           Opposite (+1800, or-)

Amarāvatī         Sukhā              Sanyamanī                      Vibhāvarī

         (Indra)          (Varuṇa)                  (Yama)                 (Soma)  

2. Ujjain (Lankā)  Yamakoṭipattan Romakapattana  Siddhapura

      (Bhārata)           (Ketumāla)        (Bhadrāśva)           (Uttara-Kuru)

विष्णु पुराण (२/८)-मानसोत्तरशैलस्य पूर्वतो वासवी पुरी।

दक्षिणे तु यमस्यान्या प्रतीच्यां वारुणस्य च। उत्तरेण च सोमस्य तासां नामानि मे शृणु॥८॥

वस्वौकसारा शक्रस्य याम्या संयमनी तथा। पुरी सुखा जलेशस्य सोमस्य च विभावरी।९।

शक्रादीनां पुरे तिष्ठन् स्पृशत्येष पुरत्रयम्। विकोणौ द्वौ विकोणस्थस्त्रीन् कोणान्द्वे पुरे तथा।॥१६॥

उदितो वर्द्धमानाभिरामध्याह्नात्तपन् रविः। ततः परं ह्रसन्तीभिर्गोभिरस्तं नियच्छति॥१७॥

(सूर्य सिद्धान्त १२/३८-४२)-भूवृत्तपादे पूर्वस्यां यमकोटीति विश्रुता। भद्राश्ववर्षे नगरी स्वर्णप्राकारतोरणा॥३८॥

याम्यायां भारते वर्षे लङ्का तद्वन् महापुरी। पश्चिमे केतुमालाख्ये रोमकाख्या प्रकीर्तिता॥३९॥

उदक् सिद्धपुरी नाम कुरुवर्षे प्रकीर्तिता (४०) भूवृत्तपादविवरास्ताश्चान्योन्यं प्रतिष्ठिता (४१)

तासामुपरिगो याति विषुवस्थो दिवाकरः। न तासु विषुवच्छाया नाक्षस्योन्नतिरिष्यते ॥४२॥

These, references could be linked. Lankā (Ujjain on same meridian) is centre of Bhārata quadrant with its 2 ends Amarāvatī in east and Sanyamanī on west at difference of 45 degrees. Similarly, Ketumāla boundaries in east west are Sanyamanī and Vibhāvarī in west with Romakapattana in centre. Kuru varṣa in bound by Vibhāvarī in east, Sukhā in west and Siddhapura in centre. Bhadrāśva is bound by Amarāvatī in west, Sukhā in east and Yamakoṭi pattana in centre. Towns of Indra and Garuḍa are described in east part of Indonesia in Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, Kiṣkindhā Kāṇḍa (40/39, 53). Indra had erected a Tri-śirā ketu (Pyramid) to mark east end of Bhārata part.

(आर्यभटीय ४/११-१४)-मेरुर्योजनमात्रः प्रभाकरो हिमवता परिक्षिप्तः। नन्दनवनस्य मध्ये रत्नमयः सर्वतो वृत्तः॥११॥

स्वर्मेरु स्थलमध्ये नरको बडवामुखं च जलमध्ये। अमरमरा मन्यन्ते परस्परमधः स्थितान् नियतान् ॥१२॥

Local references in each continent, countries-local Merus,

North Hemisphere-4 quadrants in 4 colours = 4 colours of Sumeru faces.

Similarly, 4 quadrants in south= Total 8 petals of earth,

मत्स्य पुराण,अध्याय ११३-चातुर्वर्ण्यस्तु सौवर्णो मेरुश्चोल्बमयः स्मृतः।१२।

नाभी बन्धन सम्भूतो ब्रह्मणो ऽव्यक्त जन्मनः। पूर्वतः श्वेत वर्णस्तु ब्राह्मण्यं तस्य तेन वै।१४।

पीतश्च दक्षिणेनासौ तेन वैश्यत्वमिष्यते। भृङ्गिपत्र-निभश्चैव पश्चिमेन समन्वितः।

पार्श्वमुत्तरतस्तस्य रक्त वर्णं स्वभावतः। तेनास्य क्षत्र भावः स्यादिति वर्णाः प्रकीर्तिताः।१६।

मध्ये त्विलावृतं नाम महामेरोः समन्ततः।१९।

मध्ये तस्य महामेरुर्विधूम इव पावकः। वेद्यर्थं दक्षिणं मेरोरुत्तरार्धं तथोत्तरम्।२०।

ब्रह्माण्ड पुराण, अध्याय (१/२/१५)-

Bhārata petal in north-divided into 3 or 7 lokas like lokas in space.

ब्रह्माण्ड पुराण उपसंहार पाद, अध्याय २ (३/४/२)-

लोकाख्यानि तु यानि स्युर्येषां तिष्ठन्ति मानवाः॥८॥ भूरादयस्तु सत्यान्ताः सप्तलोकाः कृतास्त्विह॥९॥

पृथिवीचान्तरिक्षं च दिव्यं यच्च महत् स्मृतम्। स्थानान्येतानि चत्वारि स्मृतान्यावर्णकानि च॥११॥

जनस्तपश्च सत्यं च स्थान्यान्येतानि त्रीणि तु। एकान्तिकानि तानि स्युस्तिष्ठंतीहाप्रसंयमात्॥१३॥

भूर्लोकः प्रथमस्तेषां द्वितीयस्तु भुवः स्मृतः।१४॥

स्वस्तृतीयस्तु विज्ञेयश्चतुर्थो वै महः स्मृतः जनस्तु पञ्चमो लोकस्तपः षष्ठो विभाव्यते॥१५॥

सत्यस्तु सप्तमो लोको निरालोकस्ततः परम्।१६। महेति व्याहृतेनैव महर्लोकस्ततोऽभवत्॥२१॥

यामादयो गणाः सर्वे महर्लोक निवासिनः।५१॥

(वायु पुराण, अध्याय १०१)-महेति व्याहृतेनैवं महर्लोकस्ततोऽभवत्।

विनिवृत्ताधिकाराणां देवानां तत्र वै क्षयः॥२३॥ यामादयो गणाः सर्वे महर्लोकनिवासिनः॥५२॥

Trilokī of Indra-(1) Bhārata, (2) Chīna, (2) Ṛṣīka (Russia) with Śivira (Siberia), Nivāta-kavacha (very cold region needing wind-cheaters).

Each are divided into 3 parts, middle parts come in parts of both sides, so there are 7 lokas in Deva-part (Bhārata petal of north hemisphere)-

(1) Bhū-Equator to Vindhya

(2) Bhuvah-Vindhya to Himālaya-called Madhya deśa (Madhes in Nepal, Medes in Bible, another Medes north-west of Iran)-King of Ayodhyā has been called king of middle loka-अन्वग्ययौ मध्यम लोकपालः (रघुवंश २/१६)

(3) Svah (Svarga)-Himālaya region in Bhārata is divided into 3 Viṣṭapa or Viṭapa (Tree, catchment area of river)-(a) Viṣṇu-viṭapa in west is drained by Sindhu river system-place of Vaiṣṇo Devī. Lakṣmī is daughter of Sindhu & wife of Viṣṇu. This region Kashmir is heaven on earth. (b) Śiva-viṭapa is region around Kailāsa-Mānasarovara drained by Gangā system-from hairs of Śiva. (c) Brahma-viṭapa is drained by Brahmaputra and land east of that is Brahma-deśa (now Myammar = Mahā + Amara, or head among Devas). 3 Vitapas combined are Triviṣṭapa = svarga (Tibet). Region between Brahma-deśa and and south India is Ka-maṇḍala (ka = water, Bay of Bengal) in which Ganga merges.

(4) Mahar-China is next part called Mahar as its people were called Mahā (Han) by Brahmā.

(5) Jana-Mangolia is Janah loka-In space Janahloka is galaxy which is final destination of soul-ध्रुवादूर्ध्वं महर्लोको यत्र ते कल्पवासिनः । एकयोजनकोटिस्तु यत्र ते कल्पवासिनः॥१२॥

द्वे कोटी तु जनो लोको यत्र ते ब्रह्मणः सुताः। सनन्दनाद्याः प्रथिता मैत्रेयामलचेतसः॥१३॥(विष्णु पुराण २/७)

In Arabic, mukul = preta = pra +itah (soul which has departed from body). Parallel to place of Mukul on earth is Mukul = Mangolia.

(6) Tapah loka-Ṛṣīka deśa where Arjun had stopped his northward conquest. Śivira (Siberia-temporary tents in snow), Nivāta-kavacha (very cold place, wind cheaters used).Tapas has become Steppes.

(7) Satya loka-Polar circle-north boundary of Jambū-dvīpa is bow shaped like north boundary of Bhārata, which is Himālaya-

भारतं प्रथमं वर्षं ततः किम्पुरुषं स्मृतम्।.. उत्तराः कुरवश्चैव यथा वै भारतं तथा॥(विष्णु पुराण २/२/१३-१४)

In space, average energy or temperature oh higher (bigger) lokas is successively lower. In Indra region also, lokas to north are colder.

Other 7 petals (3 in north, 4 in south) are 7 Tala (or Pātāla), named differently in purāṇas-

Viṣṇu-Atala, Vitala, Nitala, Gabhastimat, Mahātala, Sutala, Pātāla.

Brahmāṇḍa-Tatvala, Sutala, Talātala, Atala, Tala, Rasātala, Pātāla.

Bhāgavata-Atala, Vitala, Sutala, Talātala, Mahātala, Rasātala, Pātāla.

विष्णु पुराण (२/५)-दशसाहस्रमेकैकं पातालं मुनिसत्तम।

अतलं वितलं चैव नितलं च गभस्तिमत्। महाख्यं सुतलं चाग्र्यं पातालं चापि सप्तमम्॥२॥

Plane projection of earth map will have infinite scale in polar region. That is not a problem for north hemisphere where north pole is in water. But south pole is land mass, whose scale will be infinite, so it is called Ananta and its map has to be made separately.

विष्णु पुराण (२/५)-पातालानामधश्चास्ते विष्णोर्या तामसी तनुः। शेषाख्या यद्गुणान्वक्तुं न शक्ता दैत्यदानवाः॥१३॥

योऽनन्तः पठ्यते सिद्धैर्देवो देवर्षि पूजितः। स सहस्रशिरा व्यक्तस्वस्तिकामलभूषणः॥१४॥

In north hemisphere-West of Bhārata quadrant is Atala (Italy in that part). Ocean west of Atala is Atalāntaka. Assumption of Atlantis continent in ancient times. West of Atala quadrant is Pātāla (mostly north America). East of Bhārata quadrant is Sutala (su is near Sumeru-north pole). South of Bhārata is Tala or Mahātala. Both were called Kumārikā Khaṇḍa. Even now, it is called Indian ocean. There is assumption that Kumārika khaṇḍa was a large land mass in Indian ocean, but there is no description about it. Some small islands submerged in which Kabāta, ancient capital of Pāṇḍya kingdom was located (Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, Kiṣkindhā kāṇḍa, 41/19). West of Tala was Talātala (below or south of Atala which was ruled by Prahlāda, Tāraka Asura and Tripura (Tripoli of Libya)-Brahmāṇḍa purāṇa, chapter (1/2/20). South of Pātāla was Rasātala ruled by Hiraṇyākṣa, Vāsuki Nāga (same chapter). South of Sutala was Vitala(south Pacific).

3. Continent System-This is actual continents (Dvīpa) existing on earth. Circular zones formed around earth by planets up to Uranus have also been named after continents on earth. The Dvīpas of planetary system are circular (gravitational field of earth) or ring shaped and are much larger than earth. Obviously, Puṣkara dvīpa as a ring of 16 crore yojana width cannot exist on earth of 1000 yojana diameter (yojana is 1000 part of earth diameter at equator). No continent on earth has any geometrical shape. Here, Jambū dvīpa is the largest, whereas Jambū dvīpa among planet orbits is smallest. Compilers of purāṇas after Mahābhārata did not understand difference between 2 sets of Dvīpas and have mixed up both descriptions.

7 Continents and Ananta Dvīpa (Antarctica) are on 8 continental plates, called 8 Gaja (elephants). General spread of land mass is called Gaja-pṛṣṭha (elephant surface), hard rocks among them are Kūrma-pṛṣṭha (tortoise shell)-(Devī Bhāgavata purāṇa, 8/14/10, Brahmāṇḍa purāṇa, 2/3/7/292, Bhaviṣya purāṇa, 3/4/17/51, Bhāgavata purāṇa, 5/20/39, Vāyu purāṇa, 69/215, Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, 1/40/13).

Dvīpa is generally called land surrounded on all sides by ocean. But 7 dvīpas of purāṇas are not necessarily separated by oceans, they can be separated by mountains, desert or just divided by equator. Smaller islands have been called Upa-dvīpa or sometimes Dvīpa only. Some of these also are not surrounded by oceans.

7 continents are divided into natural land masses by mountains called Varṣa parvata. Varṣā means rain. From start of one rainy season to another is Varṣa (year). Natural land having a single rain system (monsoon) is also Varṣa, e.g. Bhārata-varṣa. Each Varṣa (country) is separated into natural zones (janapadas) by mountains called Kula-parvata. Major rivers also are boundaries. Continents are-

(1) Jambū-dvīpa is obviously Asia as it contains Bhārata-varṣa or Himavat-varṣa (separated by Himālaya.

(2) Śaka dvīpa-Australia, south east of India (Mahābhārata, 12/14/21-25).  Vāyupurāṇa (48/14-17) calls it Anga-dvīpa with Chakra-giri (semi-circular mountain in east). Matsya purāṇa (122/17-18) tells that Agni (fire) is always radiant here. So, this direction is called Agni-koṇa and given similar sounding name Anga dvīpa. Here, main mountains, countries, rivers as per Viṣṇu purāṇa (2/4/60-66), Matsya purāṇa (122/6-34) are-

Countries-Jalada, Kumāra, Sukumāra, Marīchaka, Kusumoda, Maudaki, Mahādruma.

Mountains-Udayāchala, Jalādhāra, Raivataka, Śyāma, Astāchala, Āmbikeya, Kesarī.

Main rivers-Sukumārī, Kumārī, Nalinī, Dhenukā, Ikṣu, Veṇukā, Gabhasti. Gabhasti could be in Papua-New Guinea as Gabhastimān is counted as one of 9 parts of Bhārata-varṣa also (Matsya purāṇa, 114/7-9, Viṣṇu purāṇa, 2/3/6-7). It is called Śakadvīpa as it has many varieties of Śaka (pillar shaped) trees-300 varieties of Eucalyptus. Papua is actually east end of Asia continental shelf. It being border of Jambū and Śaka dvīpa, it could not develop a single language without central rule and had 1000 languages out of which more than 500 still survive.

There is a Śaka country (Janapada) in north-west part of Bhārata (Matsya purāṇa, 114/41) where it is listed with Bāhlika (Balkha), Vāṭadhāna, Ābhīra, Kālatoyaka, Purandhra, Śūdra, Pallava, Āttakhaṇḍika, Gāndhāra (Kandhar), Yavana, Sindhu (Sindha), Sauvīra, Madraka, Śaka, Druhya, Pulinda, Pārada, Āhāramūrtika, Rāmaṭha, Kaṇṭakāra, Kaikeya, Daśanāmaka-as colonies of Kṣatriyas. Other countries there are-Kamboja, Darada, Barbara, Pahlava, Ātreya, Bharadvāja, Kaseraka, Lampaka, Talagāna, Jāngala.

(3) Kuśa Dvīpa-This is Africa, north of equator. This is full of desert shrubs called kuśa, so this is called Kuśa dvīpa. Ancient Egypt and Ethiopia were called Kush. There is a mount Meru (now called Kilimanjaro) and many places called Meru on equator which is dividing line.

Countries of Kuśa-Udbhid, Veṇumān, Vairatha, Lambana, Dhṛti, Prabhākara, Kapila.

Boundary mountains-Vidruma (without any tree), Hemaśaila (golden or with ice), Dyutimān, Puṣpavān, Kuśeśaya, Hari, Mandarāchala.

Main rivers-Dhūtapāpā, Śivā, Pavitrā, Sammati, Vidyut, Ambhā, Mahī (Viṣṇu purāṇa, 2/4/36-43)

(4) ŚālmaliDvīpa-This is Africa, south of equator and adjacent Madagaskar (Malgasy). Madagaskar has been called Hariṇa dvīpa by Arabs (Geography of Puranas-Muzaffar Ali, page 182) and Śankha Dvīpa was called Zeng (Zanjibar on east coast). It has been listed with Kuśa dvīpa in Vāyu purāṇa (48/14). Apāntaratamā had gone there for Tapa (Garga Samhitā, 7/40/35). Brahma-vaivarta Purāṇa (1/22/17) tells that he was called Apāntaratamā as he had gone far away into sea (ap = water, antaratama = deep). This has the same south latitude (12-26) as between Mṛgaśirā and Mṛgavyādha stars in sky.

Countries-Harita, Jīmūta, Rohita, Vaidyut, Mānasa, Suprabha.

Varṣsaparvata-Kumuda, Unnata, Balāhaka, Droṇāchala, Kanka, Mahiṣa, Kakudmān.

Main rivers-Yoni, Toyā, Vitṛṣṇā, Chandrā, Muktā, Vimochinī, Nivṛti.

(Viṣṇu purāṇa, 2/4/23-28)

(5) Krauñcha Dvīpa-Mahābhārata (12/14/21-25, 16/25) tells it west of Meru. Bṛhat Samhitā (14/24) and Rāmāyaṇa (4/43/28) tell it in north. This is north America. This continent and its main mountain Rockies-both are in shape of flying bird. So, both were called Krauñcha (Heron bird)-

क्रौञ्चद्वीपे गिरिः क्रौञ्चस्तस्य नाम्ना निगद्यते (मत्स्य पुराण, १२३/३७)

Varṣa-Kuśala, Mandaga, Usna, Pivara, Andhakaraka, Muni, Dundubhi.

Varsa parvata-Krauncha, Vamana, Andhakaraka, Svahini (shape like horse mouth), Divāvṛt, Puṇḍarīkavān, Dundubhi.

Main rivers-Gaurī, Kumudvatī, Sandhyā, Rātri, Manojavā, Kṣānti, Puṇḍarīka.

(Viṣṇu purāṇa, 2/4/48-55)

Matsya purāṇa (122/79-88) names mountains as-Devana, Govinda, Krauñcha, Pāvanaka, Andhakāraka. Their Varṣa are-Kuśala of Krauñcha, Manonuga of Vāmana. Then Uṣṇa, Pāvanaka, Munideśa, Dundubhisvana. 7 types of Gangā river are-Gaurī, Kumudvatī, Sandhyā, Rātri, Manojavāa, Khyāti, Puṇḍarīka.

(6) Plakṣa Dvīpa-This is Europe whose south part is full of Plakṣa trees (Pakar in Hindi, Fig varieties). North part has icy land and ocean, so Varāha, Matsya purāṇas call it Gomeda (white jewel) dvīpa. गोमेदके तु गोमेदः पर्वतस्तेन उच्यते (मत्स्य पुराण, १२३/३८)

Varṣa-Śāntahaya, Śiśira, Sukhodaya, Ānanda, Śiva, Kṣemaka, Dhruva.

Varṣa parvata-Gomeda (Alps), Chandra, Nārada, Dundubhi, Somaka, Sumana, Vaibhrāja.

Main rivers-Anutaptā, Śikhī, Vipāśā, Tridivā, Aklamā, Sukṛtā.

(Viṣṇu purāṇa, 2/4/5-11)

(7) Puṣkara Dvīpa-This is south America which is opposite on globe to Puṣkara (12 Degree west of Ujjain-Viṣṇu purāṇa, 2/8/28, 34 Deg north-Bukhara now in Uzbekistan)-

न्यग्रोधः पुष्करद्वीपे पद्मवत् तेन स स्मृतः (मत्स्य पुराण, १२३/३९)

It is divided into 2 parts by Andes mountain from north to south end. West part is very dry and east parts has largest river basin of Amazon. This part is Rasātala. North part of Andes is semi-circular, called Mānasa mountain (in shapeof back of head). Its branch mountain is called Mahāviṭ as son of Mānasa.

There are 2 countries-Mahāvīra Khaṇḍa, Dhātaki Khaṇḍa. Dhātaki Khaṇḍa is plains of Brazil, Argentina. Mahāvīra Khaṇḍa is ring shaped part of north and west upto south end of Chile.

There is only one main mountain-Mānasottara, ring shaped in middle.

(Viṣṇu purāṇa, 2/4/74-90)

4. Time zones-Indian time measures were parallel to angle measure. Solar year has about 360 days (round number) which is full revolution of earth or revolution of as seen from earth. So, circle is divided into 360 amśa (degrees). Amśa is divided into 60 kalā (or Liptā), 1 kalā into 60 vikalā (or Viliptā), and further divisions by 60. Similarly, solar day is divided into 60 daṇḍa, each daṇḍa into 60 pala, 1 pala = 60 vipala, etc. Thus, approximate parallel is-

1 amśa motion of sun = 1 day

1 kalā motion = 1 daṇḍa

1 vikalā motion = 1 pala

1 prati-vikalā motion = 1 vipala, etc.

Similarly, earth rotates around its axis in 1 day, so time zones are also at intervals of 1 daṇḍa (24 minutes), making 60 time zones in all.

List of surviving time zones-

(1) Lankā, of places of time (Kāla). Central place of time was Mahā-kāla (Great time) in Ujjain, whose central point appears to be point on prime meridian. There are many important cities near this longitude line-Sthāṇvīśvara (Thaneswar), Kālapriya (Kalapi), Rohitaka (Haryana), Meru peak in Himalaya. Northernmost city was called Uttara-Kuru, now called Omsk (Om as longitude measurement starts from this line)

(2) East 1-Narasapur (16026'N, 87058'E)-One centre for Calender making.

Prayag Ghat (25027'N, 81053'E)-Yajña of Pururavā.

Raj-mahendri (1700'E, 81048'E)-Many villages named Lanka in Godavari islands, where army of Sri Ram assembled for attack on Lanka. Its officers have Lanka title.

Lolārka in Vārāṇasī (25019'N, 82069'E). It was a reference mentioned in Pañcha-siddhāntikā of Varāhamihira (3/13). Jaisingh made an observatory in 1737, called Jantar-mantar. There is a place called Sigra here as the original palace of Rāvaṇa in Lanka was called Sigiria.

(3) East 2-Tamralipti (22018'N, 87058'E), Konark (19053'N, 8606'E)-Place of sun, pillar was slightly east in sea.जयन्ति ये रणे शत्रूंस्तैः कार्यः स्तम्भ चिह्नकः। तस्मात्तव जयोद्द्योत निमित्तं स्तम्भमुत्तमम्॥

(स्कन्द पुराण, माहेश्वर खण्ड, कुमारिका खण्ड, ३५/)

(4) East 3-Viṣṇupur in Manipur (24038'N, 93036'E)

(5) East 4-Phu Langka (Thailand, 19027'N, 100025'E), Langkawi (island near Malaysia coast, 6021'N, 99048'E), Langkat (Sumatra, Indonesia, 3045'N, 98028'E)

(6) East 5-Vat Langka-Temple in Cambodia capital 11034N, 104056'E,

Baikal pyramid mountain near port, 51052'13"N, 104048'33"E

Sumeru of China-Mount Sumeru Caves (Xūmíshānshíkū)-36°16′30″ N, 105°59′6″E

(7) East 6-Sumeru of Java-8°6′28.8″S 112°55′12.0″E

(8) East 10-Ancient capital of Japan-Kyoto-35°1'15.85"N, 135°45'13.86"E, place of sun.

Nokhodka Pyramids, near Vladivostok 42050'N, 132054'E

(9) East 17-Meru creek (north Fiji)-16033' S,179054’ E

West zones-

(1) W 1-Bhuj (Kacchha in Gujrat) 23015'N, 69049'E, Porbandar (21037'N, 69049' E)

(2) W 2-Puṣkara of Brahmā (Viṣṇu purāṇa, 2/8/42)

(3) W 6-Mecca (Makha = Yajna) 21025'21"N, 39049'34"E. On old tropic of Cancer-Madina (24028'15"N, 39036'44"E)

(4) W 7-Ancient ruins near Riga (Latavia-place for study of Ṛgveda)-56056'56"N, 2406'23"E. Ancient pillars of Kintu Aka 56044'37"N, 21024'4"E

Twin pyramids near Murmansk, Kola Peninsula in north west Russia. Near it there are large Chakra-vyuha shapes in Kandalaksha. Kandala = tubers, war. Aksa = eye, wheel axis. Kandalaksa = Chakravyuha. Kandla port in Gujrat has similar name.

https://www.look4ward.co.uk/archeology/baffling-puzzle-prehistoric-russia-s-labyrinths/

https://newsinstact.com/earth/pyramids-discovered-in-russia-twice-as-old-as-the-egyptian-ones/

(5) Half quadrant 450 west-Pyramid of Giza, Ezypt-29058'20"N, 3107'31"E.

Ancient pillars of Zimbabwe-Masvingo (20016'S, 30056'E).

(6) W 8-Izmir (Turkey), Mir = Meru 38024'46"N, 2708'18"E.

Dardanelles (= Daurhṛda, land between 2 seas-Durgā Saptaśatī, 8/6) in Turkey. Old name was Hellespont (Helios = Sun in Greek)-40012'0"N, 26024'0"E.

Odessos or Odessus near Varna, Bulgaria, ancient pillars (43°13′N, 27°55′E)

(7) W 9-Talsi Pyramid in Latvia, 57014'40"N, 22035'12"E,

Hellinikon pyramid in Greece, 37053'54"N, 23043'46"E

(8) W 10-Conakry in Guinea, west Africa coast (like Konark of Odisha), 9030'33"N,13042'44"E.

Lankau (Germany) 53040'9"N, 10040'1"E.

(9) 750 west-Lourdes (France, Rudreśa) 4306'N, 003'E.

(10) W 13- Langan (France) 48°14′43″N 1°51′08″W.

Lancashire (Britain), 53048'0"N, 2036'0"W. Near to it are Stonehenge (Britain) ancient circles 51010'30"N, 1049'21"W, Silbury mount (Pyramid) 51024'55.55"N, 1051’27.3”W.

(11) W 14-Ardgroom Stone Circle, County Cork, Ireland, 51044'23"N, 9053'38"W

W 23-Churún Merú, Venezuela, 5057'N, 62030'W

(12) W 26-Cuzco or Cuzco in Peru, ancient Inca capital, Sacsay huamán ruins,13°31′30″S,  71°58′20″W

(13) W 27-Monk Pyramid (Madison, Ilinois, USA), 38039'38.4"N, 89048'38.98"W

Calakmul or Kalakmul pyramid in Yucatan, Mexico, 1806'19.41"N, 89048'38.98"W (Kālaka Asuras fought under Mahiṣa asura of Pātāla (north America)-Durgā saptaśatī (8/6, 26)

(14) W 29-Pyramid of sun Teotihuacan, Mexico19°41' 33.00" N, 98°50'37.68"W

(15) W 30-Guachimontones pyramid near Teuchitlán town of Mexico, west of Guadalajara, 20°41′41.68″N, 103°50′9.93″W

This is end of east direction (or of west direction) from Ujjain. As per Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, Kiṣkindhākāṇḍa, (40/64), Brahmā had made a Dvāra (gate) to mark the end of east direction. Brahmā is called first among gods (Muṇḍaka upaniṣad, 1/1/1). Old Mexican name of this is also translated as pyramid of first god.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guachimontones

https://mexiconewsdaily.com/mexicolife/western-mexicos-circular-pyramids/

ब्रह्मा देवानां प्रथमं सम्बभूव विश्वस्य कर्ता भुवनस्य गोप्ता।

स ब्रह्म विद्यां सर्व विद्या प्रतिष्ठा-मथर्वाय ज्येष्ठ पुत्राय प्राह। (मुण्डकोपनिषद्,//)

वाल्मीकि रामायण, किष्किन्धा काण्ड, अध्याय ४०-

पूर्वमेतत्कृतंद्वारंपृथिव्याभुवनस्यच।सूर्यस्योदयनंचैवपूर्वाह्येषादिगुच्यते॥६४॥

5. Meru-Meru has several meanings in cosmology, geography and other contexts.

(1) Hiraṇya-gabha Meru-This was the primordial fire-ball from which universe was created. As source of birth, it is called Ulba (Umbilical cord) also.

हिरण्यगर्भः समवर्तताग्रे भूतस्य जातः पतिरेक आसीत्।(ऋक् १०/१२१/१)

कूर्मपुराण (१/४)-यमाहुः पुरुषं हंसं प्रधानात् परतः स्थितम्। हिरण्यगर्भं कपिलं छन्दो-मूर्तिं सनातनम्॥३९॥

मेरुरुल्बमभूत् तस्य जरायुश्चापि पर्वताः। गर्भोदकं समुद्राश्च तस्यास परमात्मनः॥४०॥

It has various levels for universe, galaxy, solar system and earth.

ब्रह्माण्ड पुराण (१/१/३) आदि कर्त्ता स भूतानां ब्रह्माग्रे समवर्त्तिनाम्॥२५॥

हिरण्यगर्भः सोऽण्डेऽस्मिन् प्रादुर्भूतश्चतुर्मुखः। सर्गे च प्रतिसर्गे च क्षेत्रज्ञो ब्रह्म संमितः॥२६॥

करणैः सह पृच्छन्ते प्रत्याहारैस्त्यजन्ति च। भजन्ते च पुनर्देहांस्ते समाहार सन्धिसु॥२७॥

हिरण्मयस्तु यो मेरुस्तस्योद्धर्तुर्महात्मनः। गर्तोदकं सम्बुदास्तु हरेयुश्चापि पञ्चताः॥२८॥

यस्मिन् अण्ड इमे लोकाः सप्त वै सम्प्रतिष्ठिताः। पृथिवी सप्तभिर्द्वीपः समुद्रैः सह सप्तभिः॥२९॥

(a) (a) Svayambhū maṇḍala-This is visible universe as collection of 1011 galaxies created from abstract uniform source. Here, the mutual attraction among galaxies and receiving light of each other is Meru or ulba

(b) Kūrma meru-This is creative field, called garbha in which our galaxy has been created. Its size is measured in Śakvarī chhanda (14x4 = 56 letters), i.e. 1053 times earth size. Now, it is seen as neutrino corona of our galaxy which is about 10 times bigger than the galaxy.

शङ्कु भवत्यह्नो धृत्यै यद्वा अधृतँ शङ्कुना तद्दाधार। (ताण्ड्य महाब्राह्मण ११/१०/११)

तद् (शङ्कु साम) उ सीदन्तीयमित्याहुः॥१२॥

(c) Parameṣṭhī Meru-This is rotation axis of galaxy. Distance between galactic poles is about 1,00,000 light years, called 1 lakh yojanas. Mahar loka is 30000 yojanas from its center and has 1000 suns in the sphere of diameter of spiral arm (1400 light years) around our sun. These suns are called 1000 heads of Śeṣa, Ananta or Samkarṣaṇa. On one of these, earth is like a small particle.

भागवत पुराण (५/२५)- अस्य मूलदेशे त्रिंशद् योजन सहस्रान्तर आस्ते या वै कला भगवतस्तामसी समाख्यातानन्त इति सात्वतीया द्रष्टृ दृश्ययोःसङ्कर्षणमहमित्यभिमान लक्षणं यं सङ्कर्षणमित्याचक्ष्यते॥१॥यस्येदं क्षितिमण्डलं भगवतोऽनन्तमूर्तेः सहस्रशिरस एकस्मिन्नेव शीर्षाणि ध्रियमाणं सिद्धार्थ इव लक्ष्यते॥२॥

(2) Merus of solar system-These are of 2 types-

(a) Nākasvarga or Meru-This is axis of rotation of solar system itself. Seen from earth, earth axis rotates around it in a circle of 240 in a period of 26,000 years. The star group looks like a reptile called Śiśumāra, Thus, Nāka-meru is centre of Śiśumāra-chakra described in Viṣṇupurāṇa, chapters (2/8-9). Its size is 100,000yojana (yojana for solar system is diameter of sun). Sphere of this radius is called Maitreya-maṇḍala within which the bodies will move in gravitation of sun.

तम् (त्रयस्त्रिंशं स्तोमं) उ नाक इत्याहुर्न हि प्रजापतिः कस्मै च नाकम् । (ताण्ड्य महाब्राह्मण १०/१/१८)

विश्वा रूपाणि प्रति मुञ्चते कविः ग्रासावीद् भद्रं द्विपदे चतुष्पदे। वि नाकमख्यत् सविता वरेण्योऽनु प्रयाणमुषसो वि राजति॥ (वाजसनेयी संहिता १२/३) स्वर्गो वै लोको नाकः (शतपथ ब्राह्मण ६/३/३/१४, ६/७/२/४)

(b) Earth axis-Astronomy texts call north pole as Sumeru and south pole as Kumeru. But height of this Meru is stated as 100,000 yojanas out of which only 1000 yojana part is within earth because earth size is 1000 yojana only. Basically, this is meant to be rotation axis of earth. Its length is 100,000 yojanas (1 yojana = 1000 part of equatorial diameter = 12,800 kms approx. here).  The disc shaped zone around earth in plane of ecliptic is called Jambū-dvīpa of 50,000 yojana radius in Bhāgavata purāṇa, skandha 5, Viṣṇu purāṇa 2/7-8etc. That is exclusive gravitational zone of earth in which a body will revolve round earth. Moon is at about 61r distance, r = radius of earth.

This is description of Jaina text Lokaprakāśa (18/15-16). Purāṇas give same measure of Meru, but tell that 16000 yojanapart is within earth. Geo-synchronous orbit has diameter of this size which has been called earth here.

कूर्म पुराण (१/४३)-जम्बूद्वीपः समस्तानां द्वीपानां मध्यतः शुभः। तस्य मध्ये महामेरुर्विश्रुतः कनक-प्रभः॥६॥

चतुरशीति साहस्रो योजनैस्तस्य चोच्छ्रयः। प्रविष्टः षोडषाधस्ताद् द्वात्रिंशन् मूर्ध्नि-विस्तृतः॥७॥

मूले षोडष साहस्रो विस्तारस्तस्य सर्वतः। भू-पद्मस्यास्य शैलोऽसौ कर्णिकात्वेन संस्थितः॥८॥

(3) Merus on earth surface-(a) Polar Merus-These are reference points for survey and mapping of earth. Mapping of earth surface of north (and south) hemisphere was in 4 sheets of 900 longitude width. It was projection on rectangular pyramid with square base touching equator and axis in direction of north pole to height of 100,000 yojanas. 4 faces were Bhārata, Bhadrāśva, Ketumāla, Kuru shown in 4 colours, called 4 colours of faces of Meru mountain. South quadrants (Talas) were also described as earths of different colours in Brahmāṇḍa purāṇa (1/2/20)

ब्रह्माण्डपुराण (१/२/१५)-चतुर्वर्णश्च सौवर्णो मेरुश्चारुतमः स्मृतः। द्वात्रिंशच्च सहस्राणि विस्तीर्णः स च मूर्द्धनि॥१६॥

नाभि बन्धन सम्भूतो ब्रह्मणोऽव्यक्त जन्मनः। पूर्वतः श्वेत वर्णश्च ब्राह्मणस्तस्य तेन तत्॥१८॥

पार्श्वमुत्तरतस्तस्य रक्त वर्णः स्वभावतः। तेनास्य क्षत्र भावस्तु मेरोर्नानार्थ कारणात्॥१९॥

पीतश्च दक्षिणे नासौतेन वैश्यत्वमिष्यते। भृङ्ग पत्र निभश्चापि पश्चिमेन समाचितः॥२०॥

तेनास्य शूद्रभावः स्यादिति वर्णाः प्रकीर्त्तिताः। वृत्तः स्वभावतः प्रोक्तो वर्णतः परिमाणतः॥२१॥

North and south poles were called Sumeru or Svar-meru, Kumeru or Vaḍavā-mukha (surrounded by ocean, whose energy is called Vaḍavā)

स्वर्मेरु-स्थलमध्ये नरको बडवामुखं च जल-मध्ये। अमर-मरा मन्यन्ते परस्परमधः स्थितान्  नियतान्॥१२॥

उदयो यो लङ्काया सोऽस्तमयः सवितुरेव सिद्धपुरे। मध्याह्नो यवकोट्यां रोमक विषयेऽर्धरात्रं स्यात्॥१३॥

(आर्यभटीय, ४/१२-१३)

(b) Other Merus-Main Meru on Equator was in Africa, called Kilimanjaro now-highest mountain of Kenya. Its district is still called Meru. East Meru was called Prāń-Meru (Pamir) which is junction of mountains in Asia. Western Meru was Apara-Meru (Ameru in Peru) which is origin of name America. There was no man called Amerigo in Spain who named America. Every continent had Merus and other Merus as reference for mapping. Some have been listed as boundaries of time zones.

जैन हरिवंश पुराण (पञ्चम सर्ग)-(धातकी खण्ड, पुष्कर द्वीप)-

पूर्वापरौ महामेरोर्द्वौ मेरू भवतोऽस्य च। इष्वाकारौ विभक्तारौ पर्वतौ दक्षिणोत्तरौ॥४९४॥

अशीतिश्च सहस्राणि चत्वारि च समुच्छ्रयः। चतुर्णामपि मेरूणां परयोर्द्वीपयोर्भवेत्॥५१३॥

Some other Merus are-

1. Meru, Tanzania, a village in northern Tanzania (Arumeru District). It is inhabited by the Meru people of Tanzania, known as the "Wameru" in Bantu. Mount Meru is a volcano near Arusha in northern Tanzania 3°14′ S, 36°45′ E

2. Nearby Mount Kilimanjaro at 3°4′33″S, 37°21′12″E is in Kenya. Mount Kenya is at 0°9′00″S,37°18′00″E with nearby Meru Town at 0°03′N,37°39′E. There are Meru central and north districts, Maara district. Its people are called Ameru, their language is Kimiiru. The forest region is Meru National Park.

3. Meru, Hazaribagh, a small town in Jharkhand, India, 24°1′46″N, 85°27′26″E. This is almost at old Karkarekhā and about 100 east of Ujjain, thus a local reference.

4. Meru, Malaysia, a town in Klang, located in Selangor, 308’ N, 101027’ E

5. Meru, Western Australia, a locality near Geraldton, 28°48′11″S 114°41′10″E

6. Méru, a commune of the Oise department in France 490 14’N, 20 8’ E- about 73045’ west of Ujjain or 12 time zone west. Place of Time zones are places of Śiva called Mahākāla at Ujjain at central longitude. Similarly, town near Greenwich longitude here is called Lourdes (Rudreśa) at 4306’ N and 003’ E.

7. Meru Peak, a mountain in the Indian Himalayas 30°52′5″N, 79°1′56″E

8. Phra Sumeru Temple, Bangkok, Thailand,13°45'N,100°35'E

9. Sumerumountain, Java, 806’S, 120035’E

10. Mount Sumeru of China at 36°01′N 106°15′E is of red sandstone like colours of Meru in purāṇas. It is full of minerals.

(4) Meru is a design of house in pyramid shape. Flat pyramid shape is design of towns called Meru, e.g. Ajaya-Meru (Ajmer), Jaisalmer or many other countries in other countries.

(5) Meru is central bead of rosary for counting mantras.

(6) Backbone of animals is called Meru-daṇḍa.

(7) Head of a country or group is also called Meru which has become Mir (main, first). Other chiefs are Apara-Meru (Amir in central Asia).

E-souvenir and Final Detailed Program WAVES 2020 Conference from 25 Dec. 2020 to 3 Jan. 2021

$
0
0

 Namaste!

Please email me kalyan97@gmail.com for the Detailed Sch. and E-souvenir copies.

Enjoy some talks on Indian history, chronology of Mahabharata and the Vedas, treatment of women in Hindu dharma etc. Please browse the schedule.
Free to join. Links to join are provided.
Please receive FINAL detailed schedule of sessions of the program of WAVES 2020 with ZOOM link for all the six days and also attached is E- Souvenir ( with Messages and Abstracts) which will be formally released during the Inauguration on 25th Dec., first day of conference.
Kindly join with this Zoom link - https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85868554031
Also, please note –
Timings of the WAVES 2020 Conference -
5:00 PM to 10:00 PM Indian Standard Time
5:30 AM to 10:30 AM central standard time USA
6:30 AM to 11:30 AM Eastern standard time USA
So, accordingly kindly join fifteen minutes before the conference.
With thanks and regards,
Sincerely,
WAVES 2020 - Program Committee
Date:24/12/2020

Revisiting the Exact Identity of Vedic Aryans: Are pūru-s the only ārya-s? -- BN Narahari Achar (Dec. 2020)

$
0
0

https://tinyurl.com/ya7dog3f

Revisiting the Exact Identity of Vedic Aryans: Are pūru-s the only ārya-s?

- B. N. Narahari Achar

https://sites.google.com/site/praachiprajnaa/sastramanjusa/%E0%A4%B6%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%9E%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%B7-11th-issue-of-volume-vi-december-2020

11th Issue of Volume VI / December, 2020 of śāstramañjūṣā

https://sites.google.com/site/praachiprajnaa/sastramanjusa  of Prachi Prajna, (ISSN 2348-8417), pp. 51 to 68.

Abstract

Contrary to the view of some scholars, it is shown that purus are not the only āryas, but one among several ārya tribes. In particular ikṣvāku and yadu are among the ārya tribes and rāma and kr̥ṣṇa being the pillars of ārya dharma. Yajna rituals form the basis of Vedic culture and Vedic āryans perform yajna, offer worship to agni, Indra, aśvins and other gods and follow the path of r̥ta.



















Shrikant G Talageri

Saturday, 4 July 2020

A Reply To Prof. Narahari Achar's Critique of my article "The Rigveda and the Aryan Theory: A Rational Perspective THE FULL OUT-OF-INDIA CASE IN SHORT"

A Reply To Prof. Narahari Achar's Critique of my article

"The Rigveda and the Aryan Theory: A Rational Perspective

THE FULL OUT-OF-INDIA CASE IN SHORT"


Shrikant G. Talageri

I have presented the full Out-of-India case for the Indo-European languages in as short as possible in my article "The Rigveda and the Aryan Theory: A Rational Perspective. THE FULL OUT-OF-INDIA CASE IN SHORT". It is impossible that any supporter of the AIT (Aryan Invasion Theory) will have the guts to try to honestly examine my case, including every single piece of the humongous evidence given by me in that article, and disprove it, since it is irrefutable, at least on the basis of data, facts, logic and evidence. Of course, abusive hate-writers, hecklers and trolls will always be there, but they are inevitable and deserve no attention. 

The noted scholar Narahari Achar, who is no supporter of the AIT, has written a critique of my above article, and I feel it is incumbent upon me to note his criticism and reply to the points raised by him. Some of the points represent some common objections to my case from the OIT side.

It may be noted at the outset that the critique, entitled "Revisiting the Chronology of Rigveda and the exact identity of Vedic Aryans" was in fact sent to me by Achar himself for my reactions, and in fact, on my requesting a word document rather than the original pdf sent by him (since a word-document is easier to quote from, by copy-paste, as I will frequently be having to do in this reply), he readily and courteously sent me a word-document of his critique. Needless to say, the critique and my reply to it will make it clear that our viewpoints differ on many basic points, but also that differences can be aired in an atmosphere of mutual respect. In case my style of writing, especially when I am compelled to point out some unfortunate tendencies among my non-AIT critics, gives any impression of boorishness on any point, I sincerely apologize in advance.

While presenting a critique, Achar writes: "A formidable amount of data is presented by Talageri and an analysis that is almost impossible to refute", and    

gives it as his opinion: "Except for questions of chronology, the rest of Talageri's monumental work is held in very high regard", and even "thanks to the efforts of scholars like Talageri, there is a paradigm shift in Indological studies".

But the points on which he disagrees (the Pūru identity of the "Vedic Aryans", and the internal chronology of the Rigveda, for example) are so fundamental that it is difficult to understand which part of my work he holds in high regard and finds impossible to refute, since these two points constitute the very basis of the OIT case presented by me.

But let me go to the specific points raised by him, under the following heads:

I. The chronology of the Rigveda.

II. The Pūru identity of the "Vedic Aryans".

III. The significance of the aprīsūktas.

IV. Other minor points.

 

I. The chronology of the Rigveda.

Achar's objections to the chronology of the Rigveda, as proved by me, has already been the subject of another critique by him and reply by me some years ago (see my blog article of 2017, actually written in 2009, entitled "The Use of 'Astronomical' Evidence in Dating The Rigveda and The Vedic Period").

Here, he writes: "In the opinion of the author, the chronology developed does not agree with the traditional view that the Vedas were compiled by Vedavyasa  at one time before the beginning of Kaliyuga, generally taken to be about 3100 BCE. The fully compiled text of ten mandalas must have been available at this time.  The ṛgveda Samhita referred to in śatapatha brāhmaṇa (dated to be at about 3000 BCE) agrees with the current text available. There is no mention anywhere that a Samhita of less than ten mandalas was current anytime. However, as enumerated in Talageri's work, there was a Samhita of only seven mandalas, which grew in stages finally to a text of ten mandalas reaching down to 1400 BCE.  Again, the chronology certainly does not agree with the chronology based on astronomical methods going back several thousand years such as those of Tilak, Jacobi, and others".

[A slight amendment: I have not enumerated seven original maṇḍalas or books, but six: the family-books 2-7].

Further: "It is to be noted that there is no chronological order in the arrangement of the maṇḍala-s. It is recognized that ṛṣi-s belong to different periods, there are older ṛṣi-s and newer ṛṣi-s and ones who are in between. There is certainly no mention of earlier or later maṇḍala-s in a temporal sense".

[Important note: Achar, like most of these "traditionalist" objectors, seems to think it an unanswerable and  scoring argument that "there is no mention" in the Rigveda of many of the things that I have uncovered in my analysis. Of course there isn't, or there would have been no necessity of my having to uncover them in my analysis of the Rigvedic data. It must be remembered that all this historical discussion on the Rigveda is necessitated by the modern discovery of the fact that the languages of Europe and northern India are related to each other, and from the subsequent quest for the Original Homeland of these (Indo-European) languages, leading to the formulation of the AIT and the resultant assault on the history of Hindu Civilization. Obviously the ancient composers, commentators and analysts of our texts were not aware of all these modern developments, so they neither found it necessary to "mention" innumerable things, nor to prepare methodologies to study these future developments. Things that we uncover will very necessarily be things not "mentioned", and not even envisioned, by those ancient scholars, and the methodologies that we use will naturally be ones unknown to the ancient scholars. The objectors, more on them shortly, seem more determined in sabotaging investigation from our side and allowing the AIT writers a free leeway and complete monopoly on the debate, under cover of being protectors of our "traditions",  rather than to examine and uncover the truth and defeat the AIT.

Further, it does not even seem to strike (or matter to) these objectors that most of their own assertions on the Rigveda are also not "mentioned" in the Rigveda. Where, for example, does the Rigveda "mention" Achar's pet theory that "There is a strong correlation between the textual organization of ṛgvedasaṃhitā and somayajña"?

Also, when these objectors give quotations from other ancient texts, definitely composed long after the period of the Rigveda, to put obstacles in our research, or to object to certain points made by us, they totally fail (or refuse) to understand that:

a) all these texts (even the Brahmanas) represent later periods to the period of the Rigveda,

b) the purpose of these texts was only to expound on matters of faithritual and religious and mythical beliefs, and not on history.

c) all these ancient writers were totally unacquainted with the Indo-European question or the AIT, and with the principles of modern linguistics and historical studies, and could never have possibly intended that their religious views be misused as weapons by present-day "traditionalist" Hindus to sabotage research on ancient history and to disarm other Hindu researchers from dealing with the (for example, AIT-promoting) opponents].       

I have already dealt with the "astronomical" evidence in my above-mentioned blog article, and will not go into it again here. Further, I will not go into the untenable dates of 3100 BCE for the "beginning of Kaliyuga" (i.e. and therefore also for the Mahabharata war, for Vyāsa, and for the completion of the Rigvedic text) either, since that would be a very major diversion. In fact, I will not argue on any point in this context. I will simply present the relevant data and ask a question which must be answered by Narahari Achar or anyone else who disputes my chronology. Any honest scholar will have to admit that the only answer to my question is that my chronology is right.

So here are the facts (already given in the very article being critiqued by Achar, but it seems to require repetition):

1. The western Indologists (Oldenberg to Witzel and Proferes) over a century and a half have classified the family books 2-7 (yes, in spite of Achar's objections, I will use the word "books" here, more convenient for typing out than the word "maṇḍalas" every time. After all, this article is in English and not in Sanskrit, and the equivalent word used for the maṇḍalas of the Rigveda―or, for that matter, the Kāṇḍas of the Ramayana or the Parvas of the Mahabharata―is "books" in English) as the older layer of the Rigveda, and the non-family books (1,8,9,10) as the later layer. They have a long list of linguistic and literary criteria for this classification.

Further, they have also testified that book 5, though a family book, is closer to the non-family books than to the other family books. So that we get an older set of five books 2-4,6-7 and a newer set of five books 5,1,8-10.

2. I have independently shown, in my books and blogs, another long list of criteria leading to the same above classification, and in fact, given the exact order of the books: 6,3,7,4,2,5,1,8,9,10.

All this massive evidence certainly cannot be discarded on the basis of the myth (yes, myth) that an individual person named Vyāsa compiled all the Vedas in one go. It is perfectly possible that Vyāsa gave the final canonical form to the collection, but to say that the books were all composed and compiled together at one point of time (I will ignore here the date of this point of time: Achar says 3100 BCE, I say 1500-1400 BCE) against all the evidence, and then further use this to deny any internal chronology to the Rigveda, is a joke. These mythical beliefs would be valid in the field of keertans and religious discourses, but they are not valid as criteria to brush away all the massive evidence in the field of serious historical research.

In any case, see the following data, already given in my article critiqued by Achar, but apparently needed to be reiterated here. There is a huge mass of vocabulary common to the Rigveda and the Avesta which clearly shows the chasm between the five Old Books and the five New Books:

The common Vedic-Avestan names and name types include not only names with the prefixes and suffixes found in the Mitanni records except -uta (i.e. -aśva, -ratha, -sena, -bandhuvasu-, ṛta-, priya-, and, as per the analysis of the Indologist P.E.Dumont, bṛhad-, sapta-, abhi-, uru-, citra-,-kṣatra and yama/yami-) and the word maṇi, but also names with the prefixes and suffixes aśva-, ratha-, ṛṇa-, -citrapras-, ṛṣṭi-, -ayanadvi-, aṣṭa-, -antiūrdhva-, ṛjū-, -gusaṁ-, svar-, -manasśavas-, -stutaśūra-, sthūra-, vidad-, nṛ-, pṛṣad-, prati-, -śardhapṛthu-, jarat-, maya-, hari-, -śrutaśyāva-, -toṣa, -tanu, -rocis, -vanta/-manta, -kratu, etc., and the following names: GhoraĀptyaAtharvaUśīnaraAvasyuBudhaṚkṣaGandharvaGayaSumāyāKṛpaKṛṣṇaMāyavaŚāsaTraitanaUrukṣayaNābhānediṣṭhaVṛṣṇiVaivasvatVirāṭ, etc., as well as a few words common to the Rigveda and Avesta which are found only as words in the Rigveda but as words as well as in names in the Avesta or vice versa (such as prāṇakumbhaśepa, etc., and the names of certain animals). Also, there are numerous other words, listed by earlier Indologists (like Hopkins) and present-day Indologists (like Lubotsky and Witzel), which are peculiar to only the Indo-Aryan and Iranian branches and are not found in the other IE languages. These include the following prominent words: āśāgandha/gandhikadrūsūcītiṣyaphālasaptaṛṣimūjavatstukāambhassamāstrītokmanevathāudarakṣīrasthūṇachāgakapotavṛkkaśanaihpṛdākubhaṅgaparṣa, pavasta, dvīpa. Also the words gāthā and bīja.

The following is the distribution of this vocabulary:

To summarize the data only in the Old Hymns in the Old Books vs. the hymns in the New Books respectively, leaving aside as a distraction the Redacted Hymns (Old hymns edited during the New period), we get an absolutely uni-directional picture:

TOTAL HYMNS AND VERSES:

1. Old Hymns in Books 2,3,4,6,7:  280 Hymns, 2351 verses.

2. New Hymns in Books 1,5,8,9,10:  686 Hymns, 7311 verses.

COMMON RIGVEDIC-AVESTAN-MITANNI NAME TYPES IN COMPOSER NAMES:

1. Old Hymns in Books 2,3,4,6,7:  0 Hymns, 0 verses.

2. New Hymns in Books 1,5,8,9,10:  308 Hymns, 3389 verses.

 

COMMON RIGVEDIC-AVESTAN-MITANNI NAME TYPES AND WORDS WITHIN THE HYMNS:

1. Old Hymns in Books 2,3,4,6,7:  0 Hymns, 0 verses.

2. New Hymns in Books 1,5,8,9,10:  225 Hymns, 434 verses.

COMMON RIGVEDIC-AVESTAN NEW DIMETRIC METERS:

1. Old Hymns in Books 2,3,4,6,7: 0 Hymns, 0 verses.

2. New Hymns in Books 1,5,8,9,10:  50 Hymns, 255 verses.

I would like to add here another point: all the above data pertains to the common Indo-Iranian vocabulary: an examination of other internal Rigvedic vocabulary (not necessarily common with the Avesta or Iranian languages and hence not undertaken by me in my books and articles) will again reveal a huge mass of very important new words found only in the New Books but not in the Old Hymns of the Old Books, most of which have been noted by the western Indologists, e.g. the words candramā, loka, ājya, kalyāṇa, vijaya, kāla, rātri, maṅgala, apsarā, tīrtha, gātra, aṅkuśa, ambhas, ambara, etc., etc., grammatical words like adas, verbal roots like √aṇ, √lubh, √labh, √pūj, √klp, √gup, ā√rabh, etc. There is no vocabulary of the opposite kind (i.e. found in the Old Hymns of the Old Books, and in post-Rigvedic texts, but not found in the New Books).           

Examining the western geographical data in the books, again we get the same situation. The following is the distribution of the western geographical data (excluding the rivers) in the Books of the Rigveda:

1. Old Hymns in Books 2,3,4,6,7: 0 Hymns, 0 verses.

2. Redacted Hymns in Books 2,3,4,6,7:  0 Hymns, 0 verses.

3. New Hymns in Books 1,5,8,9,10:  44 Hymns, 52 verses, 53 names.

And the distribution of the river names (along with the relevant historical data in each book) gives the following graph:

 

Why should any person who is not a determined exponent of the AIT want to negate the importance of all this massive evidence which puts the Old Books of the Rigveda at least 1500 years before the Mitanni records of 1500 BCE and deeply within India at that date?

But this question is only to be pondered, not answered.

My question to be answered is as follows: if all the books of the Rigveda were compiled at one time, and if the classification of the books into two eras (Old and New) is wrong, then why do we find this kind of distribution of names, words, grammatical forms, verbal roots, etc. which are found massively in the New Books and in post-Rigvedic texts, but completely absent in the Old Books 2-4,6-7? All in keeping with the chronological order of the books as arrived at by the Western Indologists, and independently arrived at by me (in more specific detail)?

Is it all a super-massive super-coincidence?

Or did the Old hymns in the Old Books also originally contain all these names, words, grammatical forms, verbal roots, etc. and these were meticulously searched out and deleted from them by some unknown villains in the distant past (before the brahmins all over India started memorizing by heart and chanting the present Rigveda by complicated ghana-pāṭha methods)?

Or, alternately, did some other unknown villains in the distant past (before the brahmins all over India started memorizing by heart and chanting the present Rigveda by complicated ghana- pāṭha methods) deliberately add all these names, words, grammatical forms, verbal roots, etc. (which were totally missing in the entire Rigveda earlier) only into the hymns of the five New Books?

If the chronological division into Old Books and New Books is wrong, then what is the reason for this absolute dichotomy in the language of the two sets of Books?

The trouble is (please note that all this is a general observation based on my very huge experience in this matter, and is not aimed at Achar personally) that there is a huge crowd of "traditionalist" Hindus in India who hate logical studies and seek to reject (and vehemently reject) all research methods and conclusions which do not fit in with their fond childhood ideas of Indian tradition. In the case of many of them, it could also be because these conclusions go against what they themselves may already have written or spoken on the matter for years, or, alternately, out of envy for discoveries made by others than themselves. But more often, it is just a misguided idea of tradition, a loyalty to fantastic childhood ideas, and a stick-in-the-mud attitude. They couch their objections in "traditionalistic" religious terms, make pompous and bombastic (and totally unwarranted) use of Sanskrit terms like dharmaadhikārapramāṇa, etc., and violently attack the motives, allegedly "western" orientation, and scholarship of writers like Koenraad Elst and myself who hold truth above petty personal biases and prejudices. They prefer to lose the  war of historiography to their external enemies by their intransigent hatred for us, rather than to win it by upholding the truth and accepting facts.

I (and Koenraad Elst) have very consistently faced virulent attacks by such elements, to whom I am a greater enemy than the actual AIT writers. Let me also add here that I also genuinely have a greater respect for "enemy" AIT scholars who want their side to win than for these compulsive losers who claim to represent the Hindu side but are its worst internal saboteurs.

All this had to be said. I respectfully request Narahari Achar, whose courteous behavior in this matter I have already referred to earlier (and therefore to whom all of this should not really apply), to honestly answer my question: why do we find this kind of distribution of names, words, grammatical forms, verbal roots, etc. which are found massively in the New Books and in post-Rigvedic texts, but completely absent in the Old Books 2-4, 6-7, if not because of the chronological division into Old and New?

II. The Pūru identity of the "Vedic Aryans"

The "Vedic Aryans" of the Rigveda were the Pūrus, and the Pūrus alone, among all the different people in the Purāṇas. I have proved this in such detail that I find it really incomprehensible why anyone should want to refuse to accept it if they are really interested in the truth.

Achar objects as follows: "this model excludes rāma (an ikṣvāku) and kṛṣṇa (a yadu) from the ārya dharma. It casts a cloud on the two epics Ramayana and Mahabharata as pillars of ārya-Dharma and the heroes rāma and kṛṣṇa as representatives of the ārya-Dharma. How can these two who are not even ārya-s represent ārya-Dharma, let alone act as its protectors?

Therefore it needs to be examined from the data whether ikṣvāku-s and yadus are really non Aryans."

In my article (the same article that Achar is reviewing) I have given all the evidence for the Pūrus, and the Pūrus alone, being the "Vedic Aryans" in great detail. It would be ridiculous for me to again repeat the whole mass of evidence in reply to his review! Just because the data (not this model, but the data) shows that Rāma and Kṛṣṇa, not being Pūrus, were not part of the "Vedic Aryan" complex, and this fact is not liked by someone who always thought since childhood that they were, is no reason to reject the solid data and evidence. Scholars cannot expect to get away with throwing a tantrum and saying: "No, I don't care about the evidence: I want them to be 'Vedic Aryans', so they must be 'Vedic Aryans'".

Let us examine the many points (apart from his complete refusal to accept the data and evidence) where logic fails Achar:

1. Firstly, Achar seems to not understand what is meant by the phrase "Vedic Aryans". He writes: "the very question "Who were the Vedic Aryans ?" smacks of a hangover from the AIT days when a group of invaders were thought to come to India and to establish themselves there. So, the questions were asked, who were the Vedic people? Where did they come from? How does Talageri define 'Vedic people'?"

The definition of "Vedic people" is very simple: it means "the people of the Rigveda", or "the people among whom the Rigveda (and later the subsequent three Veda Samhitas) were composed". It has nothing to do with any hangover from the AIT days.

If one asks: "who are the people of the Old Testament?", the answer would be "the people among whom the Old testament was composed: the ancient Jews of Palestine". If one asks: "who were the people of the Sangam literature?", the answer would be "the people among whom the Sangam literature was composed: the ancient Tamilians of Tamilnadu". If one asks: "who were the people of the Iliad and Odyssey?", the answer would be "the people among whom the Iliad and Odyssey were composed: the ancient Greeks of Greece". 

The answer to the question "who are the people of the Rigveda?" is not that simple: it does mean "the people among whom the Rigveda (and later the subsequent three Veda Samhitas) were composed" but this does not imply "the ancient Sanskrit-speaking people of India" because the Rigveda does not (however desperately anyone may want it to) pertain to the whole of India: it very emphatically pertains only to a limited northwestern  area centered on Haryana and extending westwards to Afghanistan and eastwards to the neighbouring areas of western Uttar Pradesh. Huge parts of India are completely outside the boundaries of the geographical horizon of the Rigveda.

This would not have been a problem if the ardent advocates of Vedic religion and culture had simply accepted the Rigveda and the Vedic texts as the oldest and therefore most revered Hindu texts containing the oldest recorded form of Hinduism. Unfortunately they don't: they insist that the whole of Hindu and Indian religion and culture (in extreme cases the whole of world religion and culture) stems from the Vedas! They insist that the Vedic texts are "apaurusheya" which they take to mean "not created by man", timeless and eternal. In these circumstances, they find the hard facts unpalatable.

The hard facts are that the Vedic Samhitas were composed among the Pūrus, and the other people (including the Ikṣvākus and Yadus) were originally non-Vedic people. The Vedic religion and culture of the Pūrus is just one of the many branches of the banyan tree that is Hinduism, it is not the root of this banyan tree, and other aspects of Hinduism are other branches of Hinduism which are as old as the Vedic branch, only they were not recorded at so early a point of time with the organized rigor with which the Vedic religion was preserved, and many of these branches made their appearance in the records only with the geographical spread and development of the Vedic religion and culture and Vedic/Sanskrit literary tradition.

2. Achar writes: "A simple definition of the Vedic people would be those who follow the Vaidika Dharma. Vaidika Dharma implies the performance of yajña. It is stated that 'vedāhi yajñārthamabhi pravṛttāḥ' 'Veda-s are engaged (or oriented towards) in the performance of yajña.' Hence the importance of yajña in Vaidika Dharma. Vedic people are those who perform yajña. We will see that the same definition is implied in Talageri's work also….. He uses certain criteria to declare that Pūru-s are the only Vedic ārya-s to the exclusion of all other tribes and these are described in detail in his article. We will show in particular that yadus and ikṣvāku-s are also Vedic ārya-s using the very same criteria."  

I have nowhere claimed or even "implied" that "Vedic people are those who perform yajña". That is, the ancient Vedic people did perform yajña, but then so did the ancient Avestan people (they even called it yasna, modern Persian jashna) and the ancient Druids, and the ancient Lithuanians (the ancient religion has been revived by modern Lithuanian Pagans), and so did the ancient Phleguai of Greek records: were they all "Vedic people"? But, in contrast, the non-Vedic people (despite many of them being speakers of other Indo-European languages) within India farther east and south of the Rigvedic area did not perform yajña in the ancient period: they had different other forms of religion all of which are today other major branches (aspects or features) of the Hindu banyan tree.

The only criterion for deciding who are the "Vedic Aryans" of the Rigveda is an analysis of the Rigvedic data (including the  term ārya as it occurs in the Rigveda), and I have done a full analysis of this in my books and my article being critiqued by Achar and will not repeat it all again here.

I will only point out, and it is really painful to have to do so again and again, the word ārya does not mean "Pūru". It simply means "belonging to our community". Many ancient Indo-European language speaking people used the term for themselves in the sense "belonging to our community". The Iranians called themselves airya and those of other communities (originally the "Vedic Aryans") tuirya: the "Vedic Aryans" called themselves ārya and those of other communities (originally the proto-Iranians or Anus) dāsa. To a "Vedic Aryan" he himself was an ārya, but a proto-Iranian was not, and to a proto-Iranian, he himself was an airya, but a "Vedic Aryan" was not. So ārya does not automatically mean "Pūru": it means "Pūru" only in the Rigveda because the "Vedic Aryans", who were Pūrus, referred to themselves by this word in the text (which was composed among them), in the sense of "belonging to our community". The word has nothing to do with yajña, or even with the Vedic language. An analysis of the word ārya, as it occurs in the Rigveda, shows that it refers only to Pūrus, thus confirming the massive evidence that the "Vedic Aryans", the People of the Book, were Pūrus.

[An analogical example is the word amchigelo, "belonging to our community", among the Saraswats, or maybe all Konkani speaking communities, of Karnataka. Although the word has now acquired a less narrow and more inclusive usage in the discourse of many Konkani speakers, formerly at least a Chitrapur Saraswat, for example, would use the term only for other Chitrapur Saraswats: a Gaud Saraswat would be called konknyancho (strangely so, since even Chitrapur Saraswats themselves speak Konkani). And a Gaud Saraswat would use the term only for other Gaud Saraswats: a Chitrapur Saraswat would be called shenapayancho (a pun on the term shenaipanch)].

3. Achar introduces the Mandhātā motif: "ikṣvāku occurs in RV(X.60.4), but the descendant mandhātṛ is well known. He is referred to in RV (I.112.13)…..In another reference in RV (VIII.39.8), ṛṣi nābhāka kāṇva…. (and) in another reference, RV(VII.40.12), the same ṛṣi nābhāka kāṇva….make(s) it clear that mandhātṛ is the foremost performer of yajña-s, offers oblations to Agni, Indra, Aśvins and other gods and is an enemy of Dasyu.  mandhātṛ is also a ṛṣi of a sūkta, RV(X.134). He is unquestionably an ārya. Hence his descendants, ikṣvāku-s, who also follow the ārya-dharma are all ārya-s."

The word Ikṣvāku occurs only once in the Rigveda as a name for the sun, while the omnipresence of the Pūrus in the Rigveda need not be repeated here.

About Mandhāta and the Ikṣvākus in the Rigveda, I have dealt with this in detail in my books, and more recently and more comprehensively in my blog article "The Ikṣvākus in the Rigveda":

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-iksvakus-in-rigveda.html

Incidentally, the Puranas record that Mandhātā was an Ikṣvāku king whose mother was a Pūru princess, and who moved westwards to aid his maternal relations against western enemies. Yet none of the Ikṣvākus (and not Manu himself, either!) are referred to in the Rigveda as ārya, which could have been a criterion for being a "Vedic Aryan". That he performed a yajña (when among his maternal relations) is no criterion, as already pointed out.

Also, the phrase ārya-dharma does not occur in the Rigveda (and certainly not in reference to Mandhātā), nor have I used it even once in any of my writings.

Then he goes on to give two more naïve arguments (against all the heavy evidence in the text) to "prove" that the Ikṣvākus and Yadus were also "Vedic Aryans":

1. He tells us: "According to the Puranas the traditional history begins with Manu (whom Talageri calls the mythical ancestral king), Manu Vaivasvata, who ruled over the whole of India. The puranas concentrate mainly on the history of the descendants of two of his sons, ikṣvāku and iḷa. As Talageri himself describes, the tribes descended from ikṣvāku are said to belong to the solar race and those descended from iḷa are said to belong to the lunar race.. As Vaivasvata Manu is regarded as the founder of ārya-Dharma, his descendants are followers of ārya-Dharma. Hence ikṣvāku-s are ārya-s. So are the yadu-s, who are also Manu's descendants through Yayati."

To begin with, there is no statement anywhere in the Rigveda giving us all these Puranic lineages. Nor does the phrase ārya-dharma occur even once in the Rigveda, let alone any claim that "Manu is….the founder of ārya-Dharma" or that Ikṣvāku (a name occurring only once in the Rigveda, where it only means "Sun") is his son or that the Yadus are his descendants (or Yayāti's).

2. Quoting the two verses (I.108.8 and VIII.10.5) which refer to four or five of the Five Tribes, Achar misinterprets them to argue that all the Five Tribes were "Vedic Aryans" who performed his pet "somayajña":

a) I.108.8: "oh indrāgni, whether you are with yadus, turvashus, druhyus, anus, or purus, come hither to drink soma"

Achar's argument: "If indrāgni is with the yadus (or purus), then the yadus (or purus) must be performing somayajña and offering soma to indrāgni. It follows therefore that the yadus are Vedic ārya-s just as the purus. Extending the same argument to all the other tribes, it follows that yadus, turvashus, druhyus, anus, and purus are all Vedic ārya-s".

b) VIII.10.5: "Ashvins, whether you abide today in the west, whether you abide in the east; whether you sojourn with Druhyu, Anu, Turvasha or Yadu, I invoke you. Therefore come to me".

Achar's argument: "The inference, therefore, is that Druhyu, Anu, Turvasha and Yadu must all be following Vedic dharma and must be Vedic ārya-s". 

In view of the massive and direct evidence given by me that leaves no room for any doubt that the Pūrus alone are the "Vedic Aryans", this indirect and "inferred" evidence is a big zero. If all these tribes are "Vedic Aryans" that evidence makes no sense at all: at least one piece of direct evidence should have been found.

Do the phrases Jagannāth and Viśvanāth (both meaning "Lord/God of the Whole World/Universe") indicate that that the particular God called by that name or worshipped by that name is worshipped by all the people of the world?

As per Achar's logic, the details in the Old Testament, which make all the ancestors of mankind from Adam to Noah worshippers of Jehovah, and then specifically give the genealogies of most of the nations of the world as known to the Jewish composers (including the Persians, Armenians, Greeks, Romans, Scythians, etc.) from the sons of Noah, must be treated as evidence that the earliest ancestors of all these Indo-European people were worshippers of Jehovah!

If an indirect inference from a verse in the Pūru Rigveda can be treated as evidence that various other non-Pūru people were worshippers of the Pūru God Indra, then direct statements to that effect in the Hebrew Old Testament can definitely be treated as evidence that various other non-Hebrew people (including the ancestors of Indo-Europeans) were worshippers of the Hebrew God Jehovah!

To sum up, I can only say: sorry if you don't like it, but the Yadus and Ikṣvākus were not part of the Rigvedic "Vedic Aryan" culture. But all of them are part of the larger Indian=Hindu culture. It does not cast any "cloud on the two epics Ramayana and Mahabharata as pillars of ārya-Dharma and the heroes rāma and kṛṣṇa as representatives of the ārya-Dharma". Both these epics are pillars of Indian=Hindu Dharma, there being no such thing as "ārya-Dharma" (except in the eyes of Arya Samajis and others who reject other non-Vedic aspects of Hindu Dharma as anārya), and Rama and Krishna are representatives of our Hindu Dharma.

And here we come to the very big problem―or rather, two very big problems―created by people who insist on treating Vedic religion and culture as the origin of all Indian=Hindu religion and culture:

Problem No. 1Whether anyone likes it or not, the geographical horizon of the Rigveda basically extends eastwards only so far as western Uttar Pradesh. The later three Samhitas take the horizon eastwards as far as Magadha and Vaṅga, as Pūru kingdoms expanded eastwards.

So, when Veda-centric Hindus treat the Vedas as the original and sole source and origin of Indian=Hindu religion and culture, and all other non-Vedic aspects of Indian=Hindu religion and culture as "later" developments from the Vedic religion and culture itself, what does this basically imply?

Unless they insist, against the evidence of all the data, that the Rigveda was composed all over India and not only in the northwest (and many people do make this stupid assertion), it basically implies that the whole rest of India, to the east and south of the Rigvedic geographical horizon, was originally a barren, uninhabited land which was first populated only by descendants of the Vedic people as they expanded over this land.

[A similar fallacy results from the gleeful pronouncements of many ardent Hindus who mistakenly interpret certain recent genetic findings as showing that "all Indians are descended from the Harappans" of the northwest!] 

Or else, it implies that the whole rest of India was populated by other non-Vedic people who were completely annihilated and replaced by the expanding Vedic people.

Most Veda-centric Hindus don't care for facts, data and logic, so they usually simply ignore this implication of their Veda-centric paradigm.

However, occasionally the stray Veda-centric scholar has tried to explain this geographical situation in the Rigveda in some roundabout way after understanding its implications, and ended up with even more insane theories: A.C Das, in his book "Rigvedic India", tells us that parts of the Rigveda pertain to a period "tens of thousands of years ago, if not hundreds of thousands or millions" (DAS 1921:7-8) at a point of time when the entire area to the east and south of the Rigvedic horizon was under the sea and did not exist as land (until the sea receded from the area in much later epochs), and hence all the other parts of India did not even exist at the time of composition of those hymns, which is why they are not mentioned in the Rigveda!

Problem No. 2: Again, the Rigvedic religion (largely like the religion of the ancient Avestan Iranians and of the oldest Druids of Europe) consisted only of the worship of Nature and the Elements (and a limited number of Gods associated with them), fire-worship (yajña), also for a period of time the Soma rituals, and primarily the composition, memorization and chanting of hymns.

Most of the most prominent features of Hinduism are totally missing in the Rigvedic religion: idol worship and temple culture in their myriad forms, asceticism, concepts of rebirth/reincarnation, the literally thousands of Gods in the Epics, Puranas and in every nook and corner of the country, and countless more.

According to Veda-centric thinking they are all later developments in an originally Vedic religion: according to extreme Veda-centric thinking, like that of the Arya Samaj, they are all impurities which have crept into an originally pure ārya religion as depicted in the Vedas.

These two problems arise only because of Veda-centric ideology. The fact is that there is no "original" religion, culture or civilization in India ancestral to all the rest: the "Vedic" religion and culture depicted in the Rigveda is the religion and culture of the Pūrus, just one of the many branches of our great Hindu religion, culture and civilization from just one part of our land. All the other aspects and features of Hinduism are equally old and equally Indian: being aspects and features of our great Hindu religion, culture and civilization from other parts of our land. The Rigvedic religion, because it was the most systematically organized, because it was recorded in detail at the oldest point of time, and because its hymns and texts were preserved by means of the most incredibly meticulous form of oral recitation in the world (known as the ghana-pāṭha) and became the starting point of a literary tradition, which, as it expanded and developed, incorporated all the other traditions of other parts of India  into itself; and it became the nominal "upper" layer of the great all-India religion known today as Hinduism.

Therefore it is those who try to derive the whole of Hinduism and Indian culture (i.e. including those elements which are not present in the Rigveda and the other Samhitas) from an "original" Vedic religion, who are "casting a cloud" on all those other aspects of Hinduism, and disrespecting their antiquity. No Hindu hero from our ancient texts needs to be "Vedic" (there is no such thing as an ārya) in order to be our hero: his being a Hindu hero is sufficient.

III. The significance of the aprīsūktas

For some totally incomprehensible reason, Achar strongly objects to my description of the aprīsūktas. Perhaps nothing illustrates his failure to understand what I have written as his long diatribe on this point:

"The āprīsūkta-s and Chronology

We will now consider the arguments for the chronology based on the āprīsūkta-s only. As is well known, the āprīsūkta-s are ten in number and are considered to "belongto ten 'original' families, one per family. In ritual gatherings (in performing yajña-s) the priests of a given family were required to recite the āprīsūkta-s belonging to their own family. Even though, the āprīsūkta-s belong to different 'families' and are 'composed' by different ṛṣi-s, they all have a similar structure and address the same eleven deities with eleven oblations. The main concern is with the eighth oblation offered to the triplet deities, 'tisro devyaḥ' and the following hypothesis is advanced about the āprīsūkta-s in explaining the chronology of ṛgveda. "The composers of ṛgveda are divided into ten families, and these ten families are identified by the fact that each family has its own āprīsūkta. According to this hypothesis, āprīsūkta-s are then divided into three categories on the basis of the references to the goddess bhāratī, among the 'tisro devyaḥ'". It is then declared that this grouping matches "with a classification of the periods of the books of ṛgveda into early, middle and late periods as summarized earlier"

"As per this chronology, the āṅgirasa-s, bhṛgu-s, viśvāmitra-s, vasiṣṭha-s and agastya-s, are the oldest families which originated in the early period of ṛgveda and refer to the three goddesses, bhāratīiḷā, and sarasvatī in that order (I.142.9, X.110.8, III.4.8, VII.2.8, and I.188.9). Two families originated in the middle period, who refer to the three goddesses with a changed order: the kaśyapa-s referring to as bhāratī, sarasvatī, and iḷā (IX.5.8) and the gṛtsamada-s, referring to sarasvatī, iḷā and bhāratī (II.3.8). Three families originated in the late period and they do not refer to bhāratī at all: the atri-s, the kaṇva-s who use the more general name mahī (V.5.8, and I.13.9) and the bharata-s, who simply use only one name iḷā for all the three goddesses (X.70.8). "  Based on this classification, a model is arrived at  wherein mercenary motives are attributed to the ṛṣi families and it is asserted that some families were militarily associated with the bharata-s, some were not, and some were 'aloof' from the main stream of ṛgveda and this leads to the identification of 'puru's as the people of ṛgveda.

A closer examination of the āprīsūkta-s shows something quite different. Traditionally according to niruktaand other such texts, the āprīsūkta-s are classified into three groups also, but this has nothing to do with classification Talageri introduced. Although the ten āprīsūkta-s were 'composed' (envisioned) at different times, by different ṛṣi-s belonging to different 'families', they all have a very similar structure. They all address the same eleven deities (except as explained below) and contain eleven ṛca-s for eleven oblations, except for RV (I.13) which contains 12 ṛca-s and RV (I.142) which contains 13 ṛca-s. The sūkta-s are classified into three groups based on the deity worshipped for the second oblation (and not the eighth oblation which Talageri imagines).  In the following four, (VII.2), (V.5), (X.70) and (II.3), the deity addressed for the second oblation is narāśaṃsa, and these four sūkta-s are called narāśaṃsavantī sūktāni (also known as āprasūktāni). The following four, (I.188), (III.4), (IX.5) and (X.110) address tanūnapāt as the deity for the second oblation, and are called tanūnapātvantī sūktāni (also known as āprīsūktāni). The remaining two, (I.13) and (I.142) address both narāśaṃsa and tanūnapāt and are called ubhayavantī as they address both deities and hence contain additional ṛca-s for oblations as noted. There is no basis for the classification proposed by Talageri. Of the three sūkta-s he selects, which according to him 'belong to the late period, and do not refer to bhāratī at all', (V.5) and (X.70) belong to the narāśaṃsavantī group and (I.13) belongs to the ubhayavantī group. Furthermore, among the tisro devyaḥṛca-s (I.13.9) and (V.5.8) are in gāyatri and (X.70.8) is in triṣṭup. It should be noted that in eight of the ten āprīsūkta-s, including the ones that Talageri selects, the three goddesses are referred to collectively as tisro devyaḥ and no special attention is paid to the order of the deities (despite what he states). Furthermore, in (X.70), while only iḷā is explicitly mentioned, the other two are supposed to be referred by 'devī and ghṛtapadī' respectively.  However, in the two exceptions, (I.142) and (I.188) all the three goddesses are listed explicitly, but the collective name, tisro devyaḥ, is not used. This fact has not received any attention .The three goddesses are referred to in the 'original' order bhāratīiḷā, and sarasvatī in (II.1.11), but this has been explained  as due to the gṛtsamada-s making some kind of amendment for their infraction. The three goddesses are referred to in taittirīya brāhmaṇa (3.6.2.2)

"'tisrodevīrapasāmapastamā', and explained asiḷā sarasvatī bhāratītyevaṃ rāpāstisro

aṣṭamaprayāja devyaḥ tadrūpamagniṃ daivyo hotā yajatu"  The three goddesses are the deities for the eighth 'prayāja' oblation and reflect forms of agni . Furthermore, bhāratī is explained as "bharataḥ ādityaḥ tasya bhāḥ", 'bharata' is the Sun and bhāratī refers to sun's effulgence.

Thus the classification based on three goddesses and the chronological inference have no basis and are misleading.

Incidentally, the āprīsūkta-s can be classified into three groups in at least two more ways on the basis of the tisrodevyaḥ ṛk:

a)Based on meter: (i) gāyatri,  I.13, I.188, V.5;

(ii) triṣṭup, II.3, III.4, VII.2, X.70, X.110,

(iii) anuṣṭup, I.142, IX.5

b)Based on the rank of the tisrodevyaḥ ṛk in the āprīsūkta : (i) rank #8  I.188, II.3, III.4,

(ii)rank  #9:  I.13, I.142,

(iii) rank #11: V.5,  VII.2, IX.5, X.70 and X.110

It is not necessary to hypothesize political motives forthe ṛṣi-s based on such groupings.

In fact, the 'original' families, each of which characteristically "owned" a specific 'āprīsūkta', as per this model, have very little to do with the so-called 'family' in the 'family books'. Table 1 gives the list of āprīsūkta-s and the ṛṣi-s and the associated families and the meter of the tisrodevyaḥ  ṛk and the traditional classification based on the deity for the second prayāja āhuti. Thus the assertions about the ṛṣi-s and the families in connection with 'āprīsūkta-s' and the conclusions regarding the alleged chronology are also without a basis.

Table 1.āprīsūkta-s, the ṛṣi-s (families) and classification

 

maṇḍala  and sūkta

No. of ṛca -s

ṛṣi

family

rank and meter of thetisrodevyaḥ ṛk 

I.13

12

medātithi kāṇva

ubhayavantī

9   gāyatri

I 142

13

dīrghatamā aucathyaḥ

ubhayavantī

9   anuṣṭup

I.188

11

agastyo maitrāvaruṇaḥ

tanūnapātvantī

8  gāyatri

II.3

11

gṛtsamadaḥ

narāśaṃsavantī

8triṣṭup

III.4

11

gādhino viśvāmitraḥ

tanūnapātvantī

8triṣṭup

V.5

11

vasuśṛta ātreyaḥ

narāśaṃsavantī

11  gāyatri

VII.2

11

maitrāvaruṇa vasiṣṭhaḥ

narāśaṃsavantī

11 triṣṭup

IX.5

11

kaśyapo asito devalo vā

tanūnapātvantī

11 anuṣṭup

X.70

11

sumitovādhryaśva

narāśaṃsavantī

11 triṣṭup

X.110

11

jamadagnirbhārgavaḥ

tanūnapātvantī

11 triṣṭup

  

I totally fail to understand what Achar's problem is and what exactly he is objecting to.

I have given two basic facts about the aprīsūktas:

Fact 1: There are 10 aprīsūktas, one for each of the nine composer families (Aṅgiras, Bhṛgu, Viśvamitra, Vasiṣṭha, Agastya, Kaśyapa, Atri, Kevala-Aṅgiras=Kaṇva and Kevala-Bhṛgu=Gṛtsamada) and one for the only royal family of composers (Bharata).

Strangely, Achar seems to object even to this: "the concept of 'family' or 'clan' associated with the sūktā-s is an anathema. The 'family' is not a guild or trade union to which members can be admitted and licensed", though at another point he himself admits: "As is well knownthe āprīsūkta-s are ten in number and are considered to 'belong' to ten 'original' families, one per family. In ritual gatherings (in performing yajña-s) the priests of a given family were required to recite the āprīsūkta-s belonging to their own family".

Even a casual glance at any text dealing with gotras, e.g. the gotra-pravara-mañjarī, will confirm that there are seven rishi families and two "kevala" families. The Rigveda has exactly one āprīsūkta for each one of these nine priestly families; and one more for the composers (of kingly origin) from among the Bharatas, who are distributed in the gotra lists among the Bhṛgu and Aṅgiras families.

 

Achar seems, in any case, to be a bit confused about the concept of "families". He has the following objection even to the division of the books of the Rigveda into "family" and "non-family": "The more familiar labeling used by Western scholars (as well as many Indian scholars) refers to two broad groups: 'family books' (maṇḍala-s 2-7) where the hymn-have been 'composed' by one particular ṛṣi or his successors or disciples, and 'non-family' books (maṇḍala-s 1,8,9 and 10). In each of the 'books' belonging to this 'non-family' group, there are many ṛṣi-s, more than a hundred in some. The ninth maṇḍala is special in that all the hymns are addressed to one single deity, soma .This grouping and the terminology used in it as 'family- and non-family- Books' (or clan- and non-clan books) has caused some confusion and will be discussed later."

Once it is clear that there are ten families of composers (confirmed by both the gotra lists as well as the āprī sūktas), there should be no confusion about certain books being called family books: each family book  has an overwhelming number of hymns in it composed by only any one family, while the non-family books have a generous mixture of hymns composed by different families. Further, the two groups are distinguished by other factors: language, arrangement of hymns, etc. Book 5 falls between the other family books and the non-family books in respect of many of these factors, but it is still majorly the book of one family.    

Fact 2: The verse in each of these āprīsūktas which refers to the Three Goddesses indicates the period in which the family (to which that āprīsūktas belongs) originated:

a) the five old families which originated in the Old period of the Bharatas name the Three Goddesses in the order Bhāratī-Iḷā-Sarasvatī,

b) the two families which originated in the Middle period change the order to Bhāratī-Sarasvatī-Iḷā and Sarasvatī-Iḷā-Bhāratī respectively.

c) and the three families which originated in the New (post-Bharata) period omit Bhāratī altogether, naming only Iḷā-Sarasvatī or only Iḷā.

Achar objects to this and tells us: "It should be noted that in eight of the ten āprīsūkta-s, including the ones that Talageri selects, the three goddesses are referred to collectively as tisro devyaḥ and no special attention is paid to the order of the deities (despite what he states)".

If Achar is banking on the hope no-one will bother to check the actual verses, and will go by what "he states", here are the actual ten verses. It will be seen that the order of the names of the Goddesses (highlighted in yellow) is exactly as "stated" by me:

A. Bhāratī-Iḷā-Sarasvatī:

I.142.9 (Aṅgiras): śucirdevesvarpita hotrā marutsu bhāratī

iḷā sarasvatī mahī barhih sīdantu yajñiyah.

X.110.8 (Bhṛgu): ā no yajñam bhāratī tvīyam etviḷā manusvad iha cetayantī

tisro devīr barhir edam syonam sarasvatī svapasah sadantu .

III.4.8 (Viśvāmitra): ā bhāratī bhāratībhih sujoṣā iḷā devair manuṣyebhir agnih

sarasvatī sarasvatebhir arvāk tisro devīr barhir edam sadantu.

VII.2.8 (Vasiṣṭha): ā bhāratī bhāratībhih sujoṣā iḷā devair manuṣyebhir agnih

sarasvatī sarasvatebhir arvāk tisro devīr barhir edam sadantu.

I.188.8 (Agastya)bhāratī-iḷe sarasvatī yā vah sarvā upabrave

tā naś codayata śrīye.

B. Bhāratī-Sarasvatī-Iḷā:

IX.5.8 (Kaśyapa)bhāratī pavamānasya sarasvatī -iḷā  mahī

imam no yajñam ā gaman tisro devīh supeṣasah.

C. Sarasvatī-Iḷā-Bhāratī:

II.3.8 (Gṛtsamada=Kevala Bhṛgu)sarasvatī sādhayantī dhiyam na iḷā devī bhāratī viśvatūrtih

tisro devīh svadhayā barhir edam achidram pāntu śaraṇam niṣadya.

D. Iḷā-Sarasvatī:

V.5.8 (Atri)iḷā sarasvatī mahī tisro devīr mayobhuvah

barhih sīdantvasridhah.

I.13.9 (Kaṇva=Kevala-Aṅgiras)iḷā sarasvatī mahī tisro devīr mayobhuvah

barhih sīdantvasridhah.

E. Iḷā:

X.70.8 (Bharata): tisro devīr barhir idam variyā ā sīdata cakṛmā vah syonam

manusvad yajñam sudhitā havīmṣi iḷā devī ghṛtapadī juṣanta.

So clearly, Achar is not being truthful in saying that I have given wrong data.

The fact that the verses referring to the Three Goddesses are chronological indicators of the period of origin of the family to which the respective āprīsūktas belong is conclusively proved by an examination of the āprīsūktas of the families known to have originated around the same time. There are two such pairs of families: the Viśvāmitas and Vasiṣṭhas (both originating in the period of Sudās), and the Atris and Kaṇvas (both originating in the New Period and having common vocabularies and even many common patron kings).

Incredibly the Viśvāmitras and Vasiṣthas have not only the same order of naming the Three Goddesses, but share exactly the same verse (check above)! The two families are not known to be even friendly towards each other!

And the Atris and Kaṇvas are not only the only two priestly families to omit Bhāratī and name the other two Goddesses, but they also share exactly the same verse (again, see above)!

Clearly the names and order of naming of the Three Goddesses is based on the period of origin of the family.

So what is Achar's objection?

Firstly, he protests that this is not the traditional classification. But then it was not claimed by me to be any kind of "traditional classification" of the āprīsūktas at all: it is part of my historical analysis which shows how the verses naming the Three Goddesses indicate the period in which the family originated.

Then, he gives long and irrelevant descriptions of the different ritual "oblations" in the āprīsūktas, and presents what he claims are the "traditional classifications" based on other verses.

Thus:

1. He tells us that the Gṛtsamadas, Atris, Vasiṣṭhas and Bharatas make the second oblation to Narāśaṁsa. The Agastyas, Viśvāmitras, Kaśyapas and Bhṛgus make the second oblation to Tanūnapāt. And the Aṅgirases and Kaṇvas make the second oblation to both Narāśaṁsa and Tanūnapāt. This, he tells us is the three-fold "traditional classification": narāśaṃsavantītanūnapātvantī, and ubhayavantī.

2. He provides another classification: he tells us that the Three Goddesses verse of the Kaṇvas, Agastyas and Atris is in the gāyatrī meter. The Three Goddesses verse of the Aṅgirases and Kaśyapas is in the anuṣṭup meter. And the Three Goddesses verse of the Gṛtsamadas, Viśvāmitras, Vasiṣṭhas and Bharatas is in the triṣṭup meter.

3. For good measure, he gives one more two-fold classification which "has not received attention": the Angirases and Agastyas do not refer to the word "tisrodevī" at all, while all the other eight āprīsūktas do.

Now let us get down to some common-sense talk: there is such a thing as statistical data which is important because it shows something, as opposed to pointless "statistical data" for the sake of statistical data. I could pick up a printed copy of a novel, say "Gone With the Wind", and prepare "statistical charts" as follows: first a list of all the page-numbers of the pages which mention the name "Scarlett", then of all the pages which mention the name "Rhett", then of all the pages which mention the name "Ashley", then of all the pages which mention the name "Melanie". Then I could proceed to pages which mention any two of these names, then any three, then all four. Having produced all this significant "statistical data", would this qualify me for anything and would the lists be of any use for anything?

Achar refuses to accept the logical implications of my "classification" of the āprīsūktas, in spite of the fact that this "classification" actually shows something: it shows that the order of the names of the Three Goddesses fits in with the period (Old, Middle, New) in which the concerned family originated.

Then he proceeds to give alternate "classifications" which are nothing but pointless statistical data:

If the Aṅgirases and Agastyas alone omit the word "tisrodevī" while all the other eight families use it, what does it show about what distinguishes these two families from the other eight? Achar does not bother to tell us.

If the Kaṇvas, Agastyas and Atris use the gāyatrī meter, the Aṅgirases and Kaśyapas use the anuṣṭup meter, and the Gṛtsamadas, Viśvāmitras, Vasiṣṭhas and Bharatas use the triṣṭup meter, does it fit in with any significant other data which distinguishes these three groups of families from each other? Again, Achar does not bother to tell us.

What are the implications of the threefold "traditional classification" which divides the ten āprīsūktas into narāśaṃsavantītanūnapātvantī, and ubhayavantī? Is this threefold classification of any use in historical or chronological study? Again, Achar does not bother to tell us.

Clearly, all these so-called "classifications" have no meaning in any historical analysis, whatever their ritual worth if any may be. Citing them is nothing but an attempt to trivialize the discussion.

Footnote: Incidentally, Achar also writes: "We will now consider the arguments for the chronology based on the āprīsūkta-s only….. the following hypothesis is advanced about the āprīsūkta-s in explaining the chronology of ṛgveda…..a model is arrived at  wherein mercenary motives are attributed to the ṛṣi families and it is asserted that some families were militarily associated with the bharata-s, some were not, and some were 'aloof' from the main stream of ṛgveda and this leads to the identification of 'puru's as the people of ṛgveda."  

I have nowhere based my arguments for the chronology of the Rigveda on the āprīsūktas: the massive evidence for the chronology is given by me in detail in many of my books and articles, and I will not repeat it here, and the āprīsūktas do not constitute part of this evidence. After the evidence is fully established on other grounds, I only point out that the order of naming of the Three Goddesses in the āprīsūktas also fits in with this chronology.

And it is not I who am "asserting" that "some families were militarily associated with the bharata-s": those families themselves assert it in their hymns. The hymns were composed by human beings and not dictated by divine forces.

IV. Other minor points

Finally, I will examine and comment on two other minor points made by Achar. Some things are so pointless and utterly irrelevant, at least as far as this discussion on the chronology and history of the Rigveda are concerned, that I will not deal with them here. As for example the long expositions on yajñas and the different types of yajñas. 

A. The Soma Yajña: First, a point which is very minor: but in Achar's eyes it is the most central feature of the Rigveda, and in my eyes (and on the evidence of the data) it has zero value in the matter.

Achar writes: "There is a strong correlation between the textual organization of ṛgvedasaṃhitā and somayajña and has been treated in our paper referred to in a footnote earlier. A brief summary of this is given in the appendix. In agniṣṭoma, the number of stotriya ṛca-s in the beginning iṣṭi (prāyaṇīya) is the same as that in the concluding iṣṭi, (udayanīya), which is 190. Together with a +1 for the yajamana, the number of sūkta-s in maṇḍala I (corresponding to prāyaṇīya iṣṭi) is the same as the the number of sūkta-s in maṇḍala X(corresponding to udayanīya iṣṭi), both being 191. Because of this ṛgveda saṃhitā has a structure similar to the śākala serpent just like the agniṣṭoma. It is a maṇḍala, with no beginning or end. This is what is meant by 'anantā hi vai vedāḥ'. This significance is completely lost when we use the terminology 'Book 1', 'Book 10' etc."

The "paper referred to in a footnote earlier" referred to by Achar above is a paper entitled "Soma yajña and the structure of ṛgveda" written by Achar and published in Prācī Prajñā, Vol. IV., 2017. In this paper (which I had read in detail at the time), Achar claims that the soma yajña is the very basis of the organization of the entire text of the Rigveda.

In spite of my resolve to maintain the same courtesy that Achar shows in his article, I must (even while profusely apologizing for being compelled to say so) state that the above article is one of the most vague, senseless and meaningless articles I have ever read on the subject of the Rigveda. I totally failed to see even the slightest bit of evidence in the article to prove his claim that the entire textual organization of the whole Rigveda is correlated to the somayajña, and therefore I had decided to respectfully refrain from making any comments on the article at the time.

Achar on the one hand tells us "In order to perform, the somayajña the entire ṛgveda saṃhitā of more than 10500 mantra-s must have been available", and then―instead of understanding that this shows that the particular "somayajña" he is referring to thereby automatically stands out as definitely very much post-Rigvedic―Achar actually seems to think, by some twisted anti-logic, that this fact shows that this "somayajña" is in fact the basis on which the Rigveda was organized. This shows the kind of logic involved in his reasoning.

I will therefore not discuss that theory of Achar's here. But I will state that I am willing to discuss the issue in detail with anyone (Achar himself or anyone else suggested by him) who can explain to me in terms simple enough for me to understand:

a) how that article of his shows or proves that the entire textual organization of the whole Rigveda is correlated to the somayajña, and

b) how, in any way, it invalidates any part of my analysis of the chronology and the historical and geographical contents of the Rigveda.

Till then, I must request that any further comments by me on his above theory must be allowed to remain pending.

However, I cannot refrain from pointing out here the utter incomprehensibility of a Hindu scholar, who is supposed to be opposed to the AIT, promoting so obsessively (against all the evidence) the theory that the religion and culture of the Rigveda came from Central Asia and the northwestern parts of India adjacent to it.   

Because, like it or not, the Rigveda itself makes it clear that the Soma plant (which is actually ephedra) is native to the extreme northwest: to the areas of the rivers Suṣomā and Ārjīkīyā (Sohan and Haro),  and Swat, and areas beyond. The Soma plant was a foreign import in the Old Rigveda, and the Soma areas (and the Soma maṇḍala) make their appearance only in the very late New Rigveda. If the fundamental organization of the entire text of the Rigveda and of the Vedic religion is claimed to be based on a plant of Central Asia, then why should this not be taken as suggesting that Central Asia was indeed the earlier home of the "Vedic Aryans"?

B. Faith versus Facts, Data, Evidence and Logic: I know many people will not like what I am going to say here. But I am tired of pussyfooting around to avoid alienating people or "hurting their religious sentiments". So let me put it bluntly here. If people don't like the truth, then they might as well not like me also for speaking the truth.

Discussion of historical aspects of the Rigveda (as opposed to spiritual, mystical, religious, ritualistic and "faith"-related aspects of the Rigveda) cannot be based on fondly held religious beliefs. When people fall back on such arguments or statements, it is pointless to continue any kind of "discussion".

Here are a few examples of such statements or arguments in Achar's article, based on "faith" or fondly held religious beliefs, rather than on facts, data, evidence and logic:

"the Vedas were compiled by Vedavyasa  at one time before the beginning of Kaliyuga, generally taken to be about 3100 BCE".

"Each ṛk, (translated as 'verse') is a mantra and not ordinary poetry".

"The mantra is revealed to a human sage, a ṛṣi, in or during a state of deep concentration, tapas, the ṛṣi then gives a formal expression to it. The ṛṣi is referred to as mantradṛṣṭā (one who envisioned the mantra). A ṛk is thus characterized by a ṛṣi, who gives a formal expression to the revelation".

"any study of ṛgveda saṃhitā without reference to yajña, must be considered incomplete".

"ṛṣi in ṛgveda is a person to whom at least one ṛk mantra is revealed. The ṛṣi literally hears the mantra by supra physical methods".

"One becomes a ṛṣi by performing intense tapas and by the grace of Cosmic Powers (devatas)".

"Agni is said to create a ṛṣi".

"The Vedas are revered as the source of all knowledge and were revealed to the ṛṣi-s".

"according to Nirukta, one who is not a ṛṣi, or one who does not perform tapas, he cannot 'see' the mantra".

"ṛca-s exist in supreme ether, imperishable and immutable, in which all the gods are seated. One who knows not that, what shall he do with the ṛk?" [translation of RVI.164.39].

"ṛṣi is the one who is beyond the mundane because of his knowledge".

"ṛgveda saṃhitā has a structure similar to the śākala serpent just like the agniṣṭoma. It is a maṇḍala, with no beginning or end. This is what is meant by 'anantā hi vai vedāḥ'. This significance is completely lost when we use the terminology 'Book 1', 'Book 10' etc".

"Somayajña has been performed since the times of Manu, as recorded in the ṛgveda saṃhitā itself.  Thus there is no 'soma-cult' separate from 'fire-cult' which was brought later to the 'vedic aryans'".

"As Vaivasvata Manu is regarded as the founder of ārya-Dharma, his descendants are followers of ārya-Dharma".

"Manu offered the first oblations in the yajña….Since yajña is traced to Manu and essentially the creation, there was no time when yajña was not there and hence the concept 'pre-Vedic' does not arise"

As I wrote earlier above, discourse of this kind would be valid in the field of keertans and religious discourses, but is not valid in the field of serious historical research based on data, facts, logic and evidence. It is not conducive to an objective study of the evidence. We must learn to distinguish between our religious traditions and heritage, and the facts of history. Both have an important place, but separately.

In the case of Rigvedic history, let me make it very, very clear, the Rigveda is the only primary source. Firstly because this source pertains directly (with contemporary data) to the Rigvedic religion and culture, and secondly the hymns of the Rigveda have been preserved for millenniums in the identical form in which they were originally composed, without the change of a word or a syllable. Other texts, certainly the Epics and Puranas and all other later texts, have been finalized in the post-Ashokan period―they often contain countless changes, interpolated references and new ideas, even references to Greeks and Romans, and to the Cholas, Cheras and Pandyas of the South―and cannot be blindly accepted except where they confirm and elaborate the evidence in the Rigveda.

In fact, even the evidence of later Vedic texts―and even sometimes from the latest parts of the Rigveda itself―cannot be accepted when they contradict the data in the older parts of the Rigveda: the chronological gap was so large that it resulted in ambiguities. As Witzel, for example, points out: "It is interesting to note that later texts show confusion about the participants in the battle, notably JB 3.245 which speaks of Kṣatra Prātardana and his purohita Bharadvāja instead of his descendant Sudās and his purohita Vasiṣṭha". These "later textsinclude the other Samhitas: "Note the shifting of the tradition already in the early YV Samhitas: MS 3.40.6, JB. 3.244, PB 15.3.7 have substituted other names for Sudās and Vasiṣṭha" "even these relatively early texts manage to garble the evidence. Thus the JB (3.245: §205) calls Sudās Kṣatra, while KS 21.10: 50.1 has Pratardana and MS 37.7 Pratardana Daivodāsī….In light of these problems one could hardly expect the later, heavily inflated, Epic and Puranic traditions to be of help. Clearly Ṛgvedic history will have to be reconstructed primarily from the Ṛgveda itself" (WITZEL 1995b:335-340).

Likewise we have a late hymn in the Rigveda, X.70, composed by a Bharata composer, attributed in the indices of the Rigveda itself to his ancient ancestor Sudās Paijavana (and likewise the other late hymn, X.134, referred to by Achar, attributed to the far ancestral Mandhātā by a descendant who had migrated to the west and become a part of the Vedic culture―as I have shown in my blog article "Dravidian Connections With the Harappan Civilization and the Rigveda", some of the hymns in the Rigveda in the New Rigvedic Period=Mature Harappan Period, include those by an immigrant from the Kerala area, Irimbiṭhi, and by immigrant descendants of the great Dravidian-speaking muni, Agastya of the Tamil area).

Therefore, I suggest that things written in later texts, and ideas and impressions contained in later texts, should not be cited in attempts to invalidate the original historical data in the Rigveda.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

DAS 1921Rig-Vedic India. Das, Abinas Chandra. University of Calcutta, 1921.

WITZEL 1995b: Rgvedic History: Poets, Chieftains and Politics. Witzel, Michael. pp. 307-352 in "The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia", ed. by George Erdosy. Walter de Gruyter. Berlin.


The Epoch of Birth of Jesus and the Sheet Anchors of Western Chronology -- Vedaveer Arya (Dec. 25, 2020)

Itihāsa. Gāndhāri's curse & start of Kali Yuga 36 years after Mahābhārata War -- Jayasree Saranathan

$
0
0

Jayasree Saranathan presents astrological arguments validating the beginning of Kaliyuga in 3102 BCE and hence, the MBh war 36 years before this date, consistent with Gāndhāri's curse mentioned in the MBh. text in reference to the exit of Sri Kr̥ṣṇa. 

Kudos to Dr. Smt. Jayasree Saranathan.

This date of 3102 in a hallowed Hindu tradition for over thousand-three-hundred years from ca. 600 CE recorded in 436 inscriptions, as detailed in Kaliyuga-Inscriptional Evidence by Dr. ML Raja

Āryabhaṭīya emphatically records the beginning of Kaliyuga at 3102 BCE.

Āryabhaṭīya

10. When three yugapādas and sixty times sixty years had elapsed (from the beginning of the yuga) then twenty-three years of my life had passed.

“If Āryabhaṭa began the Kaliyuga at 3102 BCE as later astronomers did, and if his fourth yugapāda began with the beginning of the Kaliyuga, we arrive at the date 499 CE. It is natural to take this as the date of composition of the treatise. “ (The Āryabhaṭīya of Āryabhaṭa—an Ancient Indian work on Mathematics and Astronomy, tr. By Walter Eugene Clark, Univ. of Chicago Press, Illinois, 1930 (pp.54-55)

Source: https://archive.org/stream/The_Aryabhatiya_of_Aryabhata_Clark_1930#page/n3/mode/2up

Any date of MBh war arrived at by astronomers from the textual references in MBh text should be consistent with this hallowed tradition.

Kalyan

My photo
India
Sanatana Dharmi.

Friday, December 25, 2020

Validating the Traditional date of Mahabharata War: Determining the date of Kali Yuga (Part 1)

On this auspicious day of Vaikuntha Ekadasi when Vishnu, the Atman, as the Sun in his chariot in Margashira, instructs the self, in the nature of the Moon, having taken refuge at His feet, let Jayam spring up from this upavāsa.

nārāyaṇaṃ namaskṛtya naraṃ caiva narottamam
      devīṃ sarasvatīṃ caiva tato jayam udīrayet

The date of Mahabharata War is as contentious as the war itself !

The date, already embedded within the Itihāsa, is lost from sight due to various causes, the important one being our lack of knowledge of the features of the calendar system in vogue ever since Krishna left his mortal coils. The Kali Maha Yuga calendar started since then. Thirty five years before that, the Mahabharata war was fought. This offers the best hint to arrive at the year of the war which can be cross-checked with the astronomy references found in the text.

Here comes the next issue of locating the astronomy positions precisely. We are not able to locate the astronomy positions concurring with the date derived from the Kali date and we fail to understand the cause for it. The only external element being the simulator in use, we fail to probe that external element but instead start finding fault with the verses or manipulate the verses of Mahabharata.

These two issues are to be resolved– Kali Yuga date and the precise astronomy positions - before I begin decoding the verses to validate the Traditional date of the war.  

Kali Yuga date forms the basis for deriving the date of Mahabharata war.

Very often we come across references to Kali Yuga in Mahabharata – mostly used in the context of dharma (or adharma) prevailing then. When adharmic fighting technique was used by Bhima to slay Duryodhana, Krishna himself said, “prāptaṃ kaliyugaṃ viddhi”[1]

{Prāptā = attained to, reached to.

Viddhi = the act of piercing, perforating (second person singular present imperative class 2 parasmaipada √vid)}

If this is construed as referring to the start of Kali Maha Yuga, then we must justify another verse, pertaining to the entry of Kali in Parikshit’s time. Parikshit needs no external citation, for, his name was mentioned by Krishna himself after Aswattama shot his astra to destroy the fetus growing in the womb of Uttarā, the wife of Abhimanyu, his nephew. Krishna said that the fetus would be saved and the son born would be known as Parikshit and would rule for sixty years.[2]

Parikshit came to the throne after the Pandavas relinquished the throne which happened soon after Krishna left the world. On the day of exit of Krishna, Kali Maha Yuga started, says the same author Vyasa in Srimad Bhagavatam at two places.[3]

We have two entries of Kali by now – one at the time of Bhima killing Duryodhana and another after Krishna left this world. And for the third time we see the entry of Kali “kaliṁ praviṣṭaṁ” after Parikshit started ruling the country.[4] However Parikshit succeeded in restraining Kali from entering his country but remain in five designated places.[5] So who is this Kali who entered here?

We have to gauge the circumstances and the meaning together. At the time of the war and at Parikshit’s time the Kali’s entry was about Adharma setting in. Whenever Adharma exceeded Dharma, it was said that Kali had entered. Malyavan, the maternal grandfather of Ravana warned Ravana that, “when adharma swallows dharma, it stimulates Kali yuga” and this dialogue took place in Treta Yuga![6] Similarly we come across a reference to the entry of Kali in Treta Yuga when the sage Chyavana, covered inside an anthill due to his continuous penance, started watching the young girl Sukanya without her knowledge. This was told by the sage Lomasa in Dwapara Yuga in Mahabharata![7]

So Kali could enter Treta Yuga and Dwapara Yuga but remain muted in Kali Yuga when it had to be active. This shows that we need to do contextual analysis of the Kali verses in Mahabharata to understand whether it is about an increase in Adharma or a reference to the Time scale.

In the Time scale, there are sub divisions and units to measure time. The solar year is the basic unit and 4,32,000 solar years make the duration of this Kali Yuga. The Kali Yuga duration in turn becomes the basic unit of the Catur Maha Yuga. Two times the Kali Yuga duration is Dwapara Yuga; three times the duration is Treta Yuga; four times the duration is Krita Yuga. Thus from Krita to Kali, the time period can be expressed as 4:3:2:1 in which 1 part is equal to 4,32,000 years which is the duration of Kali Yuga. Basically all the Yugas are measured in solar years, or in other words, by the celestial entity. This in turn suggests that only celestial entities mark the beginning and the end date of the Yugas. We do come across such reference, only when we search the relevant texts- the relevant texts being the Jyothisha Siddhantas.

 Gruha sāmānyam Yugam” says Aryabhatiya, a Tantra Siddhanta[8] Here Catur Maha Yuga is identified in terms of planets sharing commonality or coming together. Traditionally it is being held that all the planets except one of the nodes congregated near zero degree Aries when Kali Yuga began. Most scholars are skeptical about this feature that it is fictitious and not supported by any textual reference. The major reason is that they are not able to get this congregation at the traditional date of Kali Yuga! 

It is indeed true that we are not able to get a direct citation from any text. However a combined reading of Aryabhatiya and Surya Siddhanta offers an indirect reference to the grouping of planets at the beginning of Aries.

Aryabhatiya does refer to the congregation of all the planets except Rahu at the beginning of Aries when Krita Yuga started on a Wednesday.[9] Can this be taken to mean that this congregation repeats at the beginning Kali Yuga, having the basic unit of time of the Catur Maha Yuga (4,32,000)? In the absence of any explicit citation in support of this we have to analyze the existing verses. Going by the Aryabhatiya verse quoted above, the congregation must repeat at the beginning of every Krita Yuga that starts after 10 rounds of the duration of Kali Yuga (4+3+2+1).[10]

Here we get to see a verse from Surya Siddhanta saying that at the END of Krita Yuga the mean places of the all the planets except the nodes coincide with each other at the first point of stellar Aries.[11] This means that the planets congregate at Aries at the beginning of Treta Yuga, after crossing 4 parts of Krita Yuga each having the duration of 4,32,000 years. If it is assumed that this congregation occurs for the second time after the previous one happening at the beginning of Krita Yuga, it upsets the very idea of such a congregation, for the reason, the subsequent congregation can occur at the middle of Dvapara Yuga (3 parts of Treta + 1 part of Dvapara) and further next, at the middle of Krita Yuga (remaining 1 part of Dvapara + 1 part of Kali Yuga + 2 parts of Krita Yuga). This cannot be true going by the mandatory requirement of the congregation at the beginning of Krita Yuga.

This leaves us with only two probable choices for the congregation of planets, either at the beginning of every 4,32,000 years or at the beginning of double that time. If the second choice is taken, there won’t be a congregation at the beginning of Kali Yuga. Kali Yuga being the basic unit of the Yuga, there must be some form of identification to mark its beginning. Except planetary movements no other markers are available or cited in any text. Therefore the second choice is ruled out. This leaves us with the first choice which is logically tenable in that being the basic unit of the Catur Yuga. In other words, all the planets come together at the beginning of Aries once in 4,32,000 years. By implication this means that any specific planetary configuration cannot occur more than once within the period of 4,32,000 years.

Vyasa on noticing the gathering of all planets at the beginning of Aries sensed the arrival of the new Yuga. When he came to know about the exit of Krishna, that was a clinching evidence of the arrival of Kali Yuga. Any derivation of the sky map for the date of Kali Yuga must have all the planets (with the exception of Rahu as stated in Aryabhatiya) close to zero degree of Aries.

That date can be derived from the simulator – not in tropical simulator but in astrology simulators using the ayanamsa as zero. [12] (Figure 1)

Fig 1: The Date of Kali Yuga with the conjunction of all the planets at zero degree Aries.

Eight planets except Rahu congregated at zero degree Aries with most of them at the last one or two degrees of Pisces. The date was 22nd January of 3101 BCE in the Gregorian calendar (including the 0 year). This corresponds to the year Pramathi, Amawasya in Caitra when the sun and the moon joined at the beginning of Aries on a Thursday. Traditionally these are the exact Pancanga features at the time of the beginning of Kali Yuga. A new Epoch was born by which the world became different after that.

One may recall a near similar congregation on 26th December 2019, when six planets congregated at the sign, Sagittarius. (Figure 2)  It was followed by a complete change in the life of the people around the world with the advent of the Covid-19 virus.

Fig 2: Six planets congregated at Sagittarius before the global outbreak of Covid 19.

This is to show that this kind of large scale changes are noticed when many planets congregate at a strategic corner accompanied with a solar eclipse. We are finding only this kind of description in Mahabharata, and not the language of the astronomers. All the astronomy references of Mahabharata were spelt by associating with some calamity or fear of calamity. When a result is associated with planetary features, it is no longer about astronomy; it enters the domain of astrology.

When we compare the two figures we will see a difference in the ayanamsa. Figure 1 was simulated for zero ayanamsa as deduced from Surya Siddhanta concept of the equinoxes. Figure 2 is simulated to the current ayanamsa (based on current location of equinox). Suppose the ayanamsa is changed for Figure 2, the planetary features would not be the same. This addresses the 2nd issue raised earlier on getting the exact planetary positions.

Only when we simulate for zero ayanamsa we get the exact planetary positions. Figure 1 showing the Kali Yuga combination is a solid proof for this. Since a new Yuga starts at the conjunction at zero degree Aries with the tropical equinox coinciding with the sidereal equinox, we have to check the astronomy features of Mahabharata only for the Surya Siddhanta ayanamsa.

Inscriptional evidence for Kali Yuga date

Further corroboration comes from the inscription of Janamejaya, the son of Pariskhit, quoted by Kota Venkatachela Paakayaaji in his book[13] from Indian Antiquary P.P. 383 334.The inscription was issued in the 29th regnal year of the king Janamejaya to Lord Sitaram temple on the banks of Tungabhadra River, in today’s Hampi. The Pancanga features were Plavanga year, Amawasya, Monday and Sahasya month referring to Pushya month. Only the star of the day is not given.  These four out of five features of the Panchanga were checked in astrology software.[14] The horoscopy chart generated for these details show that the month was Tapasya (Phalguna). The year exactly matching with the count from the Kali Yuga year (Pramathi), and other Pancanga features concurring exactly, it is deduced that Tapasya was mistakenly written as Sahasya. (Figure 3)

              Fig 3: The date of Janamejaya inscription

In 89 years after the start of Kali Yuga, the ayanamsa had moved by a degree.

Another inscription indicating the Kali date is from Aihole issued in the name of Pulikesin II, but there is a controversy regarding the event mentioned there. The year matches with 3101 BCE, but the event referred to is ‘Bhāratādāhāvāditah’ – interpreted as referring to the time of the war. This is incongruous since the date concurs with that of the Traditional Kali Yuga date and validated by the planetary and Pancanga features. There is either a mistake in the letters or in our understanding of the word.

This expression is much like ‘Bhāratāt Purvam’ used by Aryabhata to indicate the beginning of Kali Yuga, that was interpreted by ancient commentators as referring to Bhāratā (Pandavas) relinquishing the throne.[15] The Bhāratā renounced everything and cast off their sacred fires too.[16] Bhāratā dāha avādita could refer to the sacrifice of the Bharata clan after coming to know of Krishna’s demise (when Kali Yuga started). The time of Pulikesin II coming within 150 years of Aryabhata, this kind of reference to the start of Kali Yuga seems to be widespread in use. The other way of looking at it is that a powerful and prosperous king like Pulikesin II could have found it difficult to ascribe to the view that Kali was running in his country, much like Parikshit who detested the presence of Kali. Perhaps this made him pick out the alternate marker for the Yuga beginning, the sacrifice of the Bhāratā (Pandavas) on coming to know of Krishna’s exit.

Deriving the date of Mahabharata War from Kali Yuga. 

Once having established the date of Kali Yuga at 3101 BCE, it is not difficult to derive the date of Mahabharata War. There was a gap of 35 years between the war and the exit of Krishna.

On seeing the death of her children and all relatives in the war Gandhari vented out her frustration at Krishna that he (Krishna) after causing the slaughter of his kinsmen would perish in the wilderness on the 36th year.[17] On the 36th year a huge carnage did take place wiping out the Krishna-clan.

When the 36th year (after the war) arrived Yudhishthira noticed many unusual omens, says the first chapter of Mausala Parva.[18] In the next chapter it is said that a great calamity overtook the Vrishnis on the 36th year. [19] In the third chapter, Krishna on seeing the inauspicious omens understood that the thirty sixth year had arrived when Gandhari’s curse given out of grief of losing her children was about to happen.[20]

What is special about the number 36?

The number 36 has a special relevance for the welfare of one’s progeny. A 36-year sacrifice (sattra) was in vogue during Mahabharata times. It is known from Pancavimsa Brahmana that the descendants of Sakti had conducted 36 year sattra.[21] By the mention of Gauriviti as one who did the satttra[22] , Sakti is identified as the father of Parasara whose son was Vyasa.. It is further said in the Brahmana text that the one who performs this sattra gets rulership and also ten strong sons.[23] Without doubt this sattra must have been popular with the Kauravas, the Pandavas and the Vrishinis. 

As biological descendants of Vyasa, the Kuru kings could have performed the sattra. Perhaps the Kauravas could not complete the 36 year long sattra[24] or else they could have won the war, retained rulership and children. It is doubtful the Pandavas had completed the sattra in view of the exile they had to undertake. Only the Vrishinis had survived the war and were expected to prosper more in the years after the war. The Vrishnis headed by Krishna were very clever in having chosen to support both the warring sides. Whichever side wins the war, the Vrishnis would bring home the advantages of the winner.

Gandhari’s anger naturally turned towards Krishna who she accused as not having worked enough to avert the slaughter of the Kuru-s. The Kauravas lost their progeny, so did the Pandavas by the time the war ended, but only the Vrishnis survived! The Vrishnis were already known for wealth creation and didn’t mind relocating to newer terrains (Dvaraka) to safeguard their wealth, works and resources.[25] Their clan continued to be intact after the war, unlike the Kuru clan which suffered heavy losses. Gandhari’s anger was such that the new 36 year sattra that was likely to be initiated by the Vrishnis after the war was over should collapse at the penultimate hour, thereby wiping out their progeny and rulership. It is not known if the sattra was done by the Vrishnis, but their end came in the 36th year just before the Sun entered Aries with all the planets gathered around it.

The year started in Uttarayana before that time. The 36th year happening to be Pramathi, we have to count backwards by 35 years. That leads us to the year Krodhi! That was the year of the Mahabharata War. The year corresponds to 3136 BCE in the Gregorian date. Thus we have two dates established without doubt of which the date of Kali Yuga continues to form the basis of time in all Vedic and traditional activities.

The date of Kali Yuga:  22nd January 3101 BCE, Year Pramathi, Caitra, Amawasya, Aswini, Thursday with all the planets except Rahu near the beginning of Aries when the tropical vernal equinox coincided with the beginning of sidereal Aries.  

The date of the Mahabharata War: 3136 BCE corresponding to the year Krodhi. Further details will be established in the course of this series.

In any research on the date of Mahabharata war, the deduced planetary positions must concur with the year Krodhi and with the corresponding Pancanga details such as tithi, star, karana and month - whichever among them was given in the text of Mahabharata for various events around the time of war. A systematic analysis of such inputs did validate the date of Mahabharata war that the reader can find in the upcoming posts.


[1] Mahabharata: 9-59-21

[2] Mahabharata: 10-16-14

[3] Srimad Bhagavatam: 1-15- 36; 12-2-33

[4] Srimad Bhagavatam: 1-16-10

[5] Srimad Bhagavatam: 1-17

[6] Valmiki Ramayana: 6-35-14

[7] Mahabharata: 3-121

[8] Aryabhatiya: 3-8

[9] Aryabhatiya: 1-3,4

[10] Kali yuga duration of 4,32,000 years is the basic unit in Maha Yuga. Two times the Kali years = Dwapara Yuga. Three times the Kali years = Treta Yuga. Four times of the Kali years = Krita Yuga. So the ratio is 4:3:2:1 from Krita to Kali. In other words Krita = 10 times of Kali years.

[11] Surya Siddhanta: 1-57

[12] Zero ayanamsa refers to the conjunction of the sidereal and tropical equinox at the beginning of Aswini / Aries. As time goes the tropical equinox shifts in the backdrop of the stars giving rise to a gap between the tropical equinox and zero degree Aries position. This gap is known as ayanamsa.

[13]“Chronology of Ancient Hindu History” Part 1, by Pandit Kota Venkatachela Paakayaaji (1957) Page 13-17

[14]The horoscopy illustrations are generated from Jagannatha Hora software, version 7.4

[15] Aryabhatiya: 1-5

[16] Mahabharata: 17-1-20

[17] Mahabharata: 11-25-41

[18] Mahabharata: 16-1-1

[19] Mahabharata: 16-2-2

[20] Mahabharata: 16 -3 –verses 18 & 19

[21] Pancavimsa Brahmana: 25-7-1

[22] Ibid. 25-7-2

[23] Ibid. 25-7-3 & 4

[24] The Sattra is of 4 parts, with nine nine-versed years, nine fifteen versed years, nine seventeen versed years and nine twenty one versed years. (Pancavimsa Brahmana: 25-7-1)

[25] Mahabharata: 2-13

Identifying the calendar of the Mahabharata period (Part 2: Mahabharata date)

Calendar is the basis for time computing. We have to first decipher the calendar used by the people of the Mahabharata period. Mahabharata does give a decipherable calendar that was in vogue at that time. Once we are able to decode it, many inputs on time mentioned here and there in Mahabharata do fall in place. The major evidence for the type of calendar is found in the version of Bhishma when he justified the completion of the exile period of the Pandavas.

The Pandavas were expected to complete 13 years in exile. But a few days before that period ended, their identity became known. The gap is only a few days and not more, is known from two verses, one by Karna and another by Draupadi.

The near completion of the exile period was conveyed by Karna, when on hearing the blare of the conch of Arjuna, as Vrihannala in the company of Uttara he stated that Vibhatsu (Arjuna) was engaged in the last eight and five years (13 years) in severe austerities to strike him in combat.[1] The number of days left can be gauged from the reply of Draupadi to Sudeshna, the queen of Virata when asked by her to leave the country upon the death of Kichaka. Draupadi pleaded to bear with her for just thirteen days after which she would leave. [2]  This implies that the exile period was going to get over in the next thirteen days.

Within this thirteen day period, emboldened by the absence of Kichaka, the Trigartas started attacking the Matsya country aided by the Kauravas. The Kauravas were pursued by Arjuna in the guise of Vrihannala whose identity was recognized by the Kauravas by the sound of his conch. Thinking that Arjuna was spotted by them before the end of the exile, they asked Bhishma for clarification.  Bhishma’s reply helps us to identify the calendar in vogue at that time.

Deciphering the extra days in exile spent by the Pandavas.

Bhishma said that there was an excess of 5 months and 12 days in the 13 years spent by Pandavas in exile.[3] This was calculated on the basis of the 5-Year Yuga system in which for every 2 and half solar years, one lunar month gets increased. To quote the exact words of Bhishma,

“The wheel of time revolves with its divisions, viz., with Kalas and Kasthas and Muhurtas and days and fortnights and months and constellations and planets and seasons and years. In consequence of their fractional excesses and the deviations of also of the heavenly bodies, there is an increase of two months in every five years. It seems to me that calculating this wise, there would be an excess of five months and twelve nights in thirteen years. Everything, therefore, that the sons of Pandu had promised, hath been exactly fulfilled by them. Knowing this to be certain, Vibhatsu hath made his appearance.” (Ganguli’s translation)[4]

From Vedanga Jyothisha it is known that this is about the 5-year Yuga system in which two lunar months increase (Adhika masa) every five years. In ten years 4 months increase and in the next 3 years, 1 month and some days increase.  Overall there will be an addition of 5 months and some days. The days are given as “dvādaśa ca kṣapāḥ” in which kṣapāḥ is variously interpreted while the number of days are known as twelve.[5]

When we apply the aphorisms found in Vedanga Jyothisha for the 5-year Yuga, we are able to decode Bhishma’s calculation. 

No of solar days in a year = 366[6]

In 5 years (Yuga) = 366 x 5 = 1830

In 13 years = 366 x 13 = 4758

No of lunar days in 5 years (Yuga) = 1830 + 62 = 1892

In 13 years = 4919 days (d), 6 muhurta (m).

The lunar days had far exceeded the solar days. Subtracting the solar days from the lunar days we get the excess days spent by the Pandavas in exile.

Lunar days – Solar days = (4919 d + 6 m) – 4758 d= 161 d + 6 m

Converted into months and muhurtas = (161 d + 6 m) / 30 = 5 months, 11 days, 6 muhurtas

This exactly matches with Bhishma’s version of extra 5 months and “dvādaśa ca kṣapāḥ”, referring to less than 12 days as per the above calculation. Among the many meanings of ‘Kshapa’, ‘night’ was suggested by some. With the calculation coming to more than 11 days but less than 12 days, by having only 6 Muhurtas on the 12th day, Bhishma meant the other meaning, i.e. “diminishing” for Kshapa. This establishes that the Pandavas spent an additional 5 months and less than 12 days in exile. Within the last 13 days (as per Draupadi’s reply to Sudeshna), Arjuna revealed his identity.

Bhishma’s calculation shows it was the 5- year Yuga in use at that time. The earliest reference to this Yuga appears in the 1st Mandala of the Rig Veda on the sage, Dirghatamas. It is stated that the sage grew old (or perished) in the 10th Yuga.[7] This is a reference to the 10th Yuga in his life that works out to the five year period between 45th to 50th years of his life. This sage lived before Ramayana period that is known from the existence of a country by name Anga, ruled by Romapada in Ramayana. Anga got its name from a person Anga who was fathered by Dirghatamas.[8] This is to show that this Yuga system was in vogue in Bhartavarsha from before the Ramayana times. Decipherment of the date of both the Itihasas must comply with the rules of this Yuga system.

Let us begin to do that decipherment to know the exact years within the exile period when the five Adhika months had occurred. The sequence must be known, because of the crucial derivation from Mahabharata that Bhishma, who seemed to be an authority on calculation of timefailed to judge the arrival of Uttarayana and was forced to wait for more than a month in what seems to be a case of Adhika masa! So our next step is to find out whether the extended stay was due to an Adhika masa at that time as a natural sequence or by other causes.


[5] Mahabharata: 4-47, verses 3-4  http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs04047.htm

[6] Y-VJ: 28 (“Vedanga Jyothisha by Lagadha” by T.S.Kuppanna Sastry)

[7] Rig Veda: 1- 158 – 6 “dīrghatamā māmateyo jujurvān daśame yughe”.

[8] Vishnu Purana: 4-18

Sunday, December 27, 2020

Deducing the beginning of the 5-year Yuga period in Mahabharata. (Part 3: Mahabharata date)

In the 5-year Yuga concept, the year began on the day of Uttarayana, or the day after the sun turned north. This date is not the exact date of the sun turning to north in all the years of the 5 year Yuga. This is deduced from Lagadha’s Vedanga Jyothisha giving the basic concepts of the 5-year Yuga. The basic concepts are,

(1) The first year started on the day of the conjunction of the sun and the moon. [In Lagadha’s time, this conjunction occurred on Magha Amawasya[1] which means the lunar Phalguna month started the next day, though the solar month continued to be Tapas (Aquarius)]

(2) This conjunction repeated on the 6th year, i.e. after 5 years. By this it is known that the exact date of the Sun turning towards the North was taken as the time of the 1st year. The day (the star) the moon joined this Sun marked the 1st day of the first year of the Yuga.

(3) In the next four years, the same conjunction is not possible on the same star or tithi due to the faster movement of the moon.  As a result the star-tithi positions were derived in such a way that they match once again in the 6th year, i.e. the 1st year of the next Yuga.

(4) Within the 5 year period, there are 60 solar months (12 x5) but 62 lunar months. The extra two lunar months are the Adhika Masa-s.

The repetition of the conjunction of the sun and the moon on the 6th year (the 1st year of the Yuga) implies that the sun was at its true position of the winter solstice (Uttarayana) only in the 1st year. In the other four years, the sun could not be at the true Uttarayana degree; nor was the conjunction of the sun and the moon possible in those four years at the true Uttarayana degree.

This revelation is important in deciphering the dates of the events of Mahabharata. Since Bhishma was said to have waited for the sun to turn northward, it is necessary to know in which year he left the world. If the expected Uttarayana day was in a year other than the 1st year, then the true position of the sun at Uttarayana (seen in astronomy simulators) would not yield the correct date of Uttarayana at that time.

In this backdrop two inputs from Vayu Purana must also be remembered. According to Vayu Purana no date has sanctity unless it is connected with the sun and the moon. In this context Vayu Purana refers to Mesha (Aries) and Tula (Libra) as equinox months but identifies the date of equinox only by the position of the sun and the moon in opposition in specific pada of the star. [2]

(This should be an eye-opener to those who are pushing the idea that the Tropical winter solstice on 22nd December must be treated as the Uttarayana day for the current times. Without being touched by the Sun and the moon the day has no sanctity. Makara Sankaranti, now treated as Uttarayana has certain such cosmic connections besides other features which are outside the purview of this series; hence not discussed here)

The second input from Vayu Purana relates to the names of the five years of the Yuga. The five years are named as Samvatsara, Parivatsara, Idvatsara, Anuvatsara and Vatsara.[3] The point to be noted here is that the names Samvatsara and Vatsara are commonly used to refer to the year. If in a context any of these two names appear we must take a re-look at the verse to judge whether this is used to refer to the 1st and the 5th year respectively.

Applying these concepts to Mahabharata, it is found that Bhishma’s version on the upcoming Uttarayana did not match with the first point on the conjunction of the sun and the moon. He expected Uttarayana to start on Shukla Ashtami in the month of Magha when the moon was in Rohini which could happen in any year other than the 1st year of the 5- year Yuga!

This takes us to the task of identifying the first year of the 5- year Yuga closer to Krodhi (the year of the war deduced in Part 1) when the sun and the moon were together in the month of Magha. On checking the combination in jhora astrology simulator for Surya Siddhanta ayanamsa of close to zero ayanamsa of the Mahabharata times, there are twin surprises in Krodhi!

(1) The Adhika masa occurred in Caitra in Krodhi.

(2) And in Krodhi, the Uttarayana started at the conjunction of the Sun and the moon in the star Uttarashadha, which means Krodhi was the 1st year of the 5 year Yuga at that time.

Let us first take up the Adhika Masa in Krodhi. Figure 1 shows the Adhika Caitra in Shobhana (Shobhakrit, the year preceding Krodhi). The previous month was Adhika Masa in the year Krodhi, but the simulator recognizes it with the previous year, i.e. Shobhana, as it is based on the current practice of change of the year with the arrival of Caitra. We should remember that Uttarayana marked the year beginning in the 5 year Yuga. As such, the year Krodhi started from Magha, a month before Caitra. This can be expected to be seen written as the year Shobhana in the simulator.

                         Figure 1: Adhika Masa in Caitra in the year Krodhi (3137 BCE)

The next month was Nija Caitra which the simulator recognizes in the year Krodhi. (Figure 2)

                                         Figure 2: Nija Caitra in the year Krodhi (3136 BCE)

When we trace the beginning of Uttarayana in Krodhi, the date turns out to be 24th October, 3137 BCE. Interestingly the day shows the conjunction of the sun and the moon at the exact beginning of Capricorn where the 2nd pada of Uttarashadha begins. This conjunction can happen only in the 1st year of the Yuga! (Figure 3)

                               Figure 3: Uttarayana of Krodhi - the first year of the Yuga

The 1st year of the 5-year Yuga in Mahabharata times started on the first day of the month of Magha (Shukla Pratipat) when the sun and the moon were together in Uttarashadha. The previous day of Amawasya in the month of Pushya was the day the conjunction started, signaling the beginning of Uttarayana. This matches exactly with the zero degree ayanamsa at that time. Only then the winter solstice could start at the junction of Sagittarius and Capricorn with the Sun just having entered Capricorn. The Pandavas returned in this year that happened to be the 1st year of the 5 year Yuga, i.e. Samvatsara year.  The war was fought in this year.

The major revelation from this is:

The equinox was forward moving during Mahabharata times. From Magha Shukla Pratipat in Mahabharata, the Uttarayana shifted forward to Magha Amawasya in Lagadha’s time. This proves that the idea of continuous ‘precession’ of the equinoxes is erroneous.

Constructing the Mahabharata calendar from the first year of the Yuga

The relationship between the tithi and the nakshatra of the Uttarayana day is a standard one in the 5 year Yuga, as known from Lagadha’s Vedanga Jyothisha. [4] There are 6 synodic months and 6 tithis in an ayana (1 Yuga = 62 synodic months = 10 ayanas). 

So every 7th tithi starting from the 1st ayana of the 1st year (that began in Uttarayana) would give the starting tithi of the subsequent ayana. Similarly every 19th star starting from the star of the first day of Uttarayana (1st ayana) in the 1st year would be the star of the first day of the subsequent ayana. 

Using this formula we will be able to construct the tithi- nakshatra of the first day of all the 10 ayanas in the 5 years of Mahabharata times. Let me first derive the 5-year Yuga that started on Uttarashadha of Magha in Krodhi. (Figure 4)

                               Figure 4: Mahabharata calendar in vogue during the year Krodhi

The Yuga, the 1st year and the Uttarayana of the first year started with the conjunction of the sun and the moon in Uttarashadha. It can be seen that the Uttarayana date did not start on the same day every year, though the sun turned northward in the same star. A researcher in Mahabharata must bear in mind this anomaly in the calendar in vogue at that time. No modern simulator can detect this anomaly, since this Yuga system is not incorporated in any simulator.  

The 1st year was Krodhi - the year when the Pandavas ended their exile and the war was fought. At the end of the war, Bhishma waited for the Uttarayana, for his exit from the earth. That was the 2nd year of the Yuga, called Vishvavasu.

As per the above table, the Uttarayana must have started on Shukla Trayodasi in Magha, in the 2nd year of the Yuga when Bhishma was waiting to leave. So Bhishma must have told that he was waiting for Magha Shukla Trayodasi to leave the earth as that was the day of Uttarayana originally. But Bhishma stated that the Uttarayana was going to start on Magha Shukla Ashtami!

Why did Bhishma, an expert in calculating Time, determine the Uttarayana time 4 tithis earlier than the normal course?

How did this discrepancy happen?



[1] Conjunction of the sun and the moon in Sravishtha (R-VJ: 5-6  and Y-VJ: 6-7)

[2] Vayu Purana: 1-50-195 to 198

[3] Vayu Purana: 1-50-183.

[4]Rig Jyothisha 8 &9, Yajur Jyothisha 9 & 10.

Discrepancy in the time of Uttarayana remembered as Ratha Saptami (Part 4: Mahabharata date)

The Uttarayana that Bhishma was waiting for, must have started in Shukla Trayodasi of Magha. 

But Bhishma says, “The lunar month of Magha has come. This is, again, the lighted fortnight and a fourth part of it ought by this according to my calculations be over”.[1] 

māgho 'yaṃ samanuprāpto māsaḥ puṇyo yudhiṣṭhira
     tribhāgaśeṣaḥ pakṣo 'yaṃ śuklo bhavitum arhati (13-153-28)

At the face of it, the verse refers to Magha month and three fourth of it. Three fourth of a lunar month is seven and a half tithi (after Saptami / on Ashtami) in Krishna Paksha (waning phase). However by saying further “pakṣo 'yaṃ śuklo bhavitum arhati”, Bhishma had referred to the 7 and a half tithis in Shukla Paksha of Magha (waxing Magha). Bhishma identified the month as ‘Punya Masa’ of Magha. Magha was Punya Masa because the Uttarayana started in that month. Bhishma had made it clear that Uttarayana started after the completion of Saptami in Shukla Paksha of Magha.

An additional verse from Gita Press edition says that Bhishma's exit happened on “Magha Shuddha Ashtami and when the Moon was near Rohini

Śukla pakśasya cāṣṭamyām māgha māsasya pārthiva

prajāpatye ca nakṣatre madhyam prāpte divākare[2]

The additional information is that the sun was at the middle of Rohini, the star of Prajapati. This means that the sunrise occurred when the star of the day was Rohini (transited by the moon) and half of the star was crossed by the moon by the time of sunrise. This is an essential condition to identify the day Bhishma left the world. 

Since Magha Shukla Ashtami offers a definite time limit, the general tendency of researchers is to deduct 58 days from this date to arrive at the first day of the war. It more or less comes to the last day of Kartika month - the month in which Krishna went on a peace mission. Within a fortnight of this mission, the war must have started according to them, which however throws up a lot of improbabilities. But none thought for a moment how and why Bhishma, an adept in calculating the movement of the sun and the moon, miserably failed to judge the arrival of Uttarayana, for which he had to wait for not just a week or a paksha (fortnight) but nearly two months!

Additionally we have now found a discrepancy in the normal sequence of the calendar dates from the 2nd year of the Yuga. How could Shukla Trayodasi slip back to Shukla Ashtami in the following year?

A big mystery is staring at us!!

With this realization, let us proceed step by step in a systematic way.

Now by having known that Bhishma referred to a changed tithi- star position of the Uttarayana, let me produce the changed calendar for Uttarayana of Vishvavasu when Bhishma shed his mortal body. (Figure 1) The Year names and the corresponding Gregorian years are added at extreme right.

                             Figure 1: The changed calendar since Mahabharata war

Important observations from Figure 1:

  • The first row shows the first two ayanas of the 1st year in natural sequence of the calendar until then.
  • The 2nd row shows the tithi – nakshatra of the Uttarayana time (of the 2nd year) that Bhishma was waiting for. It ought to have been Shukla Trayodasi in Magha, but it turned out to be Shukla Ashtami – 4 tithis behind.
  • The regular 7 tithi difference between one ayana and the next also got disturbed. From Shukla Saptami in the 2nd ayana, it became Shukla Ashtami in the 3rd ayana. This signals the loss of tithis happening after the 2nd ayana (dakshinayana of the 1st year - Krodhi) started. In other words, during the ayana when the war took place, something odd had happened disturbing Time. 

Interestingly the star of the day remained the same in the 2nd and in the subsequent years as it used to be in the original calendar. Only the tithi had changed.  So something went wrong cosmically to upset the Time denoted by the moon! There was a loss of four tithis as a result!

This implies that Time slipped backwards!

We cannot match the first day of the next Yuga with Krishna Ekadasi of Magha (Fig 1), for that means 19 more tithis (and 22 stars) to go, but then the sun would have moved 20 degrees ahead in Capricorn to be at Shravana and not at the exact Uttarayana degree of northward turning!

The sun at zero degree Capricorn in the first year of the next Yuga is the essential condition to be present. When that condition is fulfilled, the lunar month happened to be the previous month.

One should keep in mind that there was no change in the movement of the sun; the day it turned northward remained undisturbed. The 1st year of the next round of the Yuga would start at the location where the sun turned northward.  Figure 1 shows the sun at zero degree Capricorn, but the tithi was different. This means the tithi- lunar month had got disturbed.

So some unexpected cause had changed Time once forever and this change of time coming into use from the time of Magha Shukla Saptami was frozen into memory as Ratha Saptami!

Ratha Saptami, an evidence for the change of Time in Mahabharata

Ratha Saptami marking a change in the direction of the chariot of the Sun God, celebrated even today is proof of the importance attached to this particular day. The sudden change in time resulting in the re-adjustment of Uttarayana on Magha Shukla Saptami was preserved in memory for all times to come by infusing certain practices by way of oblations to the departed on this day. No Mahabharata researcher can afford to ignore the significance of this day waited upon by Bhishma to come out of the distress he was undergoing on the arrow bed. He left the world in the next tithi, i.e. Ashtami. (The new ayana starts from the next tithi)

Further concurrence for this comes from the rules of ‘Ratha Saptami Vrata’ attributed to sage Garga. [3] Ratha Saptami vrata must be observed in Magha when there is “Tithi-dvayam” at sun rise. Tithi-Dvayam means two tithis within two sunrises. The previous tithi must end any time after the sun rise in a day, followed by the next tithi which also ends after the sun rise the next day.  For Ratha Saptami Vrata, Shashthi tithi must have ended the previous day, followed by Saptami tithi. This tithi (Saptami) must be present at sunrise the next morning but end up after some time, so that Ashtami would begin in the same day.

Tithi Dvayam is a conditional feature of Ratha Saptami, indicating similar Tithi Dvayam on the day Bhishma left. By its presence at sunrise, Saptami would be the tithi of the day marking the change of direction of the chariot of the sun, but Ashtami should follow sometime soon. This must be present on the day Bhishma left. Additionally Rohini must have been present at sunrise on that day having crossed the 2nd pada or at the end of 2nd pada. The date of Uttarayana should fulfill these two conditions. We will check them as we proceed with the derivations systematically.

The Ratha (of Surya) that Bhishma waited for, to bring peace to him is preserved in tradition as a Homa, known as “Bhishma Ratha Shanti homa”. This is done even today on completion of 70 years of age, though it needs to be ascertained whether this number refers to Bhishma’s age or the number of decades representing the number of tithis he waited after Magha started. Some people mistakenly mention this as Bheema ratha Shanti. The Ratha of Surya was waited upon by Bhishma, not Bheema.

The various austerities related to Bhishma’s departure as seen on Ratha Saptami, Bhishmashtami (when he left the world) and Bhishma Ratha Shanti that continue to be in vogue today are the standing proof of the unexpected change of time of the Uttarayana after the Mahabharata war.

There is another austerity having relevance to Magha Saptami, known as “Mandāra Saptami” vrata done on Magha “Shuddha” Saptamī. [4] This sounds strange because ‘Shuddha’ refers to ‘Nija’ masa in usage. Nija or Shuddha masa is the month following the Adhika Masa. Mandāra means Heaven. Those desiring to go to Heaven should do this vrata which goes on for 13 months starting from Magha shuddha Saptamī says the astrological text. This implies that this vrata is possible only in the year having an Adhika masa. An Adhika masa coming in between two Magha Shukla (waxing) Saptami fulfills the 13 month duration of the vrata. But the reference to Magha “Shuddha” Saptami and “Mandāra” being the fruit of the vrat – something on the lines of what Bhishma achieved, this seems to be connected with Mahabharata time or to have originated from an event of Mahabharata.

The reference “Shuddha” to Magha sounds strange as there can never be a Nija or Shuddha Magha, because Adhika Masa can never occur in the month of Magha!



[1] Mahabharata, 13-167.

[2] Mahabharata: 12-47-3 (Gita Press edition)

[3] “Jothida Varushadhi Nool” (Tamil), Kumaran Padhippagam, Chennai, p. 388

[4] “Jothida Varushadhi Nool” (Tamil) p.381

Tuesday, December 29, 2020

Can Adhika Masa occur in Magha month? (Part 5: Mahabharata date)

Adhika masa is the month when two New moons occur in a solar month or in other words, when there is no solar ingress in a lunar month. In this context it is necessary to know about another type of anomalous month, called Kshaya Masa, when there are 2 solar ingresses (Sankaranti) within a lunar month. In this event the lunar month is stretched into two signs of the zodiac such that the solar ingress occurs after the lunar month begins and the 2nd solar ingress into the next sign occurs before the lunar month ends. This happens because of the faster movement of the earth at the perihelion that covers the months from Margashira to Magha. Therefore the Kshaya Masa always occurs within these months and not at any other month. This also means that the Adhika Masa can never occur in the months Margashira, Pushya and Magha!

Any time a Kshaya Masa occurs, it would be accompanied with two Adhika Masa, one before and another after the Kshaya Masa. This one-in-149 year phenomenon occurred the last time in the year 1983 offering us a good case study. The Kshaya Masa started on 14th January 1983 when the solar ingress into Capricorn (Makara Sankaranti) started after Shukla Pratipat of the lunar Pushya month, and ended on 13th February before the lunar month ended. The very next month, Phalguna was an Adhika Masa with no solar ingress. Before the Kshaya Masa, an Adhika Masa occurred in Aswayuja. This recent event of Kshaya Masa occurring in a month at the  perihelion of lunar orbit, with an Adhika Masa immediately following it and another Adhika Masa a couple of months before the Kshaya Masa offers a better understanding of these anomalous  months.

Normally the Adhika Masa occurs any time between Phalguna and Aswayuja and not in the rest of the 4 months. Rarely the Adhika Masa can happen in Kartika, but never in Margashira, Pushya and Magha. Strangely we come across a vrata that suggests that there was an Adhika Masa in Magha! Stranger than that is the change in the date of Uttarayana that started in Magha after the Mahabharata war; strangest is the fact that the all-knowing Bhishma failed to calculate the date of Uttarayana correctly.

In this context I want to show the readers the absurdity of following the tropical simulator that works on continuing precession of the equinox. Now having known that Adhika Masa can never occur in Magha, let me show that 'it can', when we use the continuous precession of the tropical zodiac.

Figure 1 is simulated to continuous precession, shows Adhika Masa in the month Magha, but two years earlier than Krodhi, i.e. in Shubhakrit, in 3138 BCE.  Figure 2 shows the succeeding month, the Nija Masa in Magha! From this one can also understand how erroneous the deductions will be, when the simulators working on continuous precession are used.

                                  Figure 1: Adhika Magha in the year Shubhakrit (3138 BCE)

The next month was Nija Magha which, though the simulator recognizes as Shubhakrit, was in reality Shobhakri, the next year, due to the fact that the year was counted from Uttarayana in the 5 year Yuga calendar.

                                   Figure 2: Nija Magha in the year Shobhakrit (3138 BCE)

This simulation cannot be true for the reasons that (1) it is based on an unrealistic precession degree of 312-54 and (2) it occurred 37 years before the end of Krishna or the beginning of Kali Maha Yuga.

Now checking the same for the precession rate of Surya Siddhanta that was close to zero at the time of Mahabharata war, the adhika Masa didn’t appear in Magha. So it is clear that Adhika Masa could not have occurred as a natural sequence of the different speeds of the moon and the earth (detected in the movement of the sun) in the month Magha in general but it seemed to have occurred in the year Krodhi when Bhishma waited for a prolonged period on the arrow bed.

With Caitra of Krodhi being an Adhika Masano kshaya masa could have occurred in Magha that year; and no Adhika masa too could have occurred any time between Caitra and Magha in that year, so what happened then? How did the days get extended that forced  Bhishma to wait for the Uttarayana to come up?

Having now made the readers become aware that the time loss (tithi loss) is central to understanding Mahabharata verses, let me begin with the core story of Mahabharata relevant for dating. 

This story starts from the beginning of the exile of the Pandavas.  

(To be continued)

http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/

Viewing all 11198 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>