{"id":366,"date":"2012-07-29T06:09:02","date_gmt":"2012-07-29T04:09:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/?p=366"},"modified":"2017-11-20T22:57:12","modified_gmt":"2017-11-20T22:57:12","slug":"narada-the-astronomer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/narada-the-astronomer\/","title":{"rendered":"N\u0101rada the Astronomer?"},"content":{"rendered":"

When introducing Stanza II of the anthropogenesis portion of the \u201cBook of Dzyan,\u201d given in volume 2 of The Secret Doctrine<\/em>, H. P. Blavatsky informs us that the commentary thereon refers to N\u0101rada and Asura Maya (p. 47):<\/p>\n

\u201cStanza II., which speaks of this Round, begins with a few words of information concerning the age of our Earth. The chronology will be given in its place. In the Commentary appended to the Stanza, two personages are mentioned: Narada and Asura Maya, especially the latter. All the calculations are attributed to this archaic celebrity; and what follows will make the reader superficially acquainted with some of these figures.\u201d<\/p>\n

Blavatsky then gives a section titled, \u201cTwo Antediluvian Astronomers\u201d (pp. 47-51), which begins with this paragraph:<\/p>\n

\u201cTo the mind of the Eastern student of Occultism, two figures are indissolubly connected with mystic astronomy, chronology, and their cycles. Two grand and mysterious figures, towering like two giants in the Archaic Past, emerge before him, whenever he has to refer to Yugas and Kalpas. When, at what period of pre-history they lived, none save a few men in the world know, or ever can know with that certainty which is required by exact chronology. It may have been 100,000 years ago, it may have been 1,000,000, for all that the outside world will ever know. The mystic West and Freemasonry talk loudly of Enoch and Hermes. The mystic East speaks of Narada, the old Vedic Rishi, and of Asuramaya, the Atlantean.\u201d<\/p>\n

The asura named Maya is indeed a famous astronomer, writer of the most authoritative Sanskrit text on astronomy, the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>. N\u0101rada is certainly a well-known rishi in Indian tradition, and astronomy is in fact one of the subjects that he is said to have mastered, but he is primarily known for his mastery of music. There is no Sanskrit astronomical treatise in use that is attributed to him, and the classical Indian astronomers do not refer to or quote him. In Blavatsky\u2019s statement, \u201cTo the mind of the Eastern student of Occultism,\u201d we have to emphasize the words, \u201cof Occultism\u201d; and in her statement, \u201cThe mystic East speaks of Narada,\u201d we have to emphasize the word \u201cmystic.\u201d To the mind of the Eastern student in general, N\u0101rada is the divine musician; and the East in general speaks of N\u0101rada the musician, not N\u0101rada the astronomer. Yet, for Blavatsky and her contacts, N\u0101rada was the great astronomer N\u0101rada. We must inquire why this would be so.<\/p>\n

As just seen, the secret commentary on the \u201cBook of Dzyan\u201d is reported to refer to the astronomers N\u0101rada and asura Maya. Then, in the section titled, \u201cThe Chronology of the Brahmins\u201d (pp. 66-74), figures are given including the age of humanity as 18,618,728 years (in 1887 C.E.), taken from the Tirukkanda Panchanga<\/em> = Tiru Ganita Panchanga<\/em>, based on the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>. After giving these figures, Blavatsky writes (p. 70): \u201cThese sacred astronomical cycles are of immense antiquity, and most of them pertain, as stated, to the calculations of N\u0101rada and Asuramaya.\u201d So is there some astronomical text that we perhaps no longer have, but that is associated with N\u0101rada, even mythologically?<\/p>\n

Ebenezer Burgess, introducing his 1860 translation of the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, writes (p. 142):<\/p>\n

\u201cAmong the different Siddh\u0101ntas, or text-books of astronomy, existing in India in the Sanskrit language, none appeared better suited to my purpose than the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta. That it is one of the most highly esteemed, best known, and most frequently employed, of all, must be evident to any one who has noticed how much oftener than any other it is referred to as authority in the various papers on the Hindu astronomy. In fact, the science as practised in modern India is in the greater part founded upon its data and processes. In the lists of Siddh\u0101ntas given by native authorities it is almost invariably mentioned second, the Brahma-Siddh\u0101nta being placed first: the latter enjoys this preeminence, perhaps, mainly on account of its name; it is, at any rate, comparatively rare and little known.\u201d<\/p>\n

We see that, at least mythologically, there is a text that is regarded even more highly than the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, namely, the Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>. But the genuine original Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em> is apparently no longer extant; otherwise it would surely be in wide use. Nonetheless, there is an extant text called the Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, and this tells us why N\u0101rada would be so highly regarded as an astronomer: in it, the god Brahm\u0101 teaches astronomy to N\u0101rada. So we may assume that in the original Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em> also, N\u0101rada is the recipient of the knowledge of astronomy from Brahm\u0101. This is like in the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, where the asura named Maya is the recipient of the knowledge of astronomy from an incarnation or part (a\u1e43\u015ba<\/em>) of the sun, s\u016brya<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The now extant text called Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em> calls itself the second pra\u015bna<\/em> or section of the \u015a\u0101kalya-sa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em>. There is no English translation of it. It was first published in 1912 in the Sanskrit collection titled, Jyauti\u1e63a-siddh\u0101nta-sa\u1e43graha<\/em>, edited by Vindhyesvari Prasad Dvivedi, in the Benares Sanskrit Series, no. 39. The puzzle of why it calls itself the second pra\u015bna<\/em> was not solved until several decades later. When D. G. Dhavale was preparing a critical edition of the Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, he saw that one of the eight manuscripts he had gathered contained many additional verses in its first chapter. These verses showed that the various pra\u015bnas<\/em> or sections of the \u015a\u0101kalya-sa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em> each summarized an astronomical siddh\u0101nta. The first section summarized the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, and the second section summarized the Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>. Six more sections summarized the Pauli\u015ba-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, the Soma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, the Roma\u015ba-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, the G\u0101rgya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, the B\u1e5bhaspati-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, and the V\u0101si\u1e63\u1e6dha-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>. Of these sections of the \u015a\u0101kalya-sa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em>, only the summary of the Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em> is now extant. It provides our only window into this long lost text. It shows us that the original Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em> was taught by Brahm\u0101 to N\u0101rada.<\/p>\n

Even though the original text by N\u0101rada is long lost to us, although perhaps not to the Theosophical Mahatmas (see SD 1.47-51), the tradition of the two great antediluvian astronomers remained known to astronomers in India. A verse from the seventeenth century C.E. Indian astronomer Kamal\u0101kara\u2019s Siddh\u0101nta-tattva-viveka<\/em> (verse 65 of the bhaga\u1e47a-m\u0101na-adhy\u0101ya, chapter on elements of revolutions) is quoted by Sankar Balakrishna Dikshit in his Bharatiya Jyotish Sastra<\/em>, English translation, vol. 2, p. 47, saying: \u201cThat pure (science of astronomy) which was revealed to Maya by the god Sun, was described to N\u0101rada by Brahm\u0101, to \u015aaunaka by Himaguru (Moon or Soma) and to M\u0101\u1e47\u1e0davya by the sage Vasi\u1e63\u1e6dha.\u201d<\/p>\n

As for the astronomical contents of the Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em> according to its summary in the \u015a\u0101kalya-sa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em>, already in 1896 Sankar Balakrishna Dikshit had determined that this summarized version copies the modern S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>. He writes (Bharatiya Jyotish Sastra<\/em>, English translation, vol. 2, p. 4): \u201cThe basic principles, propounded by the \u015a\u0101kalya Brahma Siddh\u0101nta, even it be more ancient than Brahmagupta, are exactly the same as those propounded by the modern S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta.\u201d Again, he says (p. 49): \u201cThe number of revolutions and other elements in this tally entirely with those of the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta in all respects and have already been given.\u201d This was confirmed by D. G. Dhavale when preparing his Sanskrit critical edition, The Brahmasiddh\u0101nta of \u015a\u0101kalyasa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em> (Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1996). He writes in his English Introduction (pp. xi-xii): \u201cIt is generally agreed that this Brahmasiddh\u0101nta<\/em> is based on the modern S\u016bryasiddh\u0101nta<\/em>. In order to compare the two siddh\u0101ntas<\/em> I prepared a line index to the S.S. [S\u016bryasiddh\u0101nta<\/em>] . . . On comparison it was found that agreement in actual wording of the two siddh\u0101ntas<\/em> occurs in 65 lines or cara\u1e47as<\/em>. . . . The present Brh. [Brahmasiddh\u0101nta<\/em>] closely follows the modern S.S. in data about the planetary motions etc.\u201d It seems certain, then, that like the S\u016brya-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, where we have only a modern revision of the original text, so the summary of the Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em> in the \u015a\u0101kalya-sa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em> is only a modern revision.<\/p>\n

Nonetheless, although this summary apparently does not preserve the original astronomical data of the original Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>, Sankar Balakrishna Dikshit noticed that it was unique in a couple of ways. First, \u201cthe subject of religion also, which is never met with in an astronomical work, has been included in it\u201d (op. cit., p. 49). Further on this, D. G. Dhavale found in the one manuscript that had additional verses in the first chapter, an entire additional chapter, a seventh adhy\u0101ya. It, too, apparently pertains to religion. He writes (op. cit., p. ix): \u201cThe contents of the seventh Adhy\u0101ya<\/em>, however, do not justify its inclusion in a treatise on astronomy. In fact the chapter reads more like a Pur\u0101\u1e47a than an astronomical essay. Whatever astronomical references there are in it are about the same as are found in some of the Pur\u0101\u1e47as.\u201d For this reason, he unfortunately did not include this otherwise unknown chapter in his edition, so we do not know exactly what is in it. There is an astrological text attributed to N\u0101rada, the N\u0101rad\u012bya-sa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em>, on divination and muh\u016brta. A Sanskrit edition of it was prepared by Harid\u0101sagupta and published in 1905. Much of its contents are included in the N\u0101rada-pur\u0101\u1e47a<\/em>, according to a comparison made by K. Damodara Nambiar (published in the journal, Pur\u0101\u1e47a<\/em>, Jan. 1974, pp. 103-112, and cited in Ganesh Vasudeo Tagare\u2019s Introduction to his English translation of The N\u0101rada-Pur\u0101\u1e47a<\/em>, Part 1, Delhi, 1980, p. 30). Perhaps some of this material in fact came from the original Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Second, the Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em> is also unique in that it gives otherwise unknown information about the seven stars of what we call the Great Bear or Big Dipper constellation, known as the Seven Rishis (saptar\u1e63i). Sankar Balakrishna Dikshit writes (op. cit., p. 50): \u201cIt is the specialty of this work that it gives the latitudes and longitudes of the Saptar\u1e63i group (i.e.<\/em> Great Bear), which are not given by any other siddh\u0101nta.\u201d There is a very unusual cycle associated with the Seven Rishis, taught by the ancient astronomer V\u1e5bddha Garga in a now lost text (quoted by Bha\u1e6d\u1e6dotpala in his commentary on Var\u0101ha-mihira\u2019s B\u1e5bhat-sa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em>, chapter 13). These stars are supposed to move through one asterism or nak\u1e63atra in exactly one hundred solar years. Of course, the fixed stars have no such physical motion. Nonetheless, the cycle is real, and has been in use in parts of India and Kashmir from ancient times, as seen in stone inscriptions, and right up to the present. It has been studied in detail by John E. Mitchiner in his 1982 book, Traditions of the Seven \u1e5a\u1e63is<\/em>. I have written a little about it and its relation to Theosophical teachings in my article, \u201cThe Centennial Cycle\u201d (Theosophical History<\/em>, vol. 11, no. 4, Oct. 2005, pp. 5-15; http:\/\/www.easterntradition.org\/centennial%20cycle.pdf). According to David Pingree, N\u0101rada is \u201cone of the interlocutors in the V\u1e5bddhag\u0101rg\u012bsa\u1e43hit\u0101<\/em>\u201d (Census of the Exact Sciences in Sanskrit<\/em>, Series A, vol. 3, 1976, p. 148; see also vol. 2, 1971, p. 118). Whether or not N\u0101rada and V\u1e5bddha Garga here discuss the cycle of the Seven Rishis, the fact that N\u0101rada gives unique information on the Seven Rishis associates him with old teachings on astronomical cycles.<\/p>\n

It is clear from the above that N\u0101rada is considered to be an ancient astronomer, one of the very most eminent as the recipient of the astronomical teachings from Brahm\u0101 that formed the original but now lost Brahma-siddh\u0101nta<\/em>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

When introducing Stanza II of the anthropogenesis portion of the \u201cBook of Dzyan,\u201d given in volume 2 of The Secret Doctrine, H. P. Blavatsky informs us that the commentary thereon refers to N\u0101rada and Asura Maya (p. 47): \u201cStanza II., which speaks of this Round, begins with a few words of information concerning the age […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[38],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-366","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-occult-chronology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/366","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=366"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/366\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1616,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/366\/revisions\/1616"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=366"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=366"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prajnaquest.fr\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=366"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}