365bet娱乐

It has now become almost a truism to say that the fixing of dates of a majority of ancient Indian texts is a formidable task. Lack of direct evidence and the doubtful 117. Cf. Atharvaveda-Parisistas 33.6.8; 37.6.1 etc. 118. Cf. Max Muller, A Hist. of Anc. Sk. lit., p. 312: The authors of the Parisistas, unwilling to wear the straitjacket of the Sutrakaras, and unable to invent a more appropriate dress, adopted the slovenly metre of epic poetry, well adapted for legendary narration but unfit for scientific discussion." 119. Atharvaveda-Parisistas 3.3.7-8; 7.1.13; 11.2.5; 19 b.5.9; 40.6.16; 42.2.13; 55.6.4; 72.5.6.

736 character of several generally accepted landmarks defy all attempts to arrive at any definite conclusions. Therefore, all that one may do is to build up a prima facie case in favour of a certain view - always being prepared to give up the case if and when stronger evidence to the contrary is produced. The Atharvaveda-Parisistas obviously represent a composite text being a collection of tracts presumably belonging to different chronological periods. Accordingly, an attempt is made, in this section, to bring together all the material from the Parisistas which has a bearing - direct or indirect - on the various chronological strata reflected in them. To begin with, it may be assumed, on the strength of the evidence presented by tradition that the Atharvaveda-Parisistas were written long after the Gopatha Brahmana , the Kausika Sutra the Vaitana Sutra and the Laksana granthas were composed. It is difficult to say how much time must have elapsed between the composition of these ancillary texts on 120 the one hand and that of the Parisistas on the other. So far as the internal evidence is concerned, the upper limit of the date of Atharvaveda-Parisistas may be said to have been fixed by the Arthasastra of Kautilya as also by the Manu-Smrti. The Atharvaveda-Parisistas show a fair knowledge of the technical terms employed by 121 Kautilya. The terms yayi, sthavara and akrandasarin are 120. In the opinion of Aufrecht (Aitareya Brahmana, intro. p. 5) the Gopatha Brahmana is known to Yaska and Keith (Aitareya Aranyaka intro. p.25) dates the Gopatha Brahmana at about 600 B.C. 121. Cf. Arthasastra, chap. VII.

met with at 51.2.1. 737 mentioned at 63.4.10 and the words nagarah and yayinah, are The terms like samdhi, vigraha etc. are also found (3.1.13). Atharvaveda-Parisistas 44.2.2 quotes Manu Smrti 3.125 and ab 122 Atharvaveda-Parisistas 41.3.8 ab is identical with Manu Smrti 4.94 123 According to Keith, the metrical test shows that Atharvaveda-Parisistas must be later than the Brhaddevata and the Rgvidhana. The mention of 124 the planets in the astrological context, according to Jacobi, would fix the time of the composition of the text as later 125 than 200 A.D. Another point of chronological interest is the fact that niska and dinara are mentioned in the Atharvaveda-Parisistas 127 128 126 According to Jolly who is followed by Winternitz , all Indian works, in which the word dinara occurs, cannot have been composed before second century A.D. It may, however, be pointed out in this connection that the word dinara occurs 122. Atharvaveda-Parisistas 43.1.6 mentions Panini. 123. JRAS 1912, p.769. 124. Zeitschrift der deuschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft XXX, p. 306. Cf. Indische Studien X, pp.317 ff, VIII, p.413; Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics IV, p.799. Cf. also Weber, A Hist. of Ind. lit. p. 153, f.n. 172. 125. But it is now a well-recognised fact that the earliest astronomical records and traditions of the Hindus date back to several centuries before this date and that astronomy was current among these people not merely as a system of true science intended for chronometrical uses. Cf. Ebenezer Burgess, "On the origin of the zodiac represented in the Naksatra system of the Hindus", Journal of the American Oriental Society VIII, pp. 309-34. 126. 4.2.5; 31.7.3; 36.26.3; 70 b.10.1,22.3;72.2.9. 127. Recht und Sitte, p. 23. 123. Hist. Hist. of Ind. Lit. II, p. 216, f.n. 4

738 in some earlier works like Apss (23.11.2) and the Mahabhasya 130 (4.1.19).129 It may also be added that Keith does not accept Jolly's suggestion. Nevertheless one thing may be generally accepted, namely, that the Atharvaveda-Parisistas on the whole cannot be assigned to any remote antiquity. Fairly accurate, ornate and elaborate metres make the comparative lateness of the 131 text undoubted. According to Keith , words like camara b (3.1.3; 4.1.14; 19掳.4.4; 70掳.20.1) are late Puranic and the word nayaka (24.1.9) is a sign of late origin. Similar is 132 the case with the words attalaka (55.6.2; 71.19.2; 72.3. 10), aksamala (41.4.5) and golavat (58 b.2.9, 4.9). The root kutta and the words mandalika (36.26.3), kulira and Karkata (39.1.10) are, according to that scholar, very later words, belonging to the time of Susruta. The lower limit of the date of the Parisistas can be said to be fixed by the Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira of Varahamihira, which is definitely posterior to the Atharvaveda-Parisistas Attention has already been drawn, in the section 'The Nature of the Parisistas', to the influence of the Atharvaveda-Parisistas on the Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira Varahamihira has drawn on 133 the Atharvaveda-Parisistas and has even named many of the adhyayas of the Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 129. It has been established (Proceedings of the British academy, Vol. XVIII, pp. 211-66) that the earliest denarius period begins about 187 B.C. 130. JRAS 1915, p. 504. 131. JRAS 1912, pp. 755-76. 132. Cf. attala: 61.1.12; 56.2.8; saddala: 70.14.1. 133. See above pp. 299-300. The two verses Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 48.52-53 are probably taken from Atharvaveda-Parisistas 8.1.6-7.

739 134 in imitation of the Atharvaveda-Parisistas That Varahamihira lived at the close of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth century of our era is quite evident from the position of the colures affirmed as actual in his time by that scholar (Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 3.2). It was at this time that the enumeration of the constellations beginning with the Asvini started. The same date has been 136 arrived at by different scholars. According to Colebrooke, the date of Varahamihira is 472 A.D. and in the opinion of Jones 137 it is 499 A.D. 138 135 Looking to the state of astrological knowledge in the Atharvaveda-Parisistas and comparing it to that in the works of Varahamihira, one cannotb but feel that Varahamihira is far advanced in such knowledge and hence a long period of time must have 134. Cf. Weber, A Hist. of Ind. lit., p.263, f.n. 300: "The laksana sections in the Atharva-Parisistas are either of a ceremonial or astrological-meteorological purport while on the other hand the astrological samhita of Varahamihira, for instance, contains much that may have been directly derived from the old vidyas and laksanas." 135. Cf. Burgess, op. cit. p. 312. For details regarding the recession of equinoctial and solticial points and the origin of the ecliptic determined from the Citra, see Colebrooke, Miscellaneous Essays II, p. 481. 136. ibid. According to Dikshit (Hist. of Ind. Astro., p. 311) the date is 505 A.D. 137. "A supplement to the essay on Indian chronology," Asiatick Researches II, pp. 391-403. 138. Varahamihira belongs to the 6 th century according to Whitney, Suryasiddhanta, Tr. p. 211; Oriental and Linguistic Studies II, p.365; Journal of the American Oriental Society VI, p. 355.

740 elapsed between the composition of the Atharvaveda-Parisistas and of the works of Varahamihira. The Atharvaveda-Parisistas are not acquainted with the division of the zodiac into Rasis. 139 Varahamihira not only known such division, but he uses it freely in his astrological works. Moreover he explains how the Moon appears to wax and to wane (Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 4.1) and states that the occurrence of an eclipse can be known by calculation (Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 5.5) and not by any portent (Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 5.16). Atharvaveda-Parisistas 53, On the contrary, mentions the omens which announce the coming of Rahu and further adds that when such omens are seen but an eclipse does not follow, it forebodes fight and famine (53.6.3). This shows the absence of mathematical calculation at the time when the Atharvaveda-Parisistas were composed. The advance of scientific knowledge in the days of Varahamihira can be seen from his statement regarding Grahayuddha (Atharvaveda-Parisistas 51) that the planets move far away from one another in their own orbits and that they only appear to our eyes as coming near to each other (Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 17.2). The Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira mentions the precise movements of the Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus and Saturn (chap. 6-10 resp.). Such astronomical knowledge is lacking in the Atharvaveda-Parisistas Varahamihira starts counting the Naksatras from the Asvini, as they are counted at present, whereas the Atharvaveda-Parisistas (1.1.2) enumerate them from the Krttika as found in the ancient texts including the Atharvaveda, Saunakiya recension (XIX.7). It 139. There is only one doubtful indication at 72.1.3 (astame ca candramasah sthane) which probably refers to the position of the Moon among the constellations (Cf. 71.7.4). It may also be noted that the Atharvaveda-Parisistas do not show acquaintance with the names of the week-days.

741 may be noted in this context that the Atharvaveda-Parisistas (64.8.9-10.3) count the seasons from sisira to Hemanta whereas Varahamihira (Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 46.84-98) counts them from Vasanta to Sisira as at present. It may also be noted that Varahamihira starts counting the months from Karttika (Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira 5.69-80) whereas the Atharvaveda-Parisistas enumerate them from Asvina (17.1.2) or Sravaga (55.1.5).140 The foregoing discussion makes it clear that the date of the compilation of the Atharvaveda-Parisistas lies somewhere between the second century B.C. which is the date of the Manu Smrti and the fifth century A.D. which is the date of Varahamihira. Leaving a fair margin of the time say about three or four centuries- for the development of astronomical and astrological knowledge from the state as reflected in the Atharvaveda-Parisistas to the state as reflected in the Brhatsamhita by Varahamihira and its consolidation, one may not be far from truth if one assigns the Atharvaveda-Parisistas to a period somewhere round about the beginning of the Christian era. 141 140. It may, incidentally, be mentioned that according to Max Muller (The Rgveda IV, pp. 315-6) the Hindu months were named as early as 1181 B.C. It might 141. The first Parisista, namely the Naksatra-Kalpa must, however, be said to belong to a much earlier period. have been composed in the third or the fourth century B.C. Some of the portions therein (sections 6-8 and 37-41) which contain verses of a Vedic character belong to a still considerable antiquity. Cf. Bloomfield, The Atharvaveda (Grundriss), p. 35.