Edwin F Bryant efb3 at
Tue Mar 18 16:33:27 UTC 1997

Yes, the sun is the crucial issue.  I have just finished editing a
critique of various arguments using astronomy to date the Vedas.  One of
B.G. Tilak's more peripheral proposals was that the, which
occurs during the two weeks after the
full moon of Bhaadrapadaa,  would more logically take place at the
beginning of the (the beginning of the sun's course
southward in the sky)--that is, immediately after the summer solstice-- 
since this half of the year is sacred to the  The dark half of
Bhaadrapadaa would have coincided with the summer solstice in the 4th
millennium BCE (it no longer does due to precession).  Tilak argued that
there was no logical explanation for the currently being
observed in September sometime.  I don't think Whitney and Thibaut
(who opposed Tilak's and Jacobi's interpretations) responded to this
particular point.  
	Does anyone know why the occurs when it presently 
does (ie why the dark half of Bhaadrapadaa is sacred to the

On Tue, 18 Mar 1997, Martin Gansten wrote:

> We seem to have understood Edwin's question differently. To clarify: on the
> day of the vernal equinox, the *moon* will occupy Aa', as Fred's
> calendar tells him -- and this is what is normally meant by a nak.satra
> "governing the day" -- but the *sun* will be in early Uttarabhadra. It is
> this equinoctial point (the apparent position of the sun in relation to the
> zodiac at the time of the equinox), slowly regressing through the fixed
> stars, which gives rise to the difference between the tropical and sidereal
> zodiacs.
> Martin Gansten

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list