Читать книгу Jyotish - Andrew Mason - Страница 7

1

AYANĀṂŚA

A few years back I ran into an old colleague and we got talking amongst other things about Jyotish. Knowing his great enthusiasm for astrology I enquired if he’d come across anything new and exciting. Immediately he began to download a whole barrage of statistics, techniques and other assorted goodies. Pausing briefly, he unexpectedly said the word Ayanāṃśa. Having more than a passing interest I asked him to expand on the topic, intrigued to hear his comments.

He went on to explain that as a longstanding member of a Vedic Astrological Association, he’d recently returned from its annual get-together. The weekend event had been a mixture of lectures by both home-grown and international speakers. The event had also been a chance to stock up on books, CDs, magazines and demos of the latest Jyotish software.

The final afternoon, he explained, had offered back-to-back lectures titled 11th House of Gain or The Question of Ayanāṃśa. Greatly intrigued by the sound of the Ayanāṃśa lecture, my friend had then made his way toward the appropriate lecture hall, only to be mowed down by a mass of charging delegates speeding toward the adjacent lecture. Recovering from this surge of bodies (heading in the opposite direction), he peered nervously into the room, wondering if he was to be the only one crossing its threshold.

Upon entrance he was relieved to see a handful of Ayanāṃśa devotees sprawled along the front row, trying uncomfortably to make the room seem a little more occupied than it was. He then went on to give me a great synopsis of the whole presentation as related by its speaker, saying, ‘I found the whole thing pretty remarkable; it brought up in my mind a great number of misgivings. Toward the close of the discussion I really started to wonder how I’d ever missed its profundity. After all, it is value that determines all end results, yet curiously it hardly seems to get a mention.’

He continued, chuckling, ‘I guess it just goes to show where some folks are with Jyotish, tripping over the fundamentals like Ayanāṃśa to get a profitable seat in the 11th House. Seems to me to be a perfect example of “me-ing” taking precedence over “be-ing”, at least in the world of some Jyotish acolytes.’

1.1 INTRODUCTION TO AYANĀṂŚA

At one time, the Sun’s southward course commenced on his reaching the middle of Aslesha (the ninth lunar constellation) and its northward course on its reaching the beginning of Dhanistha the twenty-third constellation (the Delphin of European Astronomers). This must have been the case as we find it recorded in ancient books.

Brihat Saṃhitā by Varāhamihira

In this chapter I have tried to distil the salient points of Ayanāṃśa into a greatly simplified form that hopefully enlightens the reader to the ‘rhino in the room’, draped with a lace tablecloth.

As the following is a bit technical, the reader is urged to ponder the diagrams and accompanying text – but above all remain calm. If the points discussed do not resonate immediately, simply return to this chapter at regular intervals and reacquaint yourself with its various concepts. Some of the topics discussed may at times appear contradictory, complex and even detrimental to the precepts of astrology; however, during compilation I felt I should provide a balanced appraisal wherever possible.

All of the following sections are therefore best considered pieces of an elaborate puzzle that float individually or, when taken in totality, lock neatly together, helping one to become cognisant of the subject’s importance.

1.2 LET THE GAMES BEGIN

Many Vedic and some western sidereal astrologers are first confronted with the word Ayanāṃśa upon installation of their newly acquired software, momentarily hesitating as to which option they should click next. In some cases this rather troublesome decision is made for you by the software as it neatly and unobtrusively instals its default values. The default and most endorsed Ayanāmśa for most Vedic Astrology software is that proposed by the Indian Calendar Reform Committee or CRC, called Chitrāpaksha/Lahiri Ayanāṃśa with an epoch value of 23° 15′ and an annual precessionary rate of 50.28 (as of 1 January 1950). Although some software allows for a little tinkering, by and large the Ayanāṃśa edit facility is far less likely to suffer from excess wear and tear.

So what is all this Ayanāṃśa business, and why have I dedicated a whole chapter to this subject? Well, Ayanāṃśa is a fundamental cornerstone, if not one of the most historically interesting aspects of Vedic Astrology, and as such I felt a little space should be afforded it.

One tentative translation of Ayanāṃśa1 might be ‘a measurement’ (amsha) of the solstices (ayana) or the value that marks the difference between the solar (tropical) zodiac and the sidereal2 (starry) zodiac.

At first glance it seems best to just ‘go with the flow’ using default settings, but once you’ve disengaged your autopilot and asked yourself why the default is the default, Pandora’s Box pops open and the fun begins.

Many, in truth, turn back long before reaching this point, and in fairness this is understandable as the initial allure of astrology, that is, its planets, signs and houses, is far more attractive than the gearwheels and cogs that hide unseen within the mechanism.

Additionally, you may also find that Ayanāṃśa values are one of the most incendiary topics amongst Jyotishi – but, if nothing else, are a useful barometer with which to gauge the liberality of your astrological company.

Some astrologers, like my colleague at the start of this chapter, feel quite comfortable about raising their misgivings over popular Ayanāṃśa values – while others refrain from any experimentation, feeling content with endorsed values. There are those who feel that the whole issue has been satisfactorily resolved and that any further experimentation is ill-advised or, worse, folly. As one astrological colleague related to me after installing newly acquired software: ‘I found Ayanāṃśa editing pretty restrictive – in fact, borderline impossible.’ Somewhat perturbed, he contacted the programmer to vent his frustrations only to be told: ‘Adjustment of Ayanāṃśa is superfluous and anyone wishing to do so is probably on an ego trip.’ Of course, the reply was framed in a polite manner.

A well-respected astrologer I discussed this issue with told me he’d personally known a number of astro-colleagues who’d spend a decent amount of time tinkering with different values – and while modern authors afforded little space to the subject in their books, there of course remained deep interest in the subject.

Whatever your particular take on this issue, the following attempts to present a number of components that constitute the Ayanāṃśa paradox, with our first visit paid to the solar zodiac and lunar Nakshatras.

1.3 RĀSHICAKRA, NAKSHATRAS AND YOGATÂRÂ

Again Brahmā, of subdued passions, divided a circle invented by himself into 12 equal parts naming it the Rasi-vritta and the same circle into 27 parts, naming it the Nakshatra-vritta.

Sûrya Siddhântikâ

The zodiac or Rāshicakra comprises twelve signs called Rashis, these being Mesha (Aries), Vrishaba (Taurus), Mithuna (Gemini), Karkata (Cancer), Simha (Leo), Kanya (Virgo), Tula (Libra), Vrishchika (Scorpio), Dhanus (Sagittarius), Makara (Capricorn), Kumbha (Aquarius) and Meena (Pisces). To each, 30° of the heavens is allotted and so divided.3 Calculation of any horoscope requires the establishment of 0° from which to construct a snapshot upon the heavens. This it seems was best achieved by the employment of convenient (if not irregular) stellar markers, that is, the stars.

Aries traditionally is taken to be the first sign of the zodiac and as such became the pivotal point about which the remainder of the signs were evenly sequenced. During a solar or tropical year4 the Sun roughly traverses one zodiacal sign in a period of about 30 days, hence its apparent dominion over the zodiac.

Coexisting, yet completely separate from the solar zodiac, there resides an additional twenty-seventh division of the heavens named Nakshatras (see Chapter 25; sometimes called the lunar mansions5). One Nakshatra roughly equates to the daily passage of the Moon along its sidereal orbit. This passage is approximately twenty-seven lunar days,6 hence its dominion over Bhacakra or the lunar zodiac.

The junctures (or portions) of Nakshatra are marked by certain stars called Yogatârâ,7 which confusingly bear the same name as the Nakshatra within which they reside. For example, Ashwini Nakshatra extends from 0° to 13° 20′ Aries and is marked by the Yogatârâ Ashwini, also known as β Arietis (Sheratan). This star resides close to 13° therein. As stars are randomly spaced and Nakshatra portions precise, it is virtually impossible to have all stars fall evenly within their allotted boundaries.

Ideally, the apportioning of junction stars should fall to a bright star/s well within the lunar orbit; in practice; however, this is not the case as a number of Yogatârâ stray far from the lunar orbit. Additionally, a number of these stars are of a magniītude8 that is not easily discerned and call into question their suitability as Yogatârâ (see the Appendix).

The zodiacal belt comprises the twelve major constellations that find themselves close to the ecliptic (the Sun’s apparent yearly course for Earthbound spectators). As solar ecliptic and lunar orbit are not so distant from one another (about +/–5°) a significant number of Yogatârâ used to identify Nakshatra divisions naturally find themselves attached to the familiar twelve zodiacal constellations. This is clearly reflected in ancient astronomical texts, which declare the start of Ashwini Nakshatra to correspond to 0° Aries.9 The term Rashi, used to identify zodiacal signs, is commonly translated as ‘tied’ or ‘heaped’ together, confirming a reconciliation of solar signs and lunar Nakshatras.10 Every zodiacal sign therefore comprises 2¼ Nakshatras.

Solstices and equinox ad 522: Revati Yogatârâ 359° 50′ (ζ Piscium), datum point for Revatipakṣa Ayanāṃśa. GC = galactic centre.

The three Yogatârâ of greatest concern to this narrative are Ashwini, Chitrā and Revati,11 sequentially representing the first, middle and last of the Nakshatras and, latterly, the start, middle and end of the solar zodiac. Ashwini and Revati we’ll consider briefly here; the importance of Chitrā will be outlined in Section 1.6.

The close of Revati12 Nakshatra is marked by a Yogatârâ (of the same name), close to the ecliptic in the constellation of Pisces. Today this star is most commonly identified as ζ Piscium. Due to its 5.2 magnitude it is easily lost to the naked eye, making its choice questionable for such a significant Yogatârâ, that is, that which marks the commencement of the sidereal sphere – 0° Ashwini and subsequently 0° Aries.13

The importance attached to this part of the sky has led some researchers14 to conclude that another star close to ζ Piscium may once have been preferred, but has subsequently been lost to us. Others have considered the possibility that ζ Piscium’s radiance has diminished over the ensuing millennia. Needless to say, there is much conjecture over missing, muted and/or surrogate star theories.

From an astronomical point of view ζ Piscium is not a singular star but in fact a trinary, meaning what is apparently singular (to the naked eye) is in actuality three stars separated by great distance, these being: ζ A15 (+5 magnitude), ζ B16 (+6 magnitude) and ζ C17 (a white dwarf companion to ζ B). White dwarfs are often interpreted as stars of failing longevity so there is a possibility that a more active ζ C had at some point in the past been more radiant.18 Additionally, many stars exhibit degrees of variability19 over time, their incandescence shifting substantially or subtly. During such periods, luminance may range from thousandths to several increments of difference in magnitude.20

According to recent findings; our own pole star α Ursae Minoris is currently 2.5 times brighter than it appeared in the first century AD to notable astrologer/astronomer Claudius Ptolemy. There is also the enigma of irregularly variable stars, such as η Carinae, surrounded by the Homunculus Nebula. Between the 1830s and 1850s η Carinae was gauged to be the second brightest star in the southern hemisphere.

Could ζ Piscium (trinary) have displayed similar irregularities over the millennia?

With something like five thousand stars visible to an unaided eye, making sense of the stellar clutter is a challenge to any observer. Admittedly, over time and with familiarisation, patterns slowly come into focus, but generally any foray out on a clear night requires good orientation skills and visual acuity. It soon becomes apparent that an equidistant distribution of stars along the ecliptic or lunar orbit is non-existent and that that all divisions are idealised. Astrology therefore seeks to impose order upon apparent chaos. As zodiacal constellations remain greatly unequal in proportion, their man-made borders (according to various sources) divide the heavens into lots of 30°, 13° 20′ and 3° 20′,21 and so on. The ancients called the zodiac ‘Manomaya Chakra’ or ‘mind-wheel’, reminding us that any segregation of the heavens ultimately resides within the minds-eye of the beholder.

1.4 THE PHENOMENON OF PRECESSION

Ecliptic and equatorial plane key:  = 0° Aries (spring equinox),  = 0° Cancer (summer solstice),  = 0° Capricorn (winter solstice), GNP = Geographic North Pole, GSP = Geographic South Pole, ZNP = Zodiacal North Pole, ZSP = Zodiacal South Pole.

Inclined to the Earth’s equatorial plane at an angle of about 23.5°, the ecliptic was and is a very convenient reference point with which to measure the relative distances between various astronomical bodies. Following their varied orbits, the planets in our solar system appear to stray no more than 9°+/–22 above or below this convenient reference plane.

Due to a phenomenon known as equinoctial precession, the point at which the ecliptic and equatorial plane meet, that is, the equinoxes, does not remain fixed. Instead these points slowly retrograde over time. Currently the spring equinox frames our Sun against the constellation of Pisces, but this was not always so. Fifteen hundred years ago it was the constellation of Aries that hosted the spring equinox. The rate of precession at this time is in the order of 1° every 72 years. This imperceptibly shifts our Sun backward through each zodiacal sign in a period of 2160 years. The Sun then circumnavigates the entirety of the zodiac every 25,920 years.

Note: When considering precession it should be kept in mind that this is a direct consequence of Earth’s own orbital instabilities and has nothing to do with the position of the Sun, which remains at the centre of the solar system.

Equinox and solstices: 1 = spring equinox (days of equal length), 2 = summer solstice (longest day), 3 = autumnal equinox (days again of equal length), 4 = winter solstice (shortest day). Key: GNP/GSP = Geographic North and South Poles, ZNP/ZSP = Zodiacal North and South Poles.

Although the true mechanism behind precession is not understood (see Section 1.5) its measurement at the spring equinox allows its variable rate to be determined and averaged. Ayanāṃśa therefore is a corrective value applied to the Sun’s current position at this equinoctial juncture – effectively reasserting a point from a former epoch – previously agreed to represent 0°, that is, the initial point of the zodiac.

Of course the exact date of this reasserted point is hotly debated, but for the sake of argument we’ll assume the last time it occurred was AD 522. Taking this date as coincident, there is currently some 20°+ difference between the Sun’s current position and its former position as of 1493 years ago.

Although the Sun’s location (at the spring equinox) has some tradition of being used to identify 0°, it is not known how long observers were aware of this position’s instability, due mostly to its imperceptible crawl. In truth, remote sky-watchers were probably more akin to seeing precession in terms of solstices23 rather than equinoxes – the latter marking an highly important yearly juncture in their calendar such as the Sun’s movement from south to north, that is, marking the longest and shortest day of the year. See the equinox and solstices diagram above.

Ancient solstices (c. 1225 bc+/–) coincide with the middle of Aslesha Nakshatra (ε Hydrae) and the start of Dhanistha Nakshatra (β Delphini) as recorded in Brihat Saṃhitā by Varāhamihira. Key: SE = Spring Equinox, SS = Summer Solstice, AE = Autumnal Equinox and WS = Winter Solstice.

This sentiment is clearly echoed in the opening quote of this chapter by Varāhamihira, taken from his Brihat Saṃhitā24 in which the esteemed astrologer notes earlier classics identifying different Nakshatras occupying the solstice positions from those of his day. Although little is revealed about the source of his information, Mihira offers no explanation as to why these positions might have changed, indicating he remained unaware of precession.

1.5 MODELS OF PRECESSION

Precession of the equinoxes and the circumnavigation of Polar Stars

Nicolaus Copernicus proposed three planetary motions. First the Earth spins upon its own axis, second it completes an annual orbit about the Sun and third it inscribes a rotational axis upon the heavens at the celestial pole, completing a single revolution every 25,920 years. This third motion, now called nutation, was thus termed ‘The Great Year’ and featured heavily in the mystery schools25 of the ancient world.

The phenomenon of precession plays a pivotal role in the history of astrology and astronomy yet, to date, its explanation still remains an unsolved mystery; and while its effect might be simulated in sophisticated computer models, mechanically they remain untenable.

Although there are some interesting theories that seek to account for precession, none really seem to put the issue to bed. Arguments for and against various mechanisms are basically ‘big science’ and well beyond the scope of this work; however, presented here for readers’ interest are three interesting possibilities. Which explanation ultimately proves correct remains to be seen; but for now the jury is out.

Chandler’s wobble (polar motion)

Seth Carlo Chandler Jr (1846–1913), an amateur astronomer and businessman, first proposed his ‘wobble’ theory in 1891, having the Earth akin to a spinning top whose lessening momentum develops a slight destabilisation of spin axis. This might be likened to a child’s spinning top that develops similar properties prior to toppling or ‘when gyroscopic forces can no longer resist the hand of gravity’. He reasoned that geographically the Earth has a greater land mass north of the equator and that this subtle pear-shaped26 profile would cause its more ‘pointed’ end (or southern hemisphere) to subtly displace the Earth’s centre of gravity, producing an incremental ‘wobble’ effect.

Chandler proposed that Earth’s North Pole moved in an irregular circle of 4–16 metres in diameter over a period of about 1.2 years. This ‘eigenmode’27 was reckoned to have a six-year cycle, during which two spiralling extremes were attained – one small and one large with a 3.5-year break in between. Since its proposal, the amplitude of the effect appears to have remained inconsistent, performing a number of surprises (referred to as phase-jumps) in the last 100 years. One significant jump occurred in the 1920s followed by a similar episode in 2000.

This ‘wobble’ had been predicted to subside after a number of decades, unless some unseen force worked upon it to reinvigorate motion. This, JPL28 believed, it had uncovered in July 2000 in the form of fluctuating oceanic pressures, coupled with changes in water temperature, ocean salinity and weather patterning. The totality of these influences were proposed to contribute to at least two-thirds of the observable phenomenon.

Although this new theory looked tenable, events in November 2005 cast doubts upon this line of enquiry as further monitoring of the smaller spiralling cycles saw Earth’s spin-axis veer rather sharply at a right angle to its normal circular motion. This anomaly was completely unexpected and not predicted in any of the computer simulations.

To date, the 124-year-old free nutation model remains unexplained. The most current revision of Polar Motion was published in August 2009,29 with its investigators concluding that the historical phase-jumps were not likely to be unique and that the accrued data (so far) should be revisited and reprocessed to attain clarity in predicting future cycles.

Binary Companion Theory

A more recent, ‘extraterrestrial’, proposal by Walter Cruttenden and Vince Dayes30 draws largely upon a popular theory called luni-solar causation. This sees the Sun’s gravitational force (along with the Moon) torqueing upon Earth’s equatorial bulge, resulting in axial gyration.31 Though the original luni-solar precession model dealt largely with near and visible objects, Binary Companion Theory is an upscaled hybridisation of the effect, working in tandem with distant unseen forces. Its protagonists claim that this alternative model of the solar system (and beyond) better accommodates the observable data whilst nicely trimming away a whole swathe of previously annoying loose ends.

One troublesome factor for the luni-solar causation camp had been the prolonged and unrelenting torque exerted upon the Earth’s axial tilt. This, over longer periods, predicted a displacement of the seasons, that is, our seasonal routine eventually swapping hemispheres. To date, however, no noticeable switching has occurred as the equinoxes occur right on schedule – requiring only minor adjustments in the form of leap years to synchronise calendars.

Supporters of the original luni-solar causation had attempted to account for this annoying oversight with complex mathematics, concluding that equinoxes were attained slightly earlier each year – along Earth’s orbit. This idea was eventually defeated by observable phenomena such as the lunar cycle, which showed Earth to complete the entirety of its equinoctial year. This again cast doubts on the accuracy of the luni-solar model.

All was not lost, however, as luni-solar causation was about to get a shot in the arm; this time in the form of a new dark stellar companion to our Sun some 2–4000 A.U.s32 distant. This twinning effect was proposed to have a warping effect on our Sun’s great orbit about the galactic centre, forcing it to accommodate the demands of its distant binary.

In this revised model of precession, the Earth is constrained to a near-perfect circular orbit whereas our Sun now takes on a vastly accentuated elliptical orbit about its twin. The outcome for Earth is the effect of precession, which according to the laws of celestial mechanics predicts that objects in elliptical orbits accelerate to periapsis and decelerate toward apoapsis.

This last prediction has proved to be the theory’s most promising indicator of correctness, as the rate of precession is anything but constant and does indeed appear at this time to be accelerating. See Section 1.10.

Earth nodes

Earth nodes/precession as proposed by astrologer Carl Payne Tobey. Earth’s ‘great’ solar orbit is here represented by 24 circles in increments of 15°. Individual circles represent Earth’s ‘lesser’ orbit or epicycle, moving clockwise in 15° increments. The faint grey inner circle represents the deferent. Position (1) marks the commencement of great and lesser orbits; position (13) sees epicycle and great orbit re-conjoin. As Earth returns to position (1) and closes its great orbit, its lesser orbit/epicycle completes imperceptibly quicker, making its great orbital plane precess; see position (A).

This explanation of precession was first proposed by American astrologer and mathematician Carl Payne Tobey. In his 1973 book Astrology of Inner Space, Tobey asks the question, ‘Is the axis of the Earth’s spin wobbling or is the whole orbit wobbling?’ In other words he seems to be asking: if the other planets (or for that matter any orbiting body) have nodes, shouldn’t the Earth have nodes33 also? Tobey had never encountered an astronomer who had considered the possibility of Earth nodes, but makes the observation that all ellipses are essentially epicycles or small orbits and that by moving in two different circles simultaneously a planet (or satellite) will automatically describe an ellipse (see diagram).

Here the black dot (representing Earth) orbits the Sun in a counter-clockwise direction. In moving from position 1 to 2 it travels 15° about its great solar orbit whilst simultaneously moving 15° anticlockwise within its lesser orbit. At position (7), 90° of both orbits have been completed by Earth and here it drops maximally inside its great solar orbit. At position (13) Earth is again synchronous with its great solar orbit, having moved 180° in both orbits. At position (19) 240°, Earth again moves maximally inwards on its lesser orbit. In returning to position (1) Earth finalises its great orbit but imperceptibly completes its lesser orbit ahead of the former – making its now elliptical orbital plane appear to precess, that is, slip backward. If we accept this precessionary model, Earth would begin its next great orbit 50 arc seconds back (or clockwise) from position (1), meaning that its polar axis would continually precess in seconds of arc with each successive solar orbit, which is exactly what we see at the spring equinox each year.

Tobey notes that to be a perfect ellipse the revolution of both orbits must be identical; however, planets and satellites do not move in perfect ellipses, hence they move in regressive ellipses. He also makes the observation that the elliptical shape of Earth’s orbit is being somehow mirrored by Earth’s ellipsoid profile, having a polar diameter of 7901 miles with a girth of 7926 miles (a difference of 25 miles). Lastly, special note should be made of the influence exerted by our rather unique (and intimate) companion the Moon, which is proportionally far larger than any other satellite (to its primary) in our solar system.

1.6 CALENDAR REFORM COMMITTEE

Note: This section concludes the information previously outlined in Section 1.3.

We are not aware how the Hindu savants determined Dhṛuvaka (polar longitude) and Vikśepa (ecliptic latitude), it appears they had a kind of armillary sphere with an ecliptic circle which they used to set to the ecliptic with the aid of standard stars like Pushya (δ Cancri), Magha (α Leonis), Chitrā (α Virginis), Vishaka (ι Libræ), Shatabhishak (λ Aquarii) and Revati (ζ Piscium).

Saha and Lahiri (1992)

In an effort to unify India’s many regional calendars,34 November 1952 saw an appointment of a Calendar Reform Committee or CRC whose principal task was ‘to examine all existing calendars being followed by the country and after scientific study of the subject submit proposals for an accurate and uniform calendar for the whole of India.’

Any reformed dates were then hoped to be adopted for both civil and religious purposes, ratifying the country’s numerous festivals, luni-solar calendars, Panchāng35 and of course Ayanāṃśa. Though not directly incorporating Christian/Gregorian or Islamic considerations,36 some indirect study of these calendars was also included.

The Calendar Reform Committee, chaired by Professor Meghanad Saha, comprised seven members37 hailing from varied backgrounds in higher education and the sciences. Together they laboured over the task for about three years, finally submitting their 279-page report to the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) in 1955.38

N.C. Lahiri, whose surname ultimately hijacked Chitrāpakṣa39 (now popularly referred as Lahiri Ayanāṃśa), was one Sri Nimal Chandra Lahiri, then acting secretary of the committee. As well as being a meteorologist, Lahiri was by all accounts something of an astrologer/astronomer as well as (and most interestingly) a publisher of ephemerides.

During the course of investigation into ancient Indian calendrical systems, the committee considered modern astronomical data as well as examining a large number of classical works including Siddhântic and Vedāṅga Jyotish.40 Although concluding that ‘no definite values on the initial point of the zodiac’ were to be gleaned directly from the latter’s pages, it was felt the location of 0° might be inferred from the positions of junction stars (Yogatârâ) as presented in Chapter VIII of the Sûrya Siddhânta (generally agreed to be an authoritative and accurate Siddhântic work). Indeed, this text was to become their principal guide during the investigation. In the words of the committee: ‘Our modern Sûrya Siddhânta is a book of 500 verses divided into 14 chapters… A scrutiny of the text shows that it is, with the exception of a few elements, almost completely astronomical.’41

1.7 WHY CHITRĀ?

While attempting to uncover a true measure of ancient astronomical calendars, it soon became apparent that previous researchers had hit a similar impasse, concluding the initial point of the zodiac to be close to Revati’s Yogatârâ (ζ Piscium), situated at 359° 50′ Pisces, yet the absence of a ‘prominent’ star marking this critical juncture had also prompted the question, could another Yogatârâ have been used indirectly to infer this auspicious point?42

Directly opposite the Revati/Ashwini juncture lies Chitrā Nakshatra (23° 20’ Virgo – 6° 40’ Libra). Its Yogatârâ Chitrā/α Virginis is given a longitude of 180° (0° Libra) by Sûrya Siddhânta. Situated about 2° below the ecliptic with an impressive 0.9 Mv (magnitude), Chitrā is the 15th brightest in the northern hemisphere.43

Had Chitrā been considered fiducial, it only remained to calculate the coincidence of this Yogatârâ with the autumnal equinox and infer the initial point of the zodiac. This, you might think, neatly wraps up the matter on two counts: first, Chitrā’s rather exacting degree of longitude; and second, having such data endorsed by an esteemed Siddhânta, adding legitimacy to the whole proposal. However, the referral star idea is not without controversy!

Solstices and equinox as of ad 285, Chitrā Yogatârâ (α Virginis) providing the referral point for Chitrāpakṣa Ayanāṃśa.

1.8 CONTROVERSIES

The astronomical classics use a number of techniques to determine the positions of stars and the one favoured in our surviving44 version of Sûrya Siddhânta is known as Dhṛuvaka. This system of measurement we now interpret as polar longitude. Converting this measurement into something akin to a modern reckoning adjusts the longitude of Chitrā/α Virginis to 180° 48′ 48″ (a difference of almost 1°), a discrepancy noted by the CRC45 yet curiously put aside in their final deliberations.

Added to this there is a lack of corroborative evidence within the Indian astronomical tradition of Chitrā serving as referral star for the initial point. There are also the contemporary Siddhântic works such as Brāhma Spuṭa,46 Śiromani47 and Vaṭeśvara48 to be considered, which vary in their longitudinal measurement of Chitrā/α Virginis. These give positions ranging from 179° to 184° 20′,49 yet, unperturbed by all this, on 21 March 1956 following CRC’s recommendations, the Indian government adopted Chitrāpakṣa (an Ayanāṃśa value based upon Chitrā being the referral star for the initial point of the zodiac) on whose positioning as of 22 September AD 285 at 11.18am IST50 inferred the coincidence of the sidereal and tropical zodiacs, that is, 0° Aries.

In defence of this conclusion it may be said that the absolute identity of ζ Piscium as the initial point of the zodiac is not without some doubt but overall there is good historical as well as astronomical reasoning behind its use. First, ζ Piscium rests almost exactly upon the ecliptic and resides at the juncture of Pisces and Aries. Second, Sûrya Siddhânta itself informs us that the initial point is to be found 10′ east of Revati’s Yogatârâ, with no mention of any referral point. Revatipakṣa is not without some traditional astrological credence, having been favoured by south India astrologers prior to the 19th and into the 20th century. Before the emergence of Chitrāpakṣa, Revatipakṣa was one of the more widely accepted Ayanāṃśa in recent Indian history.

One of the main criticisms levelled at Chitrāpakṣa is its lack of Siddhântic support as well as the CRC’s negation of Revatipakṣa, already nominated for just such a purpose in their primary Siddhântic reference. Additionally, use of an Ayanāṃśa based upon Chitrāpakṣa raises the question as to why Sûrya Siddhânta assigns a longitude to Chitrā’s Yogatârâ that contradicts supportive texts. A question mark also hangs over the influence of N.C. Lahiri within the CRC51 and their final decision to adopt Chitrāpakṣa – a decision that to this day is rejected by a number of influential Indian astrologers and researchers.

1.9 AYANĀṂŚA CORRECTION

Forewarning: Adjustment of Ayanāṃśa requires a sense of adventure and experimentation, but mostly an open-mindedness on the part of the astrologer. Armed with these, all corners of the Jyotish toolbox become accessible, even its darkest, dustiest draws!

I imagine readers making it this far without skipping pages are hitting their heads against a wall or starting to appreciate why this subject seldom gets an airing. Some well-meaning astrologers have made it their personal mission to prove one Ayanāṃśa over another; however, such claims become difficult to substantiate or turn out to harbour vested self-interest.

In his 1939 book Hindu Astrology, Shil Ponde offers the following value for Ayanāṃśa: 19° 27′ 00″ as of 12 noon, 9 October 1920 with an annual precession rate of 50.1″. Ponde’s suggested value is actually Revatipakṣa with a slight discrepancy on a date of coincidence,52 but for those wishing to experiment I’ve given its full calculation method below. I should also mention here that Ponde himself did not appear to claim ownership of the value, just endorsed its use.

In Chapter 2, ‘General Theory of Astrology’, of the same book, Ponde suggests an epoch value of AD 522, yet in one Ayanāṃśa calculation mistakenly cites AD 239 as being the most recent epoch of coincidence. He also suggests an annual precessional rate of 50.1″ in his primary calculation yet later amends the value to 50″. These anomalies, though slightly frustrating, should not detract from the overall validity of the calculation. It is highly likely the inconsistencies relate to a historical confusion on the part of the author, or were just publishing oversights.

Ponde’s value was first introduced to me by an astrologer I consider to be a particularly accurate astrologer and after a good number of years of comparison (between it and other popular rivals), I eventually opted for the former.

To date I’ve found this value to be the most reliable, specifically with regard to Varga charts.53 As always, the best course of action appears to be personal trial and error with familiar (intimate) horoscopes where major life events can be cross referenced against the dasha periods, Vargas and transits. Character analysis can be more open to interpretation and so ultimately unreliable. Predictive astrology and the detailed examination of divisional charts is where most gratification of this value is likely to be found.

The following Ayanāṃśa correction is given by Shil Ponde for an epoch of 9 October 1920 at 12.00pm GMT:

1920

–522 (AD 522 – date of sidereal/tropical coincidence)

= 1398

×50.1″ (annual precession value)

= 70039.8 (precession value at birth)

/3600 (converts seconds of arc to degrees of arc)

= 19.4555

(4555)×60 = 273,300

19° 27′ 00″

Note: Software permitting, an easier method of applying Shil Ponde’s calculation (or any alternative value) would be to enter:

Epoch Value: AD 522

Value at Epoch: 0° 0′ 0″

Annual Precession Value: 50.1″

Note: Applying this Ayanāṃśa value (as of J-200054) we arrive at a value of 20° 32′ or 9° 28′ Pisces. Using the comparative Ayanāṃśa value proposed by the CRC we arrive at a value of 23° 57′ or 6° 3′ Pisces. The difference between the two values is a constant 3° 25′ – or one Navamsha (see Section 21.1). This in effect guarantees that the Navamsha ascendant will be displaced by one sign when converting from the latter to the former.

1.10 A NOTE ON NUTATION

The following table lists a number of popular nutation values along with their epoch and Ayanāṃśa correction values. As can be seen, annual arc seconds remain in dispute with best-guess estimates ranging between 50″/50.34″. Recent measurements of the phenomenon suggest a rate of 50.28″ annually, equating to 1° every 72 years. Providing this current measurement does not fluctuate too wildly, each zodiacal revolution should be completed over a period of 26,000+/– years. Of course there is no way to be sure the recorded data is accurate in making long-term predictions. For now it appears that precession is following the lead of Binary Companion Theory and accelerating slightly.

Solstices and equinox: ad 3250 should see the spring equinox (SE) closely conjunct Shatabhishak’s yogatârâ (λ Aquarii).

Popular Ayanāṃśa values
Name	Coincidence Date	Date of Epoch	Value at Epoch	Annual Precession (in arc seconds)
Usha Shashi	AD 559	1950	19° 25′	50.26″
Shil Ponde*	ad 522	“	19° 52′	50.10″
B.V. Raman	AD 397	“	21° 43′	50.34″
Sri Yukeswar	AD 499	“	21° 45′	54.00″
Swaminarayan	AD 320	“	22° 47′	50.30″
J.N. Bhasin	AD 364	“	22° 10′	50.33″
Krishnamurti (KP)	AD 291	“	23° 09′	50.23″
N.C. Lahiri	AD 285	“	23° 15′	50.28″
Fagan/Bradley	AD 221	“	24° 09′	50.25″
* All Ayanāṃśa calculations in this book are based upon the value suggested by Shil Ponde.

With a lack of concise data, astrologers sometimes opt for the mean rate of precession. Having already imposed a number of abstract divisions upon the heavens it seems totally in keeping to round-up annual nutation to 50″; indeed, all recorded values to date would not be in opposition to this value.

Numerologically speaking, 50 routes to number five (5+0 = 5). This number is already rich in occult symbolism and so more than qualifies for the task at hand.55 The use of 50 arc seconds neatly rounds up the numerical symbolism for the entire zodiac, so for example: 50×72 = 3600 (3+6+0+0) and (7+2) both routing to the all important astrological 9 (see Chapter 29). Precession through each 30° sign would be 2160 years (2+1+6+0) = 9 and of course the Great Year itself: 2160×12 = 25,920 (2+5+9+2+0) = 18, 1+8 = 9.

1.11 CONCLUSION

Simplified Pythagorean model of the universe; with each of the planets attached to crystal spheres, nested within the circle of fixed stars. At its epicentre resides Earth, prominent, protected and basking in the harmonic symphony of the planets; imagined to correspond to a divine musical scale.

When considering any aspect of precession it is important to remember this is an Earth-born phenomenon. Ayanāṃśa therefore should be more appropriately termed the wobble value of Earth’s orbit and should not be confused with the issue of where 0° resides in the zodiac, although the former is intrinsically linked to the latter.

For many it is almost natural to assume the Earth is somehow suspended or nested in space, with everything else kicking-off about us. Watching sunrise and sunset each day it is easy to forget that we are the ones doing most the moving while the Sun is at the hub of events (in our solar system anyway). This idea of a somewhat removed and passive Earth is a hangover from the Pythagorean notion that all heavenly bodies were interconnected and immersed in a kind of mathematical musical harmony.

Pythagoras termed this unity Musica Universalis or music of the spheres, and resting at the heart of this symphony was Earth, safe, secure and, most importantly – special. Indeed, Earth’s safety begged such urgency as to require guardian angels to be thrown in for good measure, lest some unruly extraterrestrial force threaten it. The idea of instability or vulnerability appears to have been a terrifying concept for the ancient Greeks. And so the idea of a fixed Earth arose, permeating into modern culture and thought with terms such as sunrise and sunset. Perhaps this is another reason why Ayanāṃśa (subconsciously) remains partly veiled in astrological consciousness and why many remain fixated on a Firma Terra.

After reviewing the arguments set forth you’ll have hopefully gleaned a clearer understanding of Ayanāṃśa and its implications. Additionally, when considering the amount of general astrological material available, how little weight is given to this subject. How to a greater or lesser extent this subject is just railroaded, often consigned to an appendix or mentioned only in passing while still (of course) endorsing the CRC’s recommendation.

In general, this reception to Ayanāṃśa may be a way of placating boat-rocking energetics; after all, who wants to be told a particular value may be questionable or inaccurate and that all analyses given during the interim years require a rethink. I’d imagine (for the most part) that this kind of proposition would be unwelcome.

Some astrologers argue Chitrāpakṣa’s validity and that corrective values are unnecessary, having (in their eyes) achieved consistent results and excellent rapport with clients. To this retort, little then can be said except that there are (and remain) major unanswered questions in the field of Ayanāṃśa – which on the whole appears to have been given a fairly thick coat of whitewash.

NOTES

1.Also known as Ayanacalana – a shifting of the solstitial points.

2.Sidereal = pertaining to the stars.

3.The zodiac generally constitutes 9º (+/–) above and below the ecliptic.

4.A year of seasons = 365 days 5 hours 48 minutes 46 seconds.

5.Known also as Manázil al-Kamar – meaning lunar stations.

6.Sidereal transition = 27 days 7 hours 43 minutes. Synodic transition = 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes.

7.Yoga = position and Târâ = star.

8.Measurements of magnitude are: apparent (mv) and absolute (Mv). Apparent magnitude is measured by appearance to the human eye. Absolute magnitude is the measurement of a star at a standard distance, such as a light-year or parsec.

9.This particular assumption is based upon the Aśvinyādi system and although there remains some uneasiness over their true relationship of 0º Aries and the Nakshatra Ashwini, the two positions are taken to be mutual. Antagonists of Aśvinyādi (as the original point of coincidence) argue that its use cannot be found prior to 300 BCE.

10.Nakshatras may precede zodiacal signs, but at some point Indian astrologers began to incorporate both elements into their system.

11.For more information about Nakshatra positions and stellar designations see the Appendix.

12.Revati Nakshatra is held to be the initial point of all planetary motion. At the start of Kali Yuga all planets were set into motion at the point marked by Revati yogatârâ. All planets then complete a set number of sidereal revolutions before conjoining every 1,080,000 years or ¼ of a Great Age or Yuga. Something close to this appears to have occurred at midnight 17/02/3101 BC.

13.Sûrya Siddhânta identifies the spring equinox (c. AD 560) as coinciding with a point 10’ eastward along the ecliptic from the star Revati (longitude 359º 50′).

14.See Lesson 3 in Shashi (2009[1978]).

15.Category: sub-giant, approximately 150 light years distant.

16.Category: white (main sequence star), approximately 200 light years distant.

17.Category: pale yellow/white dwarf, approximately 250 light years distant.

18.White dwarf = stellar remnants in their final stage of evolution. Final stages include swelling of mass (a red giant), then the shedding of outer layers to an emission nebula (ionised gas) leaving only its heated core to cool over time.

19.There are five categories of variability: cataclysmic (explosive/nova), pulsating (contraction and expansion), eruptive (solar flaring), rotating (high sunspot activity) or eclipsing (close proximity of binary twin).

20.χ Cygni is known to vary from +3.3 mv to +14.2 mv over a 400-day period. These observations may explain the phenomenon of guest stars (the accounts of new stars) appearing and disappearing in the past two millennia.

21.30º = Rashi, 13º 20′ = Nakshatra and 3º 20′ = Nakshatra Pada.

22.Not including the recently de-planetised Pluto with its whopping 17º+ inclination to the ecliptic.

23.The word Solstice means ‘motionless Sun’ indicating the ancients’ obsession with solar declination.

24.Brihat Saṃhitā, Vol. 1, Chapter III – ‘On the Sun’.

25.The Great Year has been discussed at some length in Hamlet’s Mill by Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend (2014[1969]) and The Seven Ages of Man by Andrew Kirk (2013).

26.Also known as non-spherical or subject to free nutation.

27.Vibrations expected to be produced by a system of oscillation.

28.JPL = Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology.

29.Chandler wobble: two larger phase jumps revealed by Zinovy Malkin and Natalia Miller, Central Astronomical Observatory, Pulkovskoe, Ch. 65, St. Petersburg 196140, Russia, 23 August 2009.

30.See Binary Research Institute: http://binaryresearchinstitute.org.

31.In simpler terms, luni-solar causation sees the combined gravitational force of the Sun and Moon acting upon the Earth to produce its third eccentricity of orbit, precession of the equinoxes.

32.A.U. (astronomical unit) = 92,928,090 miles or 149,597,870,700 metres.

33.As Earth’s orbit effectively defines the ecliptic, establishment of Earth nodes requires another plane of reference, such as the Sun′s equatorial plane. Assuming Revatipaksha identifies 0º Aries, the longitude of Earth’s ascending node is currently close to 54º.

34.Prior to the CRC, thirty different calendar systems were used in India, including: Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Muslim and Gregorian.

35.Hindu astrological calendar and almanac.

36.Islamic Hegira Calendar, inception date 15 July AD 622, is purely lunar.

37.Committee members consisted of: Professor M.N.Saha, D.Sc., F.R.S., M.P. (Chairman); Professor A.C. Banerji, Vice-Chancellor, Allahabad University; Dr K.L. Daftari, Nagpur; Sri J.S. Karandikar, Ex-Editor (The Kesari), Poona; Dr Gorakh Prasad, D.Sc., Allahabad University; Professor R.V. Vaidya, Madhav College, Ujjain; and Sri. N.C. Lahiri, Calcutta (Secretary).

38.The CRC’s report was eventually circulated in a book format titled History of the Calendar in Different Countries Through the Ages by M.N. Saha and N.C. Lahiri (1992). This investigation still makes interesting reading some sixty years on and should, regardless of any shortcomings, be included in the list of essential reads for those wishing to gain greater insight into this fractious issue.

39.Chitrā = α Virginis, Pakṣa = relating to half.

40.Collectively given the acronym S.J. or Siddhânta-Jyotish, that is, covering the calendrical switch between the earlier Vedāṅga Jotish (lunar) to the later Siddhantic period (solar).

41.Varāhahimira in his Pañca Siddhântika regarded it as his most authoritative and reliable reference source.

42.See Ketkar (1921).

43.Spica/α Virginis is actually a double-variable, appearing to fluctuate between +0.9 and +1.05 mv.

44.The Sûrya Siddhânta referenced by Varāhamihira (in Pañca Siddhântika) does not include the use of polar longitude.

45.See Saha and Lahiri (1992, p.265).

46.Brāhma Sphuṭa Siddhânta by Brāhma-Gupta (c. AD 580).

47.Siddhânta Śiromani (Crown of Knowledge) by Bhāskarācārya II (c. AD 1100).

48.Vaṭeśvara Siddhânta by Vaṭeśvara (c. AD 880).

49.Al-Bīrūnī concluded the longitude of Chitrā to be 183º or 3º Libra.

50.IST = Indian Standard Time, 5h 30 minutes ahead of Greenwich Mean Time.

51.It has been suggested N.C. Lahiri’s own astrological practice had personally convinced him of Chitrāpakṣa’s validity. For more information read Ayanāṃśa Controversy (Chandra Hari 1985).

52.Sûrya Siddhânta commentaries estimate a date to be closer to AD 570, with an annual precession of 54’.

53.Varga = divisional; for more information see Chapter 21.

54.J-2000 = Julian epoch 2000 (AD).

55.Number 5 recurs throughout Vedic literature, largely in connection to calendrical cycles or ritual. Thus, the 5 worlds: air, fire, Sun, Moon and stars; 5 devatās: atman, æther, trees, planets and water; or the 5 forms of prāṇa: prāṇa, udāna, vyāna, samāna and apāna.