Those pious men (the Âpta (?)-purâṇa-kâr_Alberuni's India (Volume 1 of 2)

the back of the earth; nay, they maintain it by comparing the earth to

the back of a tortoise. Only Balabhadra makes them deny it (by the

words, “the earth is not round from below,” supra), since he understood

their words as meaning that the water surrounds the earth. That which

rises above the water may either be globular or a plain rising above

the water like an inverted drum, i.e. like a segment of a round

pilaster.

Further, the remark of Balabhadra (v. p. 273), that man, on account of

the smallness of his stature, cannot observe the rotundity of the

earth, is not true; because even if the human stature were as tall as

the plumb-line of the highest mountain, if he were to make his

observation only from one single point without going to other places,

and without reasoning about the observations made at the different

places, even such a height would be of no avail to him, and he would

not be able to perceive the rotundity of the earth and its nature.

What, however, is the connection of this remark with the popular

theory? If he had concluded from analogy that that side of the earth

which is opposed to the round one—I mean the lower half—was also round,

and if he then had given his theory about the extent of the power of

human vision as a result of reflection, not as a result of the

perception of the senses, his theory would seem to have a certain

foundation.

[Calculation on the extent of human vision on the earth.] With regard

to Balabhadra’s definition of the extent which may be reached by the

human eye, we propose the following calculation:—

Let A B round the centre H represent the globe of the earth. B is the

standing-point of the observer; his stature is B C. Further, we draw

the line C A, so that it touches the earth.

Now it is evident that the field of vision is B A, which we suppose to

be equal to 1⁄96 of the circle, i.e. 3¾ degrees, if we divide the

circle into 360 degrees.

According to the method followed in the calculation of the mountain

Meru (in chap, xxiii.), we divide the square of T A, i.e. 50,625, by H

T, i.e. 3431′. So we get as quotient T C = 0° 14′ 45″; and B C, the

stature of the observer, is 0° 7′ 45″.

Our calculation is based on this, that H B, the sinus totus, is 3438′.

However, the radius of the earth is, according to the circumference

which we have mentioned, 795° 27′ 16″ (yojana). If we measure B C by

this measure, it is = 1 yojana, 6 krośa, 1035 yards (= 57,035 yards).

If we suppose B C to be equal to four yards, it stands in the same

relation to A T, according to the measure of the sine, as 57,035, i.e.

the yards which we have found as the measure of the stature, to A T

according to the measure of the sine, i.e. 225. If we now calculate the

sine, we find it to be 0° 0′ 1″ 3‴, and its arc has the same measure.

However, each degree of the rotundity of the earth represents the

measure of 13 yojana, 7 krośa, and 333⅓ yards (sic). Therefore the

[Page 138.] field of vision on the earth is 291⅔ yards (sic).

(For an explanation of this calculation see the notes.)

The source of this calculation of Balabhadra’s is the Pulisa-siddhânta,

which divides the arc of the quarter of a circle into 24 kardajât. He

says: “If anybody asks for the reason of this, he must know that each

of these kardajât is 1⁄96 of the circle = 225 minutes (= 3¾ degrees).

And if we reckon its sine, we find it also to be = 225 minutes.” This

shows us that the sines are equal to their arcs in parts which are

smaller than this kardaja. And because the sinus totus, according to

Pulisa and Âryabhaṭa, has the relation of the diameter to the circle of

360 degrees, this arithmetical equality brought Balabhadra to think

that the arc was perpendicular; and any expanse in which no convexity

protrudes preventing the vision from passing, and which is not too

small to be seen, is visible.

This, however, is a gross mistake; for the arc is never perpendicular,

and the sine, however small it be, never equals the arc. This is

admissible only for such degrees as are supposed for the convenience of

calculation, but it is never and nowhere true for the degrees of the

earth.

[The axis of the earth according to Pulisa.] If Pulisa says (v. p. 267)

that the earth is held by an axis, he does not mean thereby that in

reality there exists such an axis, and that but for it the earth would

fall. How could he say such a thing, since he is of opinion that there

are four inhabited cities around the world, which is explained by the

fact that everything heavy falls from all sides down towards the earth?

However, Pulisa holds this view, that the motion of the peripheric

parts is the reason why the central parts are motionless, and that the

motion of a globe presupposes two poles, and one line connecting them,

which in the idea is the axis. It is as if he meant to say, that the

motion of heaven keeps the earth in its place, making it the natural

place for the earth, outside of which it could never be. And this place

lies on the midst of the axis of motion. For the other diameters of the

globe may also be imagined to be axes, since ἐν δυνάμει they are all

axes, and if the earth were not in the midst of an axis, there might be

axes which did not pass through the earth. Hence one may say

metaphorically that the earth is supported by the axes.

[Whether the earth moves or is at rest, according to Brahmagupta and

the author.] As regards the resting of the earth, one of the elementary

problems of astronomy, which offers many and great difficulties, this,

too, is a dogma with the Hindu astronomers. Brahmagupta says in the

Brahmasiddhânta: “Some people maintain that the first motion [Page

139.] (from east to west) does not lie in the meridian, but belongs to

the earth. But Varâhamihira refutes them by saying: ‘If that were the

case, a bird would not return to its nest as soon as it had flown away

from it towards the west.’ And, in fact, it is precisely as

Varâhamihira says.”

Brahmagupta says in another place of the same book: “The followers of

Âryabhaṭa maintain that the earth is moving and heaven resting. People

have tried to refute them by saying that, if such were the case, stones

and trees would fall from the earth.”

But Brahmagupta does not agree with them, and says that that would not

necessarily follow from their theory, apparently because he thought

that all heavy things are attracted towards the centre of the earth. He

says: “On the contrary, if that were the case, the earth would not vie

in keeping an even and uniform pace with the minutes of heaven, the

prâṇas of the times.”

There seems to be some confusion in this chapter, perhaps by the fault

of the translator. For the minutes of heaven are 21,600, and are called

prâṇa. i.e. breaths, because according to them each minute of the

meridian revolves in the time of an ordinary human breath.

Supposing this to be true, and that the earth makes a complete rotation

eastward in so many breaths as heaven does according to his

(Brahmagupta’s) view, we cannot see what should prevent the earth from

keeping an even and uniform pace with heaven.

Besides, the rotation of the earth does in no way impair the value of

astronomy, as all appearances of an astronomic character can quite as

well be explained according to this theory as to the other. There are,

however, other reasons which make it impossible. This question is most

difficult to solve. The most prominent of both modern and ancient

astronomers have deeply studied the question of the moving of the

earth, and tried to refute it. We, too, have composed a book on the

subject called Miftâḥ-ʿilm-alhaiʾa (Key of Astronomy), in which we

think we have surpassed our predecessors, if not in the words, at all

events in the matter.

CHAPTER XXVII.

ON THE FIRST TWO MOTIONS OF THE UNIVERSE (THAT FROM EAST TO WEST

ACCORDING TO ANCIENT ASTRONOMERS AND THE PRECESSION OF THE EQUINOXES),

BOTH ACCORDING TO HINDU ASTRONOMERS AND THE AUTHORS OF THE PURÂṆAS.

The astronomers of the Hindus hold on this subject mostly the same

views as ourselves. We shall give quotations from them, but shall at

once confess that that which we are able to give is very scanty indeed.

[Quotation on the subject from Pulisa.] Pulisa says: “The wind makes

the sphere of the fixed stars revolve; the two poles keep it in its

place, and its motion appears to the inhabitants of Mount Meru as a

motion from the left to the right; to the inhabitants of Vaḍavâmukha as

one from the right to the left.”

In another place he says: “If anybody asks for the direction of the

motion of the stars which we see rising in the east and rotating

towards the west until they set, let him know that the motion which we

see as a westward motion appears different according to the places

which the spectators occupy. The inhabitants of Mount Meru see it as a

motion from the left to the right, whilst the inhabitants of

Vaḍavâmukha see it as the opposite, as a motion from the right to the

left. The inhabitants of the equator see it exclusively as a westward

motion, and the inhabitants of the parts of the earth between the poles

and the equator see it more or less depressed, as their places have

more or less northern or southern latitude. The whole of this motion is

caused by the wind, which makes the spheres revolve, and compels the

planets and the other stars to rise in the east and to set in the west.

This, however, is only an accidens. As for the essentia rei, the

motions of the heavenly bodies are directed towards the east, from

Alsharaṭân towards Albuṭain, the latter lying east of the former. But

if the inquirer does not know the [Page 140.] lunar stations, and is

not capable of procuring for himself by their help an idea of this

eastward motion, let him observe the moon herself, how she moves away

from the sun once and a second time; how she then comes near him, till

she finally joins him. This will give him an idea of the second

motion.”

[Quotations from Brahmagupta and Balabhadra.] Brahmagupta says: “The

sphere has been created as moving with the greatest rapidity possible

about two poles without ever slackening, and the stars have been

created where there is no Baṭn-ḥût nor Sharaṭân, i.e. on the frontier

between them, which is the vernal equinox.”

Balabhadra, the commentator, says: “The whole world hangs on two poles,

and moves in a circular motion, which begins with a kalpa and ends with

a kalpa. But people must not therefore say that the world, on account

of the continuity of its motion, is without beginning and without end.”

Brahmagupta says: “The place without latitude (Niraksha), divided into

sixty ghaṭikâ, is the horizon for the inhabitants of Meru. There east

is west; and behind that place (beyond the equator) towards the south

is Vaḍavâmukha and the ocean which surrounds it. When the spheres and

the stars revolve, the meridian becomes an horizon common to the Devas

(in the north) and the Daityas (in the south), which they see together.

But the direction of the motion appears to them as different. The

motion which the angels see as a motion to the right, the Daityas see

as one to the left, and vice versâ, just as a man who has a thing on

his right side, looking into the water, sees it on his left. The cause

of this uniform motion which never increases nor decreases is a wind,

but it is not the common wind which we feel and hear; for this is

lulled, and roused, and varies, whilst that wind never slackens.”

In another place Brahmagupta says: “The wind makes all the fixed stars

and the planets revolve towards the west in one and the same

revolution; but the planets move also in a slow pace towards the east,

like a dust-atom moving on a potter’s-wheel in a direction opposite to

that in which the wheel is revolving. That motion of this atom which is

visible is identical with the motion which drives the wheel round,

whilst its individual motion is not perceived. In this view Lâṭa,

Âryabhaṭa, and Vasishṭha agree, but some people think that the earth

moves while the sun is resting. That motion which mankind conceives as

a motion from east to west, the angels (Deva) conceive as a motion from

left to right, the Daityas as one from right to left.”

[Criticisms of the author.] This is all I have read in Indian books on

the subject.

[The wind as the motor of the sphere.] Their speaking of the wind as

the motor (supra) has, I think, only the purpose of bringing the

subject near to the understanding of people and to facilitate its

study; for people see with their own eyes that the wind, when blowing

against instruments with wings and toys of this kind, puts them into

motion. But as soon as they come to speak of the first mover (God),

they at once give up any comparison with the natural wind, which in all

its phases is determined by certain causes. For though it puts things

into motion, the moving is not its essence; and besides, it cannot move

without being in contact with something, because the wind is a body,

and is acted upon by external influences or means, its motion being

commensurate with their force.

Their saying that the wind does not rest, simply means that the moving

power works perpetually, and does not imply rest and motion such as are

proper to bodies. Further, their saying that it does not slacken means

that it is free from all kinds of accidents; for [Page 141.] slackening

and weakening only occur in such bodies or beings which are composed of

elements of conflicting qualities.

[On the two poles keeping the sphere.] The expression that the two

poles keep the sphere of the fixed stars (p. 278) means that they keep

or preserve it in its normal state of motion, not that they keep or

preserve it from falling down. There is a story of an ancient Greek who

thought that once upon a time the Milky Way had been a road of the sun,

and that afterwards he had left it. Such a thing would mean that the

motions ceased to be normal, and to something like this the expression

of the poles keeping the sphere of the fixed stars may be referred.

[On the relative nature of time.] The phrase of Balabhadra about the

ending of the motion (that it ends with a kalpa, &c., p. 279) means

that everything which exists and may be determined arithmetically has

no doubt an end, for two reasons: first, because it has a beginning,

for every number consists of one and its reduplications, whilst the one

itself exists before all of them; and, secondly, because part of it

exists in the present moment of time, for if days and nights increase

in number through the continuation of existence, they must necessarily

have a beginning whence they started. If a man maintains that time does

not exist in the sphere (as one of its immanent qualities), and thinks

that day and night have only a relative existence, exist only in

relation to the earth and its inhabitants, that if, e.g., the earth

were taken away out of the midst of the world, also night and day would

cease to exist as well as the possibility of measuring elements

composed of days, he would thereby impose upon Balabhadra the necessity

of a digression, and compel him to prove the cause, not of the first,

but of the second motion. The latter cause is the cycles of the

planets, which have only a relation to the sphere, not to the earth.

These cycles Balabhadra indicates by the word kalpa (v. p. 279), since

it comprehends them all, and since all of them begin with its

beginning.

[The meridian divided into sixty ghaṭikâ.] If Brahmagupta says of the

meridian that it is divided into sixty parts (v. p. 279), it is as if

any one of us should say, the meridian is divided into twenty-four

parts; for the meridian is a medium for measuring and counting time.

Its revolution lasts twenty-four hours, or, as the Hindus will have it,

sixty ghaṭikâ (or ghaṛî). This is the reason why they have reckoned the

risings of the zodiacal signs in ghaṭikâ, not in times of the meridian

(360 degrees).

[On the fixed stars.] If, further, Brahmagupta says that the wind

causes the fixed stars and the planets to revolve, if he besides, in

particular, attributes a slow eastward motion to the planets (p. 280),

he gives the reader to understand that the fixed stars have no such

motion, or else he would have said that they, too, have the same slow

eastward motion as the planets, not differing from them save in size

and in the variation which they exhibit in the retrograde motion. Some

people relate that the ancients originally did not understand their

(the fixed stars’) motions until, in long periods of time, they became

aware of them. This opinion is confirmed by the fact that Brahmagupta’s

book does not, among the various cycles, mention the cycles of the

fixed stars, and that he makes their appearing and disappearing depend

upon invariable degrees of the sun.

[The direction of the heavenly motion, as seen from different points of

the earth.] If Brahmagupta maintains (p. 278) that to the inhabitants

of the equator the first motion is not a motion to the right and left,

the reader must bear in mind the following. A man dwelling under either

of the two poles, to whatever direction he turns, has always the moving

heavenly bodies before himself, and as they move in one direction, they

must necessarily first stand opposite one of his hands, and then,

moving on, come to stand opposite his other hand. The direction of this

motion appears to the inhabitants of the two poles just the very

contrary, like the image of a thing in the water or a mirror, where its

directions seem to be exchanged. If the image of a man is reflected by

the water or a mirror, he appears as a different man standing [Page

142.] opposite to the spectator, his right side opposite to the left of

the spectator, and his left side opposite to the right of the

spectator.

Likewise the inhabitants of places of northern latitude have the

revolving heavenly bodies before themselves towards the south, and the

inhabitants of places of southern latitude have them before themselves

towards the north. To them the motion appears the same as to the

inhabitants of Meru and Vaḍavâmukha. But as regards those living on the

equator, the heavenly bodies revolve nearly above their heads, so they

cannot have them before themselves in any direction. In reality,

however, they deviate a little from the equator, and in consequence the

people there have a uniform motion before themselves on two sides, the

motion of the northern heavenly bodies from right to left, and that of

the southern bodies from left to right. So they unite in their persons

the faculty of the inhabitants of the two poles (viz. of seeing the

heavenly bodies moving in different directions), and it depends

entirely upon their will, if they want to see the stars move from the

right to the left or vice versâ.

It is the line passing through the zenith of a man standing on the

equator which Brahmagupta means when he says that it is divided into

sixty parts (v. p. 279).

The authors of the Purâṇas represent heaven as a dome or cupola

standing on earth and resting, and the stars as beings which wander

individually from east to west. How could these men have any idea of

the second motion? And if they really had such an idea, how could an

opponent of the same class of men concede the possibility that one and

the same thing individually moves in two different directions?

We shall here communicate what we know of their theories, although we

are aware that the reader will not derive any profit from them, since

they are simply useless.

[Quotation from the Matsya-Purâṇa.] The Matsya-Purâṇa says: “The sun

and the stars pass along southward as rapidly as an arrow revolving

round Meru. The sun revolves round something like a beam, the end of

which is burning when its revolution is very rapid. The sun does not

really disappear (during the night); he is then invisible only to some

people, to some of the inhabitants of the four cities on the four sides

of Meru. He revolves round Meru, starting from the north side of Mount

Lokâloka; he does not pass beyond Lokâloka, nor illuminate its south

side. He is invisible during the night, because he is so far away. Man

can see him at a distance of 1000 yojana, but when he is so far away, a

small object sufficiently near to the eye can render him invisible to

the spectator.

“When the sun stands in the zenith of Pushkara-Dvîpa, he moves along

the distance of one-thirtieth part of the earth in three-fifths of an

hour. In so much time he traverses 21 laksha and 50,000 yojana, i.e.

2,150,000 yojana. Then he turns to the north, and the distance he

traverses becomes thrice as large. In consequence, the day becomes

long. The distance which the sun traverses in a southern day is 9 koṭi

and 10,045 yojana. When he then returns to the north and revolves round

Kshîra, i.e. the Milky Way, his daily march is 1 koṭi and 21 laksha

yojana.”

[Criticisms of the author on the theory of the Matsya-Purâṇa.] Now we

ask the reader to consider how confused these expressions are. If the

author of the Matsya-Purâṇa says “the stars pass as rapidly as an

arrow,” &c., we take this for a hyperbole intended for uneducated

people; but we must state that the arrow-like motion of the stars is

not peculiar to the south to the exclusion of the north. There are

limits both in the north and south whence the sun returns, and the time

of the sun’s passing from the southern limit to the northern is equal

to the time of his passing from the [Page 143.] northern limit to the

southern. Therefore his motion northward has the same right of being

described as as rapid as an arrow. Herein, however, lies a hint of the

theological opinion of the author regarding the north pole, for he

thinks the north is the above and the south the below. Hence the stars

glide down to the south like children on a see-saw plank.

If, however, the author hereby means the second motion, whilst in

reality it is the first, we must state that the stars in the second

motion do not revolve round Meru, and that the plane of this motion is

inclined towards the horizon of Meru by one-twelfth of the circle.

Further, how far-fetched is this simile in which he connects the motion

of the sun with a burning beam! If we held the opinion that the sun

moves as an uninterrupted round collar, his simile would be useful in

so far as it refutes such an opinion. But as we consider the sun as a

body, as it were, standing in heaven, his simile is meaningless. And if

he simply means to say that the sun describes a round circle, his

comparing the sun to a burning beam is quite superfluous, because a

stone tied to the end of a cord describes a similar circle if it is

made to revolve round the head (there being no necessity for describing

it as burning).

That the sun rises over some people and sets over others, as he

describes it, is true; but here, too, he is not free from his

theological opinions. This is shown by his mention of the mountain

Lokâloka and his remark that the rays of the sun fall on it, on its

human or north side, not on its wild or south side.

Further, the sun is not hidden during the night on account of his great

distance, but because he is covered by something—by the earth according

to us, by Mount Meru according to the author of the Matsya-Purâṇa. He

imagines that the sun marches round Meru, whilst we are on one of its

sides. In consequence we are in a varying distance from the sun’s path.

That this is originally his opinion is confirmed by the later following

remarks. That the sun is invisible during the night has nothing

whatever to do with his distance from us.

The numbers which the author of the Matsya-Purâṇa mentions I hold to be

corrupt, as they are not borne out by any calculation. He represents

the path of the sun in the north as threefold that in the south, and

makes this the cause of the difference of the length of the day. Whilst

in reality the sum of day and night is always identical, and day and

night in north and south stand in a constant relation to each other, it

seems necessary that we should refer his remarks to a latitude where

the summer-day is 45 ghaṭikâ, the winter-day 15 ghaṭikâ long.

Further, his remark that the sun hastens in the north (marches there

more rapidly than in the south), requires to be proved. The places of

northern latitude have meridians not very distant from each other,

because of their being near to the pole, whilst the meridians become

more distant from each other the nearer they are to the equator. If,

now, the sun hastens in traversing a smaller distance, he wants less

time than for traversing the greater distance, more especially if on

this greater distance his march is slackening. In reality the opposite

is the case.

By his phrase when the sun revolves above Pushkara-Dvîpa (p. 284) is

meant the line of the winter solstice. According to him, on this line

the day must be longer than in any other place, whether it be the

summer solstice or another. All this is unintelligible.

[Quotation from the Vâyu-Purâṇa.] Similar notions are also found in the

Vâyu-Purâṇa, viz. “that the day in the south is twelve muhûrta, in the

north eighteen, and that the sun between south and north has a

declination of 17,221 yojana in 183 days, i.e. 94(19⁄183) yojana for

each day.”

One muhûrta is equal to four-fifths of an hour (= 48 minutes). The

sentence of the Vâyu-Purâṇa applies [Page 144.] to a latitude where the

longest day is 14⅖ hours.

As regards the numbers of the yojanas mentioned by the Vâyu-Purâṇa, the

author means evidently the portio of the double declination of the

sphere. According to him, the declination is twenty-four degrees;

therefore the yojanas of the whole sphere would be 129,157½. And the

days in which the sun traverses the double declination are half the

solar year, no regard being had to the fractions of days, which are

nearly five-eighths of a day.

Further, the Vâyu-Purâṇa says “that the sun in the north marches slowly

during the day and rapidly during the night, and in the south vice

versâ. Therefore the day is long in the north, even as much as eighteen

muhûrta.” This is merely the language of a person who has not the

slightest knowledge of the eastern motion of the sun, and is not able

to measure a day’s arc by observation.

[Quotation from the Vishṇu-Dharma.] The Vishṇu-Dharma says: “The orbit

of the Great Bear lies under the pole; under it the orbit of Saturn;

then that of Jupiter; next Mars, the Sun, Venus, Mercury, and the Moon.

They rotate towards the east like a mill, in a uniform kind of motion

which is peculiar to each star, some of them moving rapidly, others

slowly. Death and life repeat themselves on them from eternity

thousands of times.”

If you examine this statement according to scientific principles, you

will find that it is confused. Conceding that the Great Bear is under

the pole and that the place of the pole is absolute height, the Great

Bear lies below the zenith of the inhabitants of Meru. In this

statement he is right, but he is mistaken with regard to the planets.

For the word below is, according to him, to be understood so as to mean

a greater or smaller distance from the earth; and thus taken, his

statement (regarding the distances of the planets from the earth) is

not correct, unless we suppose that Saturn has, of all planets, the

greatest declination from the equator, the next greatest Jupiter, then

Mars, the Sun, Venus, &c., and that at the same time this amount of

their declination is a constant one. This, however, does not correspond

to reality.

If we take the sum total of the whole statement of the Vishṇu-Dharma,

the author is right in so far as the fixed stars are higher than the

planets, but he is wrong in so far as the pole is not higher than the

fixed stars.

The mill-like rotation of the planets is the first motion towards the

west, not the second motion indicated by the author. According to him,

the planets are the spirits of individuals who have gained exaltation

by their merits, and who have returned to it after the end of their

life in a human shape. According to my opinion, the author uses a

number in the words thousands of times (p. 287), either because he

wanted to intimate that their existence is an existence in our meaning

of the term, an evolution out of the δύναμις into the πρᾶξις (hence

something finite, subject to numeration or determination by measure),

or because he meant to indicate that some of those spirits obtain

moksha, others not. Hence their number is liable to a more or less, and

everything of this description is of a finite nature.

CHAPTER XXVIII.

ON THE DEFINITION OF THE TEN DIRECTIONS.

The extension of bodies in space is in three directions: length,

breadth, and depth or height. The path of any real direction, not an

imaginary one, is limited; therefore the lines representing these three

paths are limited, and their six end-points or limits are the

directions. If you imagine an animal in the centre of these lines, i.e.

where they cut each other, which turns its face towards one of them,

the directions with relation to the animal are before, behind, right,

left, above, and below.

If these directions are used in relation to the world, [Page 145.] they

acquire new names. As the rising and setting of the heavenly bodies

depend upon the horizon and the first motion becomes apparent by the

horizon, it is the most convenient to determine the directions by the

horizon. The four directions, east, west, north, south (corresponding

to before, behind, left, and right), are generally known, but the

directions which lie between each two of these are less known. These

make eight directions, and, together with above and below, which do not

need any further explanation, ten directions.

The Greeks determined the directions by the rising and setting places

of the zodiacal signs, brought them into relation to the winds, and so

obtained sixteen directions.

Also the Arabs determined the directions by the blowing-points of the

winds. Any wind blowing between two cardinal winds they called in

general Nakbâ. Only in rare cases they are called by special names of

their own.

The Hindus, in giving names to the directions, have not taken any

notice of the blowing of a wind; they simply call the four cardinal

directions, as well as the secondary directions between them, by

separate names. So they have eight directions in the horizontal plane,

as exhibited by the following diagram:—

+-------------------+---------------------+-----------------+

| S.W. | South. | S.E. |

| +-----------+---------------------+---------+ |

| | | | | |

+-------+-----------+---------------------+---------+-------+

| | | | | |

+-------+-----------+---------------------+---------+-------+

| | | | | |

| +-----------+---------------------+---------+ |

| | | |

| N.W. | North. | N.E. |

+-------------------+---------------------+-----------------+

Besides there are two directions more for the two poles of the

horizontal plane, the above and below, the former being called Upari,

the second Adhas and Tala.

These directions, and those in use among other nations, are based on

general consent. Since the horizon is divided by innumerable circles,

the directions also proceeding from its centre are innumerable. The two

ends of every possible diameter may be considered as before and behind,

and therefore the two ends of the diameter cutting the former at right

angles (and lying in the same plane) are right and left.

The Hindus can never speak of anything, be it an object of the

intellect or of imagination, without representing it as a

personification, an individual. They at once marry him, make him

celebrate marriage, make his wife become pregnant and give birth to

something. So, too, in this case. The Vishṇu-Dharma relates that Atri,

the star who rules the stars of the Great Bear, married the directions,

represented as one person, though they are eight in number, and that

from her the moon was born.

Another author relates: Daksha, i.e. Prajâpati, married Dharma, i.e.

the reward, to ten of his daughters, i.e. the ten directions. From one

of them he had many children. She was called Vasu, and her children the

Vasus. One of them was the moon.

No doubt our people, the Muslims, will laugh at such a birth of the

moon. But I give them still more of this stuff. Thus, e.g. they relate:

The sun, the son of Kaśyapa and of Âditya, his wife, was born in the

sixth Manvantara on the lunar station Viśâkhâ; the moon, the son of

Dharma, was born on the station Kṛittikâ; Mars, the son of Prajâpati,

on Pûrvâshâḍhâ; Mercury, the son of [Page 146.] the moon, on

Dhanishṭhâ; Jupiter, the son of Aṅgiras, on Pûrvaphâlgunî; Venus, the

daughter of Bhṛigu, on Pushya; Saturn on Revatî; the Bearer of the

Tail, the son of Yama, the angel of death, on Âślesha, and the Head on

Revatî.

According to their custom, the Hindus attribute certain dominants to

the eight directions in the horizontal plane, which we exhibit in the

following table:—

+----------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+

+----------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+

+----------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+

| The Fire | S.E. | Vâyu | N.W. |

+----------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+

+----------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+

| Pṛithu | S.W. | Mahâdeva | N.E. |

+----------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+

The Hindus construct a figure of these eight directions, called

Râhucakra, i.e. the figure of the Head, by means of which they try to

gain an omen or prophecy for hazard-playing. It is the following

diagram:—

[FIGURE]

The figure is used in this way: First, you must know the dominant of

the day in question, and its place in the present figure. Next you must

know that one of the eight parts of the day in which you happen to be.

These eighths are counted on the lines, beginning with the dominant of

the day, in uninterrupted succession from east to south and west. Thus

you find the dominant of the eighth in question. If, e.g., you want to

know the fifth eighth of Thursday whilst Jupiter is the dominus diei in

the south, and the line proceeding from the south terminates in

north-west, we find that the dominant of the first eighth is Jupiter,

that of the second is Saturn, that of the third the sun, that of the

fourth the moon, and that of the fifth Mercury in the north. In this

way you go on counting the eighths through the day and the night till

the end of the νυχθήμερον. When thus the direction of the eighth of

[Page 147.] the day in which you are has been found, it is considered

by them as Râhu; and when sitting down to play, you must place yourself

so that you have this direction at your back. Then you will win,

according to their belief. It is no affair of the reader to despise a

man who, on account of such an omen, in a variety of games stakes all

his chances on one cast of the dice. Suffice it to leave to him the

responsibility of his dice-playing.

CHAPTER XXIX.

DEFINITION OF THE INHABITABLE EARTH ACCORDING TO THE HINDUS.

[The Ṛishi Bhuvanakośa on the inhabitable world.] In the book of the

Ṛishi Bhuvanakośa we read that the inhabitable world stretches from

Himavant towards the south, and is called Bharata-varsha, so called

from a man, Bharata, who ruled over them and provided for them. The

inhabitants of this οἰκουμένη are those to whom alone reward and

punishment in another life are destined. It is divided into nine parts,

called Nava-khaṇḍa-prathama, i.e. the primary nine parts. Between each

two parts there is a sea, which they traverse from one khaṇḍa to the

other. The breadth of the inhabitable world from north to south is 1000

yojana.

By Himavant the author means the northern mountains, where the world,

in consequence of the cold, ceases to be inhabitable. So all

civilisation must of necessity be south of these mountains.

His words, that the inhabitants are subject to reward and punishment,

indicate that there are other people not subject to it. These beings he

must either raise from the degree of man to that of angels, who, in

consequence of the simplicity of the elements they are composed of and

of the purity of their nature, never disobey a divine order, being

always willing to worship; or he must degrade them to the degree of

irrational animals. According to him, therefore, there are no human

beings outside the οἰκουμένη (i.e. Bharatavarsha).

Bharatavarsha is not India alone, as Hindus think, according to whom

their country is the world, and their race the only race of mankind;

for India is not traversed by an ocean separating one khaṇḍa from the

other. Further, they do not identify these khaṇḍa with the dvîpas, for

the author says that on those seas people pass from one shore to the

other. Further, it follows from his statement that all the inhabitants

of the earth and the Hindus are subject to reward and punishment, that

they are one great religious community.

The nine parts are called Prathama, i.e. primary ones, because they

also divide India alone into nine parts. So the division of the

οἰκουμένη is a primary one, but the division of Bharatavarsha a

secondary one. Besides, there is still a third division into nine

parts, as their astrologers divide each country into nine parts when

they try to find the lucky and unlucky places in it.

[Quotation from Vâyu-Purâṇa.] We find a similar tradition in the

Vâyu-Purâṇa, viz. that “the centre of Jambu-dvîpa is called

Bharatavarsha, which means those who acquire something and nourish

themselves. With them there are the four yuga. They are subject to

reward and punishment; and Himavant lies to the north of the country.

It is divided into nine parts, and between them there are navigable

seas. Its length is 9000 yojana, its breadth 1000; and because the

country is also called Samnâra (?), each ruler who rules it is called

Samnâra (?). The shape of its nine parts is as follows.”

Then the author begins to describe the mountains in the khaṇḍa between

the east and north, and the rivers which rise there, but he does not go

beyond this description. Thereby he gives us to understand that, [Page

148.] according to his opinion, this khaṇḍa is the οἰκουμένη. But he

contradicts himself in another place, where he says that Jambu-dvîpa is

the centre among the Nava-khaṇḍa-prathama, and the others lie towards

the eight directions. There are angels on them, men, animals, and

plants. By these words he seems to mean the dvîpas.

If the breadth of the οἰκουμένη is 1000 yojana, its length must be

nearly 2800.

Further, the Vâyu-Purâṇa mentions the cities and countries which lie in

each direction. We shall exhibit them in tables, together with similar

information from other sources, for this method renders the study of

the subject easier than any other.

Here follows a diagram representing the division of Bharatavarsha into

nine parts.

+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+

| | | |

| | South. | |

| | | |

| Nâgadvîpa. +=====================+ Tâmravarṇa. |

| | | |

| | Gabhastimat. | |

+-------++---------+---------------------+------------++-------- +

| || | Indradvîpa or | || |

| West. || Saumya. | Madhyadêśa, i.e. | Kaśerumat. || East. |

| || | the middle country. | || |

+-------++---------+---------------------+------------++-------- +

| | | |

| Gândharva. +=====================+ Nagarasaṁvṛitta. |

| | | |

| | North. | |

| | | |

+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+

[On the figure Kûrma-cakra.] We have already heretofore mentioned that

that part of the earth in which the οἰκουμένη lies resembles a

tortoise, because its borders are round, because it rises above the

water and is surrounded by the water, and because it has a globular

convexity on its surface. However, there is a possibility that the

origin of the name is this, that their astronomers and astrologers

divide the directions according to the lunar stations. Therefore the

country, too, is divided according to the lunar stations, and the

figure which represents this division is similar to a tortoise.

Therefore it is called Kûrma-cakra, i.e. the tortoise-circle or the

tortoise-shape. The following diagram is from the Saṁhitâ of

Varâhamihira.

South.

Uttaraphalgunî.

Hasta.

Citrâ.

\|/

Svâtî. | Âślêsha.

Viśâkhâ. | Maghâ.

Anurâdhâ. | Pûrvaphalgunî.

Nairṛita. | Âgnêya.

West. >----------------------------+------------------------------< East.

Ârdrâ. | Jyeshṭhâ.

Mûla. | Punarvasu.

Pûrvâshâḍhâ. | Pushya.

Uttarâshâḍhâ. | Revatî.

Śravaṇa. | Aśvinî.

Dhanishṭhâ. | Bharaṇî.

Vâyava. | Aiśâna.

/|\

North.

Śatabhishaj.

Uttarabhâdrapadâ.

Pûrvabhâdrapadâ.

[Page 149.]

[The division of Bharatavarsha according to Varâhamihira.] Varâhamihira

calls each of the Nava-khaṇḍa a varga. He says: “By them (the vargas)

Bharatavarsha, i.e. half of the world, is divided into nine parts, the

central one, the eastern, &c.” Then he passes to the south, and thus

round the whole horizon. That he understands by Bharatavarsha India

alone is indicated by his saying that each varga has a region, the king

of which is killed when some mishap befalls it. So belong

To the 1st or central varga, the region Pâñcâla.

,, ,, 2d varga, ,, ,, Magadha.

,, ,, 3d varga, ,, ,, Kaliṅga.

,, ,, 4th varga, ,, ,, Avanti, i.e. Ujain.

,, ,, 5th varga, ,, ,, Ananta.

,, ,, 6th varga, ,, ,, Sindhu and Sauvîra.

,, ,, 7th varga, ,, ,, Hârahaura.

,, ,, 8th varga, ,, ,, Madura.

,, ,, 9th varga, ,, ,, Kulinda.

All these countries are parts of India proper.

[On the change of geographical names.] Most of the names of countries

under which they appear in this context are not those by which they are

now generally known. Utpala, a native of Kashmîr, says in his

commentary on the book Saṁhitâ regarding this subject: “The names of

countries change, and particularly in the yugas. So Mûltân was

originally called Kâśyapapura, then Haṁsapura, then Bagapura, then

Sâmbhapura, and then Mûlasthâna, i.e. the original place, for mûla

means root, origin, and tâna means place.”

A yuga is a long space of time, but names change rapidly, when, for

instance, a foreign nation with a different language occupies a

country. Their tongues frequently mangle the words, and thus transfer

them into their own language, as is, e.g. the custom of the Greeks.

Either they keep the original meaning of the names, and try a sort of

translation, but then they undergo certain changes. So the city of

Shâsh, which has its name from the Turkish language, where it is called

Tâsh-kand, i.e. stone-city, is called stone-tower in the book

γεωγραφία. In this way new names spring up as translations of older

ones. Or, secondly, the barbarians adopt and keep the local names, but

with such sounds and in such forms as are adapted to their tongues, as

the Arabs do in Arabising foreign names, which become disfigured in

their mouth: e.g. Bûshang they call in their books Fûsanj, and

Sakilkand they call in their revenue-books Fârfaza (sic). However, what

is more curious and strange is this, that sometimes one and the same

language changes in the mouth of the same people who speak it, in

consequence of which strange and uncouth forms of words spring up, not

intelligible save to him who discards every rule of the language. And

such changes are brought about in a few years, without there being any

stringent cause or necessity for it. Of course, in all of this the

Hindus are actuated by the desire to have as many names as possible,

and to practise on them the rules and arts of their etymology, and they

glory in the enormous copiousness of their language which they obtain

by such means.

The following names of countries, which we have taken from the

Vâyu-Purâṇa, are arranged according to the four directions, whilst the

names taken from the Saṁhitâ are arranged according to the eight

directions. All these names are of that kind which we have here

described (i.e. they are not the names now in general use). We exhibit

them in the following tables:—

[Page 150.] The single countries of the middle realm, according to the

Vâyu-Purâṇa.

Kuru, Pâñcâla, Sâlva, Jaṅgala, Śûrasena, Bhadrakâra (!), Bodha,

Patheśvara, Vatsa, Kisadya, Kulya, Kuntala, Kâśi, Kośala, Arthayâshava

(?), Puhliṅga (!), Mashaka (!), Vṛika.

The people in the east:—

Andhra, Vâka, Mudrakaraka (?), Prâtragira (?), Vahirgira, Prathanga

(?), Vaṅgeya, Mâlava (!), Mâlavartika, Prâgjyotisha, Muṇḍa, Âbika (?),

Tâmraliptika, Mâla, Magadha, Govinda (Gonanda ?).

The people in the south:—

Pâṇḍya, Kerala, Caulya, Kulya, Setuka, Mûshika, Rumana (?), Vanavâsika,

Mahârâshtra, Mâhisha, Kaliṅga, [Page 151.] Âbhîra, Îshîka, Âṭavya,

Śavara (?), Pulindra, Vindhyamûli, Vaidarbha, Daṇḍaka, Mûlika (!),

Asmaka, Naitika (!), Bhogavardhana, Kuntala, Andhra, Udbhira, Nalaka,

Alika, Dâkshinâtya, Vaideśa, Sûrpâkâraka, Kolavana, Durga, Tillîta (?),

Puleya, Krâla (!), Rûpaka, Tâmasa, Tarûpana (?), Karaskara, Nâsikya,

Uttaranarmada, Bhânukacchra (?), Maheya, Sâraswata (?), Kacchîya,

Surâshtra, Anartta, Hudvuda (?).

The people in the west:—

Malada (?), Karûsha, Mekala, Utkala, Uttamarṇa, Baśârṇa (?), Bhoja,

Kishkinda, Kosala, Traipura, Vaidika, Tharpura (?), Tumbura, Shattumâna

(?), Padha, Karṇaprâvaraṇa [Page 152.] (!), Hûna, Darva, Hûhaka (!),

Trigartta, Mâlava, Kirâta, Tâmara.

The people in the north:—

Vâhlîka (!), Vâḍha, Vâna (?), Âbhîra, Kalatoyaka, Aparânta (?),

Pahlava, Carmakhaṇḍika, Gândhâra, Yavana, Sindhu, Sauvîra, i.e. Multân

and Jahrâwâr, Madhra (?), Śaka, Drihâla (?), Litta (Kulinda), Malla

(?), Kodara (?), Âtreya, Bharadva, Jâṅgala, Daseruka (!), Lampâka,

Tâlakûna (?), Sûlika, Jâgara.

The names of the countries for the tortoise-figure, as taken from the

Saṁhitâ of Varâhamihira.

I. The names of the countries in the centre of the realm:—

Bhadra, Ari, Meda, Mâṇḍavya, Sâlvanî, Pojjihâna, Maru, Vatsa, Ghosha,

the valley of the Yamunâ, Sârasvata, Matsya, Mâthura, Kopa, Jyotisha,

Dharmâraṇya, Śûrasena, Gauragrîva, Uddehika near Bazâna, Pâṇḍu, [Page

153.] Guḍa = Tânêshar, Aśvattha, Pañcâla, Sâketa, Kaṅka, Kuru =

Tânêshar, Kâlkoṭi, Kukura, Pariyâtra, Audumbara, Kapishṭhala, Gaja.

II. The names of the countries in the east:—

Añjana, Vṛishabadhvaja, Padma-Tulya (sic), Vyâghramukha, i.e. people

with tiger-faces, Suhma, Karvaṭa, Candrapura, Śûrpakarṇa, i.e. people

with ears like sieves, Khasha, Magadha, Mount Śibira, Mithilâ,

Samataṭa, Oḍra, Aśvavadana, i.e. people with horse-faces, Dantura, i.e.

people with long teeth, Prâgjyotisha, Lohitya, Krîra-samudra (sic),

i.e. the milk-sea, Purushâda, Udayagiri, i.e. the mountain of sunrise,

Bhadra, Gauraka, Pauṇḍra, Utkala, Kâśi, Mekala, Ambashṭha, Ekapada,

i.e. the one-footed people, Tâmaliptikâ, Kausalaka, Vardhamâna.

III. The names of the countries of the south-east (Âgneya):—

Kosala, Kaliṅga, Vaṅga, Upavaṅga, Jaṭhara, Aṅga, Saulika, Vidarbha,

Vatsa, Andhra, Colika (?), Ûrdhvakarṇa, i.e. people whose ears are

directed upwards, Vṛisha, Nâlikera, Carmadvîpa, the mountain Vindhya,

[Page 154.] Tripurî, Śmaśrudhara, Hemakûṭya, Vyâlagrîva, i.e. people

whose bosoms are snakes, Mahâgrîva, i.e. people who have wide bosoms,

Kishkindha, the country of the monkeys, Kaṇḍakasthala, Nishâda,

Râshṭra, Dâśârṇa, Purika, Nagnaparṇa, Śavara.

IV. The names of the countries in the south:—

Laṅkâ, i.e. the cupola of the earth, Kâlâjina, Sairîkîrṇa (?),

Tâlikaṭa, Girnagara, Malaya, Dardura, Mahendra, Mâlindya, Bharukaccha,

Kankaṭa, Taṅkaṇa, Vanavâsi on the coast, Śibika, Phaṇikâra, Koṅkana

near the sea, Âbhîra, Âkara, Veṇâ a river, Avanti, i.e. the city of

Ujain, Daśapura, Gonarda, Keralaka, Karṇâṭa, Mahâṭavi, Citrakûṭa,

Nâsikya, Kollagiri, Cola, Krauñcadvîpa, Jaṭâdhara, Kauverya,

Ṛishyamûka, Vaiḍûrya, Śaṅkha, Mukta, Atri, Vâricara, Jarmapaṭṭana

(sic), Dvîpa, Gaṇarâjya, Kṛishṇavaiḍûrya, Śibika, Śûryâdri, [Page 155.]

Kuśumanaga, Tumbavana, Kârmaṇeyaka, Yâmyodadhi, Tâpasâśrama, Ṛishika,

Kâñcî, Marucîpaṭṭana, Dîvârśa (!), Siṁhala, Ṛishabha, Baladevapaṭṭana,

Daṇḍakâvaṇa, Timingilâśana (?), Bhadra, Kaccha, Kuñjaradarî,

Tâmraparṇa.

V. The names of the countries in the south-west (Nairṛita):—

Kâmboja, Sindhu, Sauvîra, i.e. Multan and Jahrâvâr, Vaḍavâmukha,

Âravâmbashṭha, Kapila, Pâraśava, i.e. the Persians, Sûdra, Barbara,

Kirâta, Khaṇḍa, Kravya, Âbhîra, Cañcûka, Hemagiri, Sindhu, Kâlaka,

Raivataka, Surâshṭra, Bâdara, Dramiḍa, Mahârṇava, Nârîmukha, i.e. men

with women’s faces, i.e. the Turks, Ânarta, Pheṇagiri, Yavana, i.e. the

Greeks, Mâraka, Karṇaprâvaraṇa.

VI. The names of the countries in the west:—

Maṇimân, Meghavân, Vanaugha, Astagiri, i.e. the country of sunset,

Aparântaka, Śântika, Haihaya, Praśastâdri, Vokkâṇa, Pañcanada, i.e. the

union of the five rivers, Maṭhara, Pârata, Târakruti (?), Jṛinga,

Vaiśya, Kanaka, Śaka, Mleccha, i.e. the Arabs.

VII. The names of the countries in the north-west (Vâyava):—

Mâṇḍavya, Tukhâra, Tâlahala, Madra, Aśmaka, Kulûtalahaḍa, [Page 156.]

Strîrâjya, i.e. women amongst whom no man dwells longer than half a

year, Nṛisiṁhavana, i.e. people with lion-faces, Khastha, i.e. people

who are born from the trees, hanging on them by the navel-strings,

Venumatî (?), i.e. Tirmidh, Phalgulu, Guruhâ, Marukucca, Carmaraṅga,

i.e. people with coloured skins, Ekavilocana, i.e. the one-eyed men,

Sûlika, Dîrghagrîva, i.e. people with long bosoms, which means with

long necks, Dîrghamukha, i.e. people with long faces, Dîrghakeśa, i.e.

people with long hair.

VIII. The names of the countries in the north:—

Kailâsa, Himavant, Vasumant, Giri, Dhanushman (!), i.e. the people with

bows, Krauñca, Meru, Kurava, Uttarakurava, Kshudramîna, Kaikaya,

Vasâti, Yâmuna, i.e. a kind of Greeks, Bhogaprastha, Ârjunâyana,

Agnîtya, Âdarśa, Antardvîpa, Trigarta, Turagânana, i.e. people with

horse-faces, Śvamukha, i.e. people with dog-faces, Keśadhara,

Capiṭanâsika, i.e. flat-noses, Dâsera, Kavâṭadhâna, Śaradhâna,

Takshaśila, i.e. Mârîkala, Pushkalâvatî, i.e. Pûkala, Kailâvata,

Kaṇṭhadhâna, Ambara, Madraka, Mâlava, Paurava, Kacchâra, Daṇḍa,

Piṅgalaka, Mânahala, Hûṇa, Kohala, Śâtaka, Mâṇḍavya, Bhûtapura,

Gândhâra, Yaśovati, Hematâla, Râjanya, Khajara, Yaudheya, Dâsameya,

Śyâmâka, Kshemadhûrta (?).

IX. The names of the countries in the north-east (Aiśâna):—

[Page 157.] Meru, Kanashṭharâjya, Paśupâla, Kîra, Kaśmîra, Abhi,

Śârada, Taṅgaṇa, Kulûta, Sairindha, Râshṭra, Brahmapura, Dârva, Dâmara,

Vanarâjya, Kirâta, Cîna, Kauṇinda, Bhalla, Palola, Jaṭâsura, Kunaṭha,

Khasha, Ghosha, Kucika, Ekacaraṇa, i.e. the one-footed people,

Anuviśva, Suvarṇabhûmi, i.e. the gold land, Arvasudhana (sic),

Nandavishṭha, Paurava, Cîranivasana, Trinetra, i.e. people with three

eyes, Puñjâdri, Gandharva.

[On Romaka, Yamakoṭi, and Siddhapura.] Hindu astronomers determine the

longitude of the inhabitable world by Laṅkâ, which lies in its centre

on the equator, whilst Yamakoṭi lies on its east, Romaka on its west,

and Siddhapura on that part of the equator which is diametrically

opposed to Laṅkâ. Their remarks on the rising and setting of the

heavenly bodies show that Yamakoṭi and Rûm are distant from each other

by half a circle. It seems that they assign the countries of the West

(i.e. North Africa) to Rûm or the Roman Empire, because the Rûm or

Byzantine Greeks occupy the opposite shores of the same sea (the

Mediterranean); for the Roman Empire has much northern latitude and

penetrates high into the north. No part of it stretches far southward,

and, of course, nowhere does it reach the equator, as the Hindus say

with regard to Romaka.

We shall here speak no more of Laṅkâ (as we are going to treat of it in

a separate chapter). Yamakoṭi is, according to Yaʿḳûb and Alfazârî, the

country where is the city Târa within a sea. I have not found the

slightest trace of this name in Indian literature. As koṭi means castle

and Yama is the angel of death, the word reminds me of Kangdiz, which,

according to the Persians, had been built by Kaikâʾûs or Jam in the

most remote east, behind the sea. Kaikhusrau traversed the sea to

Kangdiz when following the traces of Afrâsiâb the Turk, and there he

went at the time of his anchorite life and expatriation. For diz means

in Persian castle, as koṭi in the Indian language. Abû-Maʿshar of Balkh

has based his geographical canon on Kangdiz as the 0° of longitude or

first meridian.

How the Hindus came to suppose the existence of Siddhapura I do not

know, for they believe, like ourselves, that behind the inhabited

half-circle there is nothing but unnavigable seas.

[The meridian of Ujain the first meridian.] In what way the Hindus

determine the latitude of a place has not come to our knowledge. That

the longitude of the inhabitable world is a half-circle is a far-spread

theory among their astronomers; they differ (from Western astronomers)

only as to the point which [Page 158.] is to be its beginning. If we

explain the theory of the Hindus as far as we understand it, their

beginning of longitude is Ujain, which they consider as the eastern

limit of one quarter (of the οἰκουμένη), whilst the limit of the second

quarter lies in the west at some distance from the end of civilisation,

as we shall hereafter explain in the chapter about the difference of

the longitudes of two places.

[Other first meridians used by Western astronomers.] The theory of the

Western astronomers on this point is a double one. Some adopt as the

beginning of longitude the shore of the (Atlantic) ocean, and they

extend the first quarter thence as far as the environs of Balkh. Now,

according to this theory, things have been united which have no

connection with each other. So Shapûrḳân and Ujain are placed on the

same meridian. A theory which so little corresponds to reality is quite

valueless. Others adopt the Islands of the Happy Ones as the beginning

of longitude, and the quarter of the οἰκουμένη they extend thence as

far as the neighbourhood of Jurjân and Nîshâpûr. Both these theories

are totally different from that of the Hindus. This subject, however,

shall be more accurately investigated in a subsequent chapter (p. 311).

If I, by the grace of God, shall live long enough, I shall devote a

special treatise to the longitude of Nîshâpûr, where this subject shall

be thoroughly inquired into.

CHAPTER XXX.

ON LAṄKÂ, OR THE CUPOLA OF THE EARTH.

[On the meaning of the term cupola of the earth.] The midst of the

inhabitable world, of its longitudinal extension from east to west on

the equator, is by the astronomers (of the Muslims) called the cupola

of the earth, and the great circle which passes through the pole and

this point of the equator is called the meridian of the cupola. We

must, however, observe that whatever may be the natural form of the

earth, there is no place on it which to the exclusion of others

deserves the name of a cupola; that this term is only a metaphorical

one to denote a point from which the two ends of the inhabitable world

in east and west are equidistant, comparable to the top of a cupola or

a tent, as all things hanging down from this top (tent-ropes or walls)

have the same length, and their lower ends the same distances

therefrom. But the Hindus never call this point by a term that in our

language must be interpreted by cupola; they only say that Laṅkâ is

between the two ends of the inhabitable world and without [The story of

Râma.] latitude. There Râvaṇa, the demon, fortified himself when he had

carried off the wife of Râma, the son of Daśaratha. His labyrinthine

fortress is called ثنكت ںرو‎ (?), whilst in our (Muslim) countries it

is called Yâvana-koṭi, which has frequently been explained as Rome.

The following is the plan of the labyrinthine fortress:—

[FIGURE: Door of the road leading to the castle.]

[Page 159.] Râma attacked Râvaṇa after having crossed the ocean on a

dyke of the length of 100 yojana, which he had constructed from a

mountain in a place called Setubandha, i.e. bridge of the ocean, east

of Ceylon. He fought with him and killed him, and Râma’s brother killed

the brother of Râvaṇa, as is described in the story of Râma and

Râmâyana. Thereupon he broke the dyke in ten different places by

arrow-shots.

[On the island of Laṅkâ.] According to the Hindus, Laṅkâ is the castle

of the demons. It is 30 yojana above the earth, i.e. 80 farsakh. Its

length from east to west is 100 yojana; its breadth from north to south

is the same as the height (i.e. thirty).

It is on account of Laṅkâ and the island of Vaḍavâmukha that the Hindus

consider the south as foreboding evil. In no work of piety do they

direct themselves southward or walk southward. The south occurs only in

connection with impious actions.

[The first meridian.] The line on which the astronomical calculations

are based (as 0° of longitude), which passes in a straight line from

Laṅkâ to Meru, passes—

(1.) Through the city of Ujain (Ujjayinî) in Mâlava (Mâlvâ).

(2.) Through the neighbourhood of the fortress Rohitaka in the district

of Multân, which is now deserted.

(3.) Through Kurukshetra, i.e. the plain of Tâneshar (Sthâneśvara), in

the centre of their country.

(4.) Through the river Yamunâ, on which the city of Mathurâ is

situated.

(5.) Through the mountains of the Himavant, which are covered with

everlasting snow, and where the rivers of their country rise. Behind

them lies Mount Meru.

[The situation of Ujain.] The city of Ujain, which in the tables of the

longitudes of places is mentioned as Uzain, and as situated on the sea,

is in reality 100 yojana distant from the sea. Some undiscriminating

Muslim astronomer has uttered the opinion that Ujain lies on the

meridian of Al-shabûrḳân in Al-jûzajân; but such is not the case, for

it lies by many degrees of the equator more to the east than

Al-shabûrḳân. There is some confusion about the longitude of Ujain,

particularly among such (Muslim) astronomers as mix up with each other

the different opinions about the first degree of longitude both in east

and west, and are unable to distinguish them properly.

[The author’s conjecture about Laṅkâ and Langabâlûs.] No sailor who has

traversed the ocean round the place which is ascribed to Laṅkâ, and has

travelled in that direction, has ever given such an account of it as

tallies with the traditions of the Hindus or resembles them. In fact,

there is no tradition which makes the thing appear to us more possible

(than it is according to the reports of the Hindus). The name Laṅkâ,

however, makes me think of something entirely different, viz. that the

clove is called lavang, because it is imported from a country called

Laṅga. According to the uniform report of all sailors, the ships which

are sent to this country land their cargo in boats, viz. ancient

Western denars and various kinds of merchandise, striped Indian cloth,

salt, and other usual articles of trade. These wares are deposited on

the shore on leather sheets, each of which is marked with the name of

its owner. Thereupon the merchants retire to their ships. On the

following day they find the sheets covered with cloves by way of

payment, little or much, as the natives happen to own.

The people with whom this trade is carried on are demons according to

some, savage men according to others.

[A certain wind as the cause of small-pox.] The Hindus who are the

neighbours of those regions (of Laṅkâ) believe that the small-pox is a

wind blowing from the island of Laṅkâ towards the continent to carry

off souls. According to one report, some men warn people beforehand of

the blowing of this wind, and can exactly tell at what times it will

reach the different parts of the country. After the small-pox has

broken out, they recognise from certain signs whether it is virulent or

not. Against the virulent small-pox they use a method of treatment by

which they destroy only one single limb of the body, but do not kill.

They use as medicine cloves, which they give to the patient to drink,

together with gold-dust; and, besides, the [Page 160.] males tie the

cloves, which are similar to date-kernels, to their necks. If these

precautions are taken, perhaps nine people out of ten will be proof

against this malady.

All this makes me think that the Laṅkâ which the Hindus mention is

identical with the clove-country Laṅga, though their descriptions do

not tally. However, there is no communication kept up with the latter,

for people say that when perchance a merchant is left behind on this

island, there is no more trace found of him. And this my conjecture is

strengthened by the fact that, according to the book of Râma and

Râmâyana, behind the well-known country of Sindh there are cannibals.

And, on the other hand, it is well known among all seamen that

cannibalism is the cause of the savagery and bestiality of the

inhabitants of the island of Langabâlûs.

CHAPTER XXXI.

ON THAT DIFFERENCE OF VARIOUS PLACES WHICH WE CALL THE DIFFERENCE OF

LONGITUDE.

[On the Hindu method of determining longitude.] He who aims at accuracy

in this subject must try to determine the distance between the spheres

of the meridians of the two places in question. Muslim astronomers

reckon by equatorial times corresponding to the distance between the

two meridians, and begin to count from one (the western one) of the two

places. The sum of equatorial minutes which they find is called the

difference between the two longitudes; for they consider as the

longitude of each place the distance of its meridian from the great

circle passing through the pole of the equator, which has been chosen

as the limit of the οἰκουμένη, and for this first meridian they have

chosen the western (not the eastern) limit of the οἰκουμένη. It is all

the same whether these equatorial times, whatsoever their number for

each meridian may be, are reckoned as 360th parts of a circle, or as

its 60th parts, so as to correspond to the day-minutes, or as farsakh

or yojana.

The Hindus employ in this subject methods which do not rest on the same

principle as ours. They are totally different; and howsoever different

they are, it is perfectly clear that none of them hits the right mark.

As we (Muslims) note for each place its longitude, the Hindus note the

number of yojanas of its distance from the meridian of Ujain. And the

more to the west the position of a place is, the greater is the number

of yojanas; the more to the east it is, the smaller is this number.

They call it deśântara, i.e. the difference between the places.

Further, they multiply the deśântara by the mean daily motion of the

planet (the sun), and divide the product by 4800. Then the quotient

represents that amount of the motion of the star which corresponds to

the number of yojana in question, i.e. that which must be added to the

mean place of the sun, as it has been found for moon or midnight of

Ujain, if you want to find the longitude of the place in question.

[On the circumference of the earth.] The number which they use as

divisor (4800) is the number of the yojanas of the circumference of the

earth, for the difference between the spheres of the meridians of the

two places stands in the same relation to the whole circumference of

the earth as the mean motion of the planet (sun) from one place to the

other to its whole daily rotation round the earth.

If the circumference of the earth is 4800 yojanas, the diameter is

nearly 1527; but Pulisa reckons it as 1600, Brahmagupta as 1581

yojanas, each of which is equal to eight miles. The same value is given

in the astronomical handbook Al-arkand as 1050. This number, however,

is, according to Ibn Ṭâriḳ, the radius, whilst the diameter is 2100

yojanas, each yojana being reckoned as equal to four miles, and the

circumference is stated as 65969⁄25 yojanas.

[Page 161.]

[Quotations from the Khaṇḍakhâdyaka and the Karaṇa-tilaka.] Brahmagupta

uses 4800 as the number of yojanas of the earth’s circumference in his

canon Khaṇḍakhâdyaka, but in the amended edition he uses, instead of

this, the corrected circumference, agreeing with Pulisa. The correction

he propounds is this, that he multiplies the yojanas of the earth’s

circumference by the sines of the complement of the latitude of the

place, and divides the product by the sinus totus; then the quotient is

the corrected circumference of the earth, or the number of yojanas of

the parallel circle of the place in question. Sometimes this number is

called the collar of the meridian. Hereby people are frequently misled

to think that the 4800 yojanas are the corrected circumference for the

city of Ujain. If we calculate it (according to Brahmagupta’s

correction), we find the latitude of Ujain to be 16¼ degrees, whilst in

reality it is 24 degrees.

The author of the canon Karaṇa-tilaka makes this correction in the

following way. He multiplies the diameter of the earth by 12 and

divides the product by the equinoctial shadow of the place. The gnomon

stands in the same relation to this shadow as the radius of the

parallel circle of the place to the sine of the latitude of the place,

not to the sinus totus. Evidently the author of this method thinks that

we have here the [The equation vyastatrairâśika.] same kind of equation

as that which the Hindus call vyastatrairâśika, i.e. the places with

the retrograde motion. An example of it is the following.

If the price of a harlot of 15 years be, e.g. 10 denars, how much will

it be when she is 40 years old?

The method is this, that you multiply the first number by the second

(15 × 10 = 150), and divide the product by the third number (150 : 40 =

3¾). Then the quotient or fourth number is her price when she has

become old, viz. 3¾ denars.

Now the author of the Karaṇa-tilaka, after having found that the

straight shadow increases with the latitude, whilst the diameter of the

circle decreases, thought, according to the analogy of the just

mentioned calculation, that between this increase and decrease there is

a certain ratio. Therefore he maintains that the diameter of the circle

decreases, i.e. becomes gradually smaller than the diameter of the

earth, at the same rate as the straight shadow increases. Thereupon he

calculates the corrected circumference from the corrected diameter.

After having thus found the longitudinal difference between two places,

he observes a lunar eclipse, and fixes in day-minutes the difference

between the time of its appearance in the two places. Pulisa multiplies

these day-minutes by the circumference of the earth, and divides the

product by 60, viz. the minutes (or 60th parts) of the daily

revolution. The quotient, then, is the number of the yojanas of the

distance between the two places.

This calculation is correct. The result refers to the great circle on

which Laṅkâ lies.

Brahmagupta calculates in the same manner, save that he multiplies by

4800. The other details have already been mentioned.

[Calculation of the deśântara according to Alfazârî.] As far as this,

one clearly recognises what the Hindu astronomers aim at, be their

method correct or faulty. However, we cannot say the same of their

calculation of the deśântara from the latitudes of two different

places, which is reported by Alfazârî in his canon in the following

manner:—

“Add together the squares of the sines of the latitudes of the two

places, and take the root of the sum. This root is the portio.

“Further, square the difference of these two sines and add it to the

portio. Multiply the sum by 8 and divide the product by 377. The

quotient, then, is the distance between the two places, that is to say,

according to a rough calculation.

“Further, multiply the difference between the two latitudes by the

yojanas of the circumference of the earth and divide the product by

360.”

Evidently this latter calculation is nothing but the transferring of

the difference between the two latitudes from the measure of degrees

and minutes to the measure of yojanas. Then he proceeds:—

“Now the square of the quotient is subtracted from the square of the

roughly calculated distance, and of the remainder you take the root,

which represents the straight yojanas.”

[Page 162.] Evidently the latter number represents the distance between

the spheres of the meridians of the two places on the circle of

latitude, whilst the roughly calculated number is the distance between

the two places in longitude.

[The author criticises this method.] This method of calculation is

found in the astronomical handbooks of the Hindus in conformity with

the account of Alfazârî, save in one particular. The here-mentioned

portio is the root of the difference between the squares of the sines

of the two latitudes, not the sum of the squares of the sines of the

two latitudes.

But whatever this method may be, it does not hit the right mark. We

have fully explained it in several of our publications specially

devoted to this subject, and there we have shown that it is impossible

to determine the distance between two places and the difference of

longitude between them by means of their latitudes alone, and that only

in case one of these two things is known (the distance between two

places or the difference between the longitudes of them), by this and

by means of the two latitudes, the third value can be found.

[Another calculation of the deśântara.] Based on the same principle,

the following calculation has been found, there being no indication by

whom it was invented:—

“Multiply the yojanas of the distance between two places by 9, and

divide the product by (lacuna); the root of the difference between its

square and the square of the difference of the two latitudes. Divide

this number by 6. Then you get as quotient the number of day-minutes of

the difference of the two longitudes.”

It is clear that the author of this calculation first takes the

distance (between the two places), then he reduces it to the measure of

the circumference of the circle. However, if we invert the calculation

and reduce the parts (or degrees) of the great circle to yojanas

according to his method, we get the number 3200, i.e. 100 yojanas less

than we have given on the authority of Al-arkand (v. p. 312). The

double of it, 6400, comes near the number mentioned by Ibn Ṭâriḳ (i.e.

65969⁄25, v. p. 312), being only about 200 yojanas smaller.

We shall now give the latitudes of some places, as we hold them to be

correct.

[A criticism of Âryabhaṭa of Kusumapura on the meridian of Ujain.] All

canons of the Hindus agree in this that the line connecting Laṅkâ with

Meru divides the οἰκουμένη lengthways in two halves, and that it passes

through the city of Ujain, the fortress of Rohitaka, the river Yamunâ,

the plain of Tâneshar, and the Cold Mountains. The longitudes of the

places are measured by their distance from this line. On this head I

know of no difference between them except the following passage in the

book of Âryabhaṭa of Kusumapura:—

“People say that Kurukshetra, i.e. the plain of Tâneshar, lies on the

line which connects Laṅkâ with Meru and passes through Ujain. So they

report on the authority of Pulisa. But he was much too intelligent not

to have known the subject better. The times of the eclipses prove that

statement to be erroneous, and Pṛithusvâmin maintains that the

difference between the longitudes of Kurukshetra and Ujain is 120

yojanas.”

These are the words of Âryabhaṭa.

[On the latitude of Ujain.] Yaʿḳûb Ibn Ṭâriḳ says in his book entitled

The Composition of the Spheres, that the latitude of Ujain is 4⅗

degrees, but he does not say whether it lies in the north or the south.

Besides, he states it, on the authority of the book Al-Arkand, to be 4⅖

degrees. We, however, have found a totally different latitude of Ujain

in the same book in a calculation relating to the distance between

Ujain and Almanṣûra, which the author calls Brahmaṇavâṭa, i.e.

Bamhanwâ, viz. latitude of Ujain, 22° 29′; latitude of Almanṣûra, 24°

1′.

According to the same book, the straight shadow in Lohâniyye, i.e.

Loharânî, is 5⅗ digits.

On the other hand, however, all the canons of the Hindus agree in this,

that the latitude of Ujain is 24 degrees, and that the sun culminates

over it at the time of the summer solstice.

Balabhadra, the commentator, gives as the latitude [Page 163.] of Kanoj

26° 35′; as that of Tâneshar, 30° 12′.

The learned Abû-Aḥmad, the son of Catlaghtagîn, calculated the latitude

of the city of Karlî (?), and found it to be 28° 0′, that of Tâneshar

27′, and both places to be distant from each other by three days’

marches. What the cause of this difference is I do not know.

According to the book Karaṇa-sâra, the latitude of Kashmîr is 34° 9′,

and the straight shadow there 87⁄60 digits.

I myself have found the latitude of the fortress Lauhûr to be 34° 10′.

The distance from Lauhûr to the capital of Kashmîr is 56 miles, half

the way being rugged country, the other half plain. What other

latitudes I have been able to observe myself, I shall enumerate in this

place:—

Ghazna 33° 35′

Kâbul 33° 47′

Kandî, the guard-station of the prince 33° 55′

Dunpûr 34° 20′

Lamghân 34° 43′

Purshâvar 34° 44′

Waihand 34° 30′

Jailam 33° 20′

The fortress Nandna 32° 0′

The distance between the latter place and Multân is nearly 200 miles.

Sâlkot 32° 58′

Mandakkakor 31° 50′

Multân 29° 40′

If the latitudes of places are known, and the distances between them

have been measured, the difference between their longitudes also may be

found according to the methods explained in the books to which we have

referred the reader.

We ourselves have (in our travels) in their country not passed beyond

the places which we have mentioned, nor have we learned any more

longitudes and latitudes (of places in India) from their literature. It

is God alone who helps us to reach our objects!

CHAPTER XXXII.

ON THE NOTIONS OF DURATION AND TIME IN GENERAL, AND ON THE CREATION OF

THE WORLD AND ITS DESTRUCTION.

[On the notion of time according to Alrâzî and other philosophers.]

According to the relation of Muḥammad Ibn Zakariyyâ Alrâzî, the most

ancient philosophers of the Greeks thought that the following five

things existed from all eternity, the creator, the universal soul, the

first ὕλη, space in the abstract, and time in the abstract. On these

things Alrâzî has founded that theory of his, which is at the bottom of

his whole philosophy. Further, he distinguishes between time and

duration in so far as number applies to the former, not to the latter;

for a thing which can be numbered is finite, whilst duration is

infinite. Similarly, philosophers have explained time as duration with

a beginning and an end, and eternity as duration without beginning and

end.

According to Alrâzî, those five things are necessary postulates of the

actually existing world. For that which the senses perceive in it is

the ὕλη acquiring shape by means of combination. Besides, the ὕλη

occupies some place, and therefore we must admit the existence of

space. The changes apparent in the world of sense compel us to assume

the existence of time, for some of them are earlier, others later, and

the before and the afterwards, the earlier and the later, and the

simultaneous can only be perceived by means of the notion of time,

which is a necessary postulate of the existing world.

Further, there are living beings in the existing world. Therefore we

must assume the existence of the soul. Among these living beings there

are intelligent ones, capable of carrying the arts to the highest

perfection; and this compels us to assume the existence of a Creator,

who is wise and intelligent, who establishes and arranges everything in

the best possible manner, and inspires people with the force of

intelligence for the purpose of liberation.

On the other hand, some sophists consider eternity and time as one and

the same thing, and declare the motion which serves to measure time

alone to be finite.

Another one declares eternity to be the circular motion. No doubt this

motion is indissolubly connected with that being which moves by it, and

which is of the most sublime nature, since it lasts for ever. Thereupon

he rises in his argumentation from the moving being to its mover, and

from the moving mover to the first mover who is motionless.

This kind of research is very subtle and obscure. But for this, the

opinions would not differ to such an extent that some people declare

that there is no time at all, while others declare that time is an

independent substance. According to Alexander of Aphrodisias, Aristotle

gives in his book φυσικὴ ἀκρόασις the following [Page 164.]

argumentation: “Everything moving is moved by a mover;” and Galenus

says on the same subject that he could not understand the notion of

time, much less prove it.

[The notions of Hindu philosophers on time.] The theory of the Hindus

on this subject is rather poor in thought and very little developed.

Varâhamihira says in the opening of his book Saṁhitâ, when speaking of

that which existed from all eternity: “It has been said in the ancient

books that the first primeval thing was darkness, which is not

identical with the black colour, but a kind of non-existence like the

state of a sleeping person. Then God created this world for Brahman as

a cupola for him. He made it to consist of two parts, a higher and a

lower one, and placed the sun and moon in it.” Kapila declares: “God

has always existed, and with him the world, with all its substances and

bodies. He, however, is a cause to the world, and rises by the subtlety

of his nature above the gross nature of the world.” Kumbhaka says: “The

primeval one is Mahâbhûta, i.e. the compound of the five elements. Some

declare that the primeval thing is time, others nature, and still

others maintain that the director is karman, i.e. action.”

In the book Vishṇu-Dharma, Vajra speaks to Mârkaṇḍeya: “Explain to me

the times;” whereupon the latter answers: “Duration is âtmapurusha,”

i.e. a breath, and purusha, which means the lord of the universe.

Thereupon, he commenced explaining to him the divisions of time and

their dominants, just as we have propounded these things in detail in

the proper chapters (chap. xxxiii. et seq.).

The Hindus have divided duration into two periods, a period of motion,

which has been determined as time, and a period of rest, which can be

determined only in an imaginary way according to the analogy of that

which has first been determined, the period of motion. The Hindus hold

the eternity of the Creator to be determinable, not measurable, since

it is infinite. We, however, cannot refrain from remarking that it is

extremely difficult to imagine a thing which is determinable but not

measurable, and that the whole idea is very far-fetched. We shall here

communicate so much as will suffice for the reader of the opinions of

the Hindus on this subject, as far as we know them.

[The Day of Brahman a period of creation, the Night of Brahman a period

of non-creation.] The common notion of the Hindus regarding creation is

a popular one, for, as we have already mentioned, they believe matter

to be eternal. Therefore, they do not, by the word creation, understand

a formation of something out of nothing. They mean by creation only the

working with a piece of clay, working out various combinations and

figures in it, and making such arrangements with it as will lead to

certain ends and aims which are potentially in it. For this reason they

attribute the creation to angels and demons, nay, even to human beings,

who create either because they carry out some legal obligation which

afterwards proves beneficial for the creation, or because they intend

to allay their passions after having become envious and ambitious. So,

for instance, they relate that Viśvâmitra, the Ṛishi, created the

buffaloes for this purpose, that mankind should enjoy all the good and

useful things which they afford. All this reminds one of the words of

Plato in the book Timæus: “The θεοί, i.e. the gods, who, according to

an order of their father, carried out the creation of man, took an

immortal soul and made it the beginning; thereupon they fashioned like

a turner a mortal body upon it.”

Here in this context we meet with a duration of time which Muslim

authors, following the example of the Hindus, call the years of the

world. People think that at their beginnings and endings creation and

destruction take place as kinds of new formations. This, however, is

not the belief of the people at large. According to them, this duration

is a day of Brahman and a consecutive night of Brahman; for Brahman is

intrusted with creating. Further, the coming into existence is a motion

in that which grows out of something different from itself, and the

most apparent of the causes of this motion are the meteoric motors,

i.e. the stars. These, however, will never exercise regular influences

on the world below them unless they move and change their shapes in

every direction (= their aspects). Therefore the coming into existence

is limited to the day of Brahman, because in it only, as the [Page

165.] Hindus believe, the stars are moving and their spheres revolving

according to their pre-established order, and in consequence the

process of coming into existence is developed on the surface of the

earth without any interruption.

On the contrary, during the night of Brahman the spheres rest from

their motions, and all the stars, as well as their apsides and nodes,

stand still in one particular place.

In consequence all the affairs of the earth are in one and the same

unchanging condition, therefore the coming into existence has ceased,

because he who makes things come into existence rests. So both the

processes of acting and of being acted upon are suspended; the elements

rest from entering into new metamorphoses and combinations, as they

rest now in (lacuna; perhaps: the night), and they prepare themselves

to belong to new beings, which will come into existence on the

following day of Brahman.

In this way existence circulates during the life of Brahman, a subject

which we shall propound in its proper place.

[Critical remark of the author.] According to these notions of the

Hindus, creation and destruction only refer to the surface of the

earth. By such a creation, not one piece of clay comes into existence

which did not exist before, and by such a destruction not one piece of

clay which exists ceases to exist. It is quite impossible that the

Hindus should have the notion of a creation as long as they believe

that matter existed from all eternity.

[Brahman’s waking and sleeping.] The Hindus represent to their common

people the two durations here mentioned, the day of Brahman and the

night of Brahman, as his waking and sleeping; and we do not disapprove

of these terms, as they denote something which has a beginning and end.

Further, the whole of the life of Brahman, consisting of a succession

of motion and rest in the world during such a period, is considered as

applying only to existence, not to non-existence, since during it the

piece of clay exists and, besides, also its shape. The life of Brahman

is only a day for that being who is above him, i.e. Purusha (cf. chap.

xxxv.). When he dies all compounds are dissolved during his night, and

in consequence of the annihilation of the compounds, that also is

suspended which kept him (Brahman) within the laws of nature. This,

then, is the rest of Purusha, and of all that is under his control

(lit. and of his vehicles).

[Vulgar and scientific notions on the sleep of Brahman.] When common

people describe these things, they make the night of Brahman follow

after the night of Purusha; and as Purusha is the name for a man, they

attribute to him sleeping and waking. They derive destruction from his

snoring, in consequence of which all things that hang together break

asunder, and everything standing is drowned in the sweat of his

forehead. And more of the like they produce, things which the mind

declines to accept and the ear refuses to hear.

Therefore the educated Hindus do not share these opinions (regarding

the waking and sleeping of Brahman), for they know the real nature of

sleep. They know that the body, a compound of antipathetic humores,

requires sleep for the purpose of resting, and for this purpose that

all which nature requires, after being wasted, should be duly replaced.

So, in consequence of the constant dissolution, the body requires food

in order to replace that which had been lost by emaciation. Further, it

requires cohabitation for the purpose of perpetuating the species by

the body, as without cohabitation the species would die out. Besides,

the body requires other things, evil ones, but necessary, while simple

substances can dispense with them, as also He can who is above them,

like to whom there is nothing.

[Notions regarding the end of the world.] Further, the Hindus maintain

that the world will perish in consequence of the conjunction of the

twelve suns, which appear one after the other in the different months,

ruining the earth by burning and calcining it, and by withering and

drying up all moist substances. Further, the world perishes in

consequence of the union of the four rains which now come down in the

different seasons of the year; that which has been calcined attracts

the water and is thereby dissolved. Lastly, the world perishes by the

cessation of light and by the prevalence of darkness and non-existence.

By all this the world will be dissolved into atoms and be scattered.

The Matsya-Purâṇa says that the fire which burns the world has come out

of the water; that until then it dwelt on Mount Mahisha in the

Kusha-Dvîpa, and was called by the name of this mountain.

The Vishṇu-Purâṇa says that “Maharloka lies above [Page 166.] the pole,

and that the duration of the stay there is one kalpa. When the three

worlds burn, the fire and smoke injure the inhabitants, and then they

rise and emigrate to Janaloka, the dwelling-place of the sons of

Brahman, who preceded creation, viz. Sanaka, Sananda, Sanandanâda (?),

Asuras, Kapila, Voḍhu, and Pañcaśikha.”

[Abû-Maʿshar uses Indian theories.] The context of these passages makes

it clear that this destruction of the world takes place at the end of a

kalpa, and hence is derived the theory of Abû-Maʿshar that a deluge

takes place at the conjunction of the planets, because, in fact, they

stand in conjunction at the end of each caturyuga and at the beginning

of each kaliyuga. If this conjunction is not a complete one, the

deluge, too, will evidently not attain the highest degree of its

destructive power. The farther we advance in the investigation of these

subjects, the more light will be shed on all ideas of this kind, and

the better the reader will understand all words and terms occurring in

this context.

[Buddhist notions from Alêrânshahrî.] Alêrânshahrî records a tradition,

as representing the belief of the Buddhists, which much resembles the

silly tales just mentioned. On the sides of Mount Meru there are four

worlds, which are alternately civilised or desert. A world becomes

desert when it is overpowered by the fire, in consequence of the rising

of seven suns, one after the other, over it, when the water of the

fountains dries up, and the burning fire becomes so strong as to

penetrate into the world. A world becomes civilised when the fire

leaves it and migrates to another world; after it has left, a strong

wind rises in the world, drives the clouds, and makes them rain, so

that the world becomes like an ocean. Out of its foam shells are

produced, with which the souls are connected, and out of these human

beings originate when the water has sunk into the ground. Some

Buddhists think that a man comes by accident from the perishing world

to the growing world. Since he feels unhappy on account of his being

alone, out of his thought there arises a spouse, and from this couple

generation commences.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

ON THE VARIOUS KINDS OF THE DAY OR NYCHTHEMERON, AND ON DAY AND NIGHT

IN PARTICULAR.

[Definition of day and night.] According to the general usage of

Muslims, Hindus, and others, a day or nychthemeron means the duration

of one revolution of the sun in a rotation of the universe, in which he

starts from the one half of a great circle and returns to the same.

Apparently it is divided into two halves: the day (i.e. the time of the

sun’s being visible to the inhabitants of a certain place on earth),

and the night (i.e. the time of his being invisible to them). His being

visible and being invisible are relative facts, which differ as the

horizons differ. It is well known that the horizon of the equator,

which the Hindus call the country without latitude, cuts the circles

parallel to the meridian in two halves. In consequence, day and night

are always equal there. However, the horizons which cut the parallel

circles without passing through their pole divide them into two unequal

halves, the more so the smaller the parallel circles are. In

consequence, there day and night are unequal, except at the times of

the two equinoxes, when on the whole earth, except Meru and

Vaḍavâmukha, day and night are equal. Then all the places north and

south of the line share in this peculiarity of the line, but only at

this time, not at any other.

[Manushyâhorâtra.] The beginning of the day is the sun’s rising above

the horizon, the beginning of the night his disappearing below it. The

Hindus consider the day as the first, the [Page 167.] night as the

second, part of the nychthemeron. Therefore they call the former

Sâvana, i.e. a day depending on the rising of the sun. Besides, they

call it Manushyâhorâtra, i.e. a human day, because, in fact, the great

mass of their people do not know any other kind of day but this. Now,

assuming the Sâvana to be known to the reader, we shall in the

following use it as a standard and gauge, in order thereby to determine

all the other kinds of days.

[Day of the fathers.] After the human day follows Pitṛîṇâm ahorâtra,

i.e. the nychthemeron of the forefathers, whose spirits, according to

the belief of the Hindus, dwell in the sphere of the moon. Its day and

night depend upon light and darkness, not upon the rising and setting

in relation to a certain horizon. When the moon stands in the highest

parts of the sphere with reference to them, this is a day to them; and

when it stands in the lowest parts, it is night to them. Evidently

their moon is the time of conjunction or full moon, and their midnight

is opposition or new moon. Therefore the nychthemeron of the

forefathers is a complete lunar month, the day beginning at the time of

half-moon, when the light on the moon’s body begins to increase, and

the night beginning at the time of half-moon, when her light begins to

wane. This follows of necessity from the just-mentioned determination

of the noon and midnight of the nychthemeron of the forefathers.

Besides, it may be brought near to the reader by a comparison, as the

bright half of the light on the moon’s body may be compared to the

rising of half of the globe of the sun over the horizon, and the other

half’s setting below the horizon. The day of this nychthemeron extends

from the last quarter of a month to the first quarter of the succeeding

month; the night from the first to the second quarter of one identical

month. The totality of these two halves is the nychthemeron of the

forefathers.

Thus the subject is explained by the author of Vishṇu-Dharma both at

large and in detail, but afterwards he treats it a second time with

very little understanding, and identifies the day of the forefathers

with the black half of the month from opposition to conjunction, and

their night with its white half, whilst the correct statement is that

which we have just mentioned. This view is also confirmed by their

custom of offering gifts of food to the forefathers on the day of

conjunction, for they explain noon to be the time of taking food. For

this reason they offer food to the forefathers at the same time when

they themselves take it.

[Day of the Devas.] Next follows the Divyâhorâtra, i.e. the

nychthemeron of the angels. It is known that the horizon of the

greatest latitude, i.e. that of 90 degrees, where the pole stands in

the zenith, is the equator, not exactly, but approximately, because it

is a little below the visible horizon for that place on earth which is

occupied by Mount Meru; for its top and slopes the horizon in question

and the equator may be absolutely identical, although the visible

horizon lies a little below it (i.e. farther south). Further, it is

evident that the zodiac is divided into two halves by being intersected

by the equator, the one half lying above the equator (i.e. north of

it), the second half below it. As long as the sun marches in the signs

of northern declination it revolves like a mill, since the diurnal arcs

which he describes are parallel to the horizon, as in the case of the

sun-dials. For those who live under the north pole the sun appears

above the horizon, therefore they have day, whilst for those living

under the south pole the sun is concealed below the horizon, and

therefore they have [Page 168.] night. When, then, the sun migrates to

the southern signs, he revolves like a mill below the horizon (i.e.

south of the equator); hence it is night to the people living under the

north pole and day to those living under the south pole.

The dwellings of the Devaka, i.e. the spiritual beings, are under the

two poles; therefore this kind of day is called by their name, i.e. the

nychthemeron of the Deva.

Âryabhaṭa of Kusumapura says that the Deva see one half of the solar

year, the Dânava the other; that the Pitaras see one half of the lunar

month, human beings the other. So one revolution of the sun in the

zodiac affords day and night both to the Deva and Dânava, and their

totality is a nychthemeron.

In consequence our year is identical with the nychthemeron of the Deva.

In it, however, day and night are not equal (as in the nychthemeron of

the forefathers), because the sun moves slowly in the half of the

northern declination about its apogee, by which the day becomes a

little longer. However, this difference is not equal to the difference

between the visible horizon and the real one, for this cannot be

observed on the globe of the sun. Besides, according to Hindu notions,

the inhabitants of those places are raised above the surface of the

earth, dwelling on Mount Meru. Whoever holds this view holds regarding

the height of Meru the same opinions as those we have described in the

proper place (in chap. xxiii.). In consequence of this height of Mount

Meru, its horizon must fall a little lower (i.e. more southward than

the equator), and in consequence the rate of the day’s being longer

than the night is lessened (as then the sun does not entirely reach his

northern apogee, where he makes the longest days). If this were

anything else but simply a religious tradition of the Hindus, besides

being one regarding which even they do not agree among themselves, we

should try to find, by astronomical calculation, the amount of this

depression of the horizon of Mount Meru below the equator, but as there

is no use in this subject (Mount Meru being simply an invention), we

drop it.

Some uneducated Hindu heard people speak of the day of such a

nychthemeron in the north, and of its night in the south. In connection

with these elements he determined the two parts of the year by the two

halves of the zodiac, the one which ascends from the winter solstice,

called the northern, and the one which descends from the summer

solstice, called the southern. Then he identified the day of this

nychthemeron with the ascending half, and its night with the descending

half. All of which he has eternised in his books.

Not much better is what the author of the Vishṇu-Dharma says:—“The half

beginning with Capricornus is the day of the Asura, i.e. the Dânavas,

and their night begins with the sign of Cancer.” Previously he had

said: “The half beginning with Aries is the day of the Deva.” This

author acted without any understanding of the subject, for he simply

confounds the two poles with each other (for according to this theory

the half of the sun’s revolution, beginning with Capricornus or the

winter solstice, would be the day of the beings under the north pole or

the Devas, not that of the beings under the south pole or Asuras, and

the revolution of the sun beginning with Cancer or the summer solstice

would be the day of the Asuras, not their night). If this author had

really understood the sentence, and had known astronomy, he would have

come to other conclusions.

[Day of Brahman.] Next follows the Brahmâhorâtra, i.e. the nychthemeron

of Brahman. It is not derived from light and darkness (as that of the

forefathers), nor from the appearing or disappearing of a heavenly body

(like that of the Devas), but from the physical nature of created

things, in consequence of which they move in the day and rest in the

night. The length of the nychthemeron of Brahman is 8,640,000,000 of

our years. During one half of it, i.e. during the day, the æther, with

all that is in it, is moving, the earth is producing, and the changes

of existence and destruction are constantly going on upon the surface

of the earth. During the other half, i.e. the night, there occurs the

opposite of everything which occurs in the day; the earth is not

changing, because those things which produce the changes are resting

and all motions are stopped, as nature rests in the night and in the

winter, and concentrates [Page 169.] itself, preparing for a new

existence in the day and in the summer.

Each day of Brahman is a kalpa, as also each night, and a kalpa is that

space of time which Muslim authors call the year of the Sindhind.

[Day of Purusha.] Lastly follows the Purushâhorâtra, i.e. the

nychthemeron of the All-soul, which is also called Mahâkalpa, i.e. the

greatest kalpa. The Hindus only use it for the purpose of determining

duration in general by something like a notion of time, but do not

specify it as day and night. I almost feel inclined to think that the

day of this nychthemeron means the duration of the soul’s being

connected with the ὕλη, whilst the night means the duration of their

being separated from each other, and of the resting of the souls (from

the fatigue of being mixed up with the ὕλη), and that that condition

which necessitates the soul’s being connected with the ὕλη or its being

separated from the ὕλη reaches its periodical end at the end of this

nychthemeron. The Vishṇu-Dharma says: “The life of Brahman is the day

of Purusha, and the night of Purusha has the same length.”

The Hindus agree in assigning to the life of Brahman a hundred of his

years. The number of our years which corresponds to one of his years

betrays itself to be a multiplication of 360 with the number of our

years, which correspond to one nychthemeron of his. We have already

mentioned (p. 331) the length of the nychthemeron of Brahman. Now the

length of a year of Brahman is 3,110,400,000,000 of our years (i.e. 360

× 8,640,000,000). A hundred years of the same kind, reckoned in our

years, are represented by the same number increased by two ciphers, so

that you get in the whole ten ciphers, viz. 311,040,000,000,000. This

space of time is a day of Purusha; therefore his nychthemeron is double

of it, viz. 622,080,000,000,000 of our years.

[Parârdhakalpa.] According to the Pulisa-Siddhânta, the life of Brahman

is a day of Purusha. However, it has also been mentioned that a day of

Purusha is a parârdhakalpa. Other Hindus say that parârdhakalpa is the

day of kha, i.e. the point, by which they mean the first cause, on

which all existence depends. The kalpa occupies the eighteenth place in

the scale of the degrees of the numbers (see p. 175). It is called

parârdha, which means the half of heaven. Now, the double of this would

be the whole of heaven and the whole nychthemeron. Therefore kha is

represented by the number 864, followed by twenty-four ciphers, this

number representing our years (cf. p. 331).

These terms must, on the whole, be rather considered as a philosophical

means of conveying an abstract notion of time than as mathematical

values composed of the various kinds of numbers, for they are derived

from the processes of combination and dissolution, of procreation and

destruction.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

ON THE DIVISION OF THE NYCHTHEMERON INTO MINOR PARTICLES OF TIME.

[Ghaṭî.] The Hindus are foolishly painstaking in inventing the most

minute particles of time, but their efforts have not resulted in a

universally adopted and uniform system. On the contrary, you hardly

ever meet with two books or two men representing the subject

identically. In the first instance, the nychthemeron is divided into

sixty minutes or ghaṭî. We read in the book Srûdhava by Utpala the

Kashmîrian: “If you bore in a piece of wood a cylindrical hole of

twelve fingers’ diameter and six fingers’ height, it contains three

manâ water. If you bore in the bottom of this hole another hole as

large as six plaited hairs of the hair of a young woman, not of an old

one nor of a child, the three manâ of water will flow out through this

hole in one ghaṭî.”

[Cashaka.] Each minute is divided into sixty seconds, called cashaka or

cakhaka, and also vighaṭikâ.

[Prâṇa.] Each second is divided into six parts or prâṇa, i.e. [Page

170.] breath. The above-mentioned book, Srûdhava, explains the prâṇa in

the following manner: “It is the breath of a sleeping person who sleeps

a normal sleep, and not like a man who is ill, who suffers from

retention of the urine, who is hungry, or has eaten too much, whose

mind is occupied with some sorrow or pain; for the breath of a sleeping

person varies according to the conditions of his soul, which originate

either from desire or fear, according to the conditions of his body,

depending upon the emptiness or fulness of his stomach, and according

to various accidents disturbing the kind of humor which is considered

the most desirable.”

It is all the same whether we determine the prâṇa according to this

rule (one nychthemeron = 21,600 prâṇa), or if we divide each ghaṭî into

360 parts (60 × 360 = 21,600), or each degree of the sphere into sixty

parts (360 × 60 = 21,600).

[Vinâḍî.] As far as this all Hindus agree with each other in the

matter, though they use different terms. So, for instance, Brahmagupta

calls the cashaka or seconds vinâḍî, likewise Âryabhaṭa of Kusumapura.

Besides the latter calls the minutes nâḍî. Both, however, did not use

particles of time smaller than the prâṇa, which correspond to the

minutes of the sphere (60 × 360). For Pulisa says: “The minutes of the

sphere, which are 21,600, resemble the normal breaths of man at the

time of the equinoxes, and when man is in perfect health. During one

breathing of man the sphere revolves as far as one minute.”

[Kshaṇa.] Other people insert between minute and second a third

measure, called kshaṇa, which is equal to one-fourth of a minute (or

fifteen seconds). Each kshaṇa is divided into fifteen kalâ, each of

which is equal to one-sixtieth of a minute, and this is the cashaka,

only called by another name.

[Nimesha, lava, truṭi.] Among the lower orders of these fractions of

time there occur three names which are always mentioned in the same

sequence. The largest is the nimesha, i.e. the time during which the

eye, in the normal state of things, is open between two consecutive

looks. The lava is the mean, and the truṭi the smallest part of time,

the latter word meaning the cracking of the forefinger against the

inside of the thumb, which is with them a gesture expressive of

astonishment or admiration. The relation between these three measures

varies very much. According to many of the Hindus—

2 truṭi = 1 lava.

2 lava = 1 nimesha.

Further, they differ as to the relation between the nimesha and the

next higher order of fractions of time, for according to some the

latter (kâshṭhâ) contains fifteen, according to others thirty nimesha.

Others, again, divide each of these three measures into eighths, so

that—

8 truṭi = 1 lava.

8 lava = 1 nimesha.

8 nimesha = 1 kâshṭhâ (?).

The latter system is used in the book Srûdhava, and has also been

adopted by Ś M Y (?), one of their learned astronomers. He makes this

division still more subtle by adding a further measure, smaller than

the truṭi, which is called aṇu, and eight of which are one truṭi.

[Kâshṭhâ, kalâ.] The next higher orders, parts of time larger than the

nimesha, are kâshṭhâ and kalâ. We have said already (p. 335) that with

some Hindus kalâ is only another name for cashaka, and is considered as

equal to thirty kâshṭhâ. Further—

1 kâshṭhâ = 15 nimesha.

1 nimesha = 2 lava.

1 lava = 2 truṭi.

Others reckon thus—

1 kalâ = 1⁄16th minute of the nychthemeron = 30 kâshṭhâ.

1 kâshṭhâ = 30 nimesha.

And the further fractions such as those just mentioned.

Lastly, others reckon thus—

1 cashaka = 6 nimesha.

1 nimesha = 3 lava.

Here ends the tradition of Utpala.

According to the Vâyu-Purâṇa—

1 muhûrta = 30 kalâ.

1 kalâ = 30 kâshṭhâ.

1 kâshṭhâ = 15 nimesha.

The smaller fractions are disregarded by the Vâyu-Purâṇa.

[Page 171.] We have no means of settling the question as to which of

these systems is the most authentic one. Therefore it is the best for

us to adhere to the theory of Utpala and Ś M Y (?), i.e. to divide all

measures of time smaller than a prâṇa by eight—

1 prâṇa = 8 nimesha.

1 nimesha = 8 lava.

1 lava = 8 truṭi.

1 truṭi = 8 aṇu.

The whole system is represented in the following table:—

+-------------------+--------------------------+-----------------------+

| | How many times the | |

| The names of the | smaller one is contained | How many of it are |

| measures of time. | in the larger one. | contained in one day. |

+-------------------+--------------------------+-----------------------+

| Ghaṭî, Nâḍî | 60 | 60 |

| Kshaṇa | 4 | 240 |

| Cashaka, Vinâḍî, }| | |

| Kalâ }| 15 | 3600 |

| Prâṇa | 6 | 21,600 |

| Nimesha | 8 | 172,800 |

| Lava | 8 | 1,382,400 |

| Truṭi | 8 | 11,059,200 |

| Aṇu | 8 | 88,473,600 |

+-------------------+--------------------------+-----------------------+

[Prahara.] The Hindus have also a popular kind of division of the

nychthemeron into eight prahara, i.e. changes of the watch, and in some

parts of their country they have clepsydræ regulated according to the

ghaṭî, by which the times of the eight watches are determined. After a

watch which lasts seven and a half ghaṭî has elapsed, they beat the

drum and blow a winding shell called śaṅkha, in Persian spêd-muhra. I

have seen this in the town of Purshûr. Pious people have bequeathed for

these clepsydræ, and for their administration, legacies and fixed

incomes.

[Muhûrta.] Further, the day is divided into thirty muhûrta, but this

division is not free from a certain obscurity; for sometimes you think

that the muhûrtas have always the same length, since they compare them

either with the ghaṭî, and say that two ghaṭî are one muhûrta, or with

the watches, and say that one watch is three and three-quarters

muhûrta. Here the muhûrtas are treated as if they were horæ

æquinoctiales (i.e. so and so many equal parts of the nychthemeron).

However, the number of such hours of a day or of a night differs on

every degree of latitude, and this makes us think that the length of a

muhûrta during the day is different from its length during the night

(for if four watches or fifteen muhûrta represent a day or a night, the

muhûrtas cannot be of the same length in the day and in the night,

except at the times of the equinoxes).

On the other hand, the way in which the Hindus count the dominants of

the muhûrtas makes us more inclined to the opposite opinion, that, in

fact, the muhûrtas are of different length, for in the case of day and

night they simply attribute to each of them fifteen dominants. Here the

muhûrtas are treated like the horæ obliquæ temporales (i.e. twelve

equal parts of the day and twelve equal parts of the night, which

differ as day and night differ).

The latter opinion is confirmed by a calculation of the Hindus which

enables them to find the number of the muhûrtas (which have elapsed of

the day) by means of the digits which the shadow of a person at the

time measures. From the latter number you subtract the digits of the

shadow of the person at noon, and the remaining number you look out in

the middle column of the following diagram, which we have taken from

some of their metrical compositions. The corresponding field of the

upper or lower columns shows the number of muhûrtas which you wanted to

find.

+----------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+---+---+---+

| The muhûrtas which } | | | | | | | | |

| have elapsed before } | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |

| noon. } | | | | | | | | |

+----------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+---+---+---+

| How many digits the } | | | | | | | | |

| shadow in question is } | 96 | 60 | 12 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 0 |

| larger than the noon-shadow } | | | | | | | | |

+----------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+---+---+---+

| The muhûrtas which } | | | | | | | | |

| have elapsed after } | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | |

| noon } | | | | | | | | |

+----------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+---+---+---+

[Whether the length of a muhûrta is variable or invariable.] The

commentator of the Siddhânta, Pulisa, comments on the latter opinion,

and blames those who in general declare one muhûrta to be equal to two

ghaṭî, saying [Page 172.] that the number of the ghaṭî of the

nychthemeron varies in the different parts of the year, whilst the

number of its muhûrtas does not vary. But in another place he

contradicts himself, where he reasons about the measure of the muhûrta.

He fixes one muhûrta as equal to 720 prâṇa or breaths, one breath being

composed of two things: the apâna or the inhaling, and the prâṇa or the

exhaling of breath. Two other terms of the same meaning are niḥśvâsa

and avaśvâsa. However, if one thing is mentioned, the other is tacitly

included and understood; as, for instance, if you speak of days, you

include the nights, meaning to express days and nights. Accordingly a

muhûrta is 360 apâna and 360 prâṇa.

In the same manner, when speaking of the measure of a ghaṭî, he only

mentions the one species of breath, connoting the other, for he

explains it in general as equal to 360 breaths (instead of 180 apâna

and 180 prâṇa).

If now the muhûrta is measured by breaths, it is dependent upon the

ghaṭî and the horæ æquinoctiales as the gauges of its measure. But this

is exactly the contrary of what Pulisa intends, for he argues against

his opponents who maintain that a day has fifteen muhûrtas only, if he

who counts them dwells on the equator or somewhere else, but at the

time of the equinoxes. Pulisa observes that the abhijit coincides with

noon and the beginning of the second half of the day; that, therefore,

if the number of the muhûrtas of the day varied, the number of the

muhûrta called abhijit and denoting noon would vary too (i.e. it would

not always be called the eighth muhûrta of the day).

Vyâsa says that the birth of Yudhishṭhira took place in the white half,

at noon, at the eighth muhûrta. If an opponent means to infer from this

that it was the day of an equinox, we answer by referring him to the

statement of Mârkaṇḍeya, viz. that the birth took place at full moon in

the month Jyaishṭha, a time of the year which is far distant from an

equinox.

Further, Vyâsa says that the birth of Yudhishṭhira took place at the

abhijit, when the youth of the night was gone, at midnight, at the

eighth (muhûrta) of the black half, in the month of Bhâdrapada. This

date, too, is far distant from an equinox.

[Story of Śiśupâla.] Vasishṭha relates that Vâsudeva killed Śiśupâla,

the son of the daughter of Kaṁsa, at the abhijit. The Hindus tell the

following story of Śiśupâla. He had been born with four hands, and one

day his mother heard a voice from above saying, “When that person who

will kill him touches him, his two superfluous hands will fall off.”

Thereupon they put the child to the bosom of each of those who were

present, and when it came to be touched by Vâsudeva, the two hands fell

off, as had been prophesied. Now the aunt spoke to him, “Assuredly you

will one day kill my child;” whereupon Vâsudeva, who was still a child,

answered, “I shall not do that except he deserve it for some crime

committed intentionally, and I shall not call him to account until his

misdeeds exceed ten.”

Some time afterwards Yudhishṭhira was occupied with preparing a

sacrifice to the fire in the presence of the most famous personages. He

consulted Vyâsa as to the rank of the guests present and the honours

due to the president of such an assembly, consisting in the

presentation of water and roses in a cup, and Vyâsa advised him to make

Vâsudeva the president. In this assembly also Śiśupâla, his cousin, was

present, and now he began to rage, maintaining that he had a better

claim to such an honour than Vâsudeva. He boasted much and went even so

far as to abuse the parent of Vâsudeva. The latter called the present

company to witness as to his bad behaviour, and let him do as he liked.

However, when the affair lasted too long, and passed beyond the number

of ten (muhûrtas), Vâsudeva took the cup and threw it at him, as people

throw with the cakra, and cut off his head. This is the story of

Śiśupâla.

[Criticisms on Pulisa.] He who wants to prove the above-mentioned

theory (like Pulisa, viz. that the muhûrtas are thirty equal parts of

the nychthemeron), will not succeed unless he prove that the abhijit

falls together with noon and with the middle of the eighth muhûrta (so

that the day consists of twice seven and a half equal muhûrtas, and

likewise the night). As long as he does not prove this, the muhûrtas

differ in length as days and nights, though just in India only very

little, and it is possible that in times distant from the equinoxes

noon falls either at the beginning or at the end of the eighth muhûrta,

or within it.

Those pious men (the Âpta (?)-purâṇa-kâra) do not deny the rotundity of