·
Śaka eras are subdivisions of Kali Maha
Yuga devised and handed down by the sages, immediately after
Krishna departed from this world.
·
There are six
Śaka eras of which two were already over. We are now in the third Śaka era.
·
The king who eliminates the Śaka tribes (and Mleccha tribes
such as Yavana, Parada, Pahlavas and such others) becomes the Śakakāraka.
·
Yudhishtira
was the Śakakāraka of the first Śaka of Kali Yuga by virtue of having defeated
the Śaka-s in the Mahabharata war. Computation of the Śaka named after him
started only from the beginning of Kali Maha Yuga when he abdicated the throne.
This Śaka started in 3101 BCE.
·
His Śaka went on for 3044 years after
which it was replaced by King Vikrama by having
subdued the Śaka tribes. His Śaka started in Kartika (Tula Sankramana of the
sun) in the year 57 BCE. An alternate beginning also seems to have been
followed from Caitra of 56 BCE
·
Vikrama’s Śaka went on for 135 years after
which it was replaced by Shalivahana Śaka.
The
identity of the Śakakāraka of Shalivahana will be discussed after sorting out
the identity of the “Śaka’ eras found in some
inscriptions that some scholars had linked with a Jyothisha Siddhanta intended for deciphering the Vedic time
measures such as Kali Yuga.
We
should first know that no Jyothisha Siddhanta would
refer to the time scale other than the Vedic one (Kalpa – Catur Yuga –
Kali Yuga) because Time is basically a measure of the Age of Brahma. The dates of these Siddhantas are related to some
division of this Time of Kalpa or Yuga and not to an era of a Mleccha king.
Depending on the type of the Siddhanta they compute the time of compositon either
from the beginning of Kalpa or from Kali Yuga. In the latter case, the nearest
Śaka is sometimes mentioned. This is the Śaka of Kali
Maha Yuga but definitely not the
Cyrus Śaka which I had shown to be non-existent. Nor it can be the Śaka of
the Scythians or the Parthians or the Greeks suggested since the time of the colonial
writers.
Did an “Old” Śaka exist?
Some
inscriptions written in Brahmi or Kharoshthi are found to indicate an
unspecified era. Scholars refer to it as the Old Śaka with some of them linking with it the Jyothisha Siddhanta of Bhaskara II. Since Siddhantic
tradition adheres to the Śaka era of Kali Yuga, it is blatantly wrong to
suggest that Bhaskara had given the
date of Siddhanta Shiromani from the “Old Śaka”. To put at rest the mis-information
of linking the Siddhanta with the Old Śaka, let me examine the list of
inscriptions on the so-called ‘Old Śaka’ given in Epigraphia Indica, Volume
14.
Written
in Brahmi or Kharoshthi these inscriptions carry the year number either as the
regnal year of the king or the year number of an unspecified era that goes upto
399. I have boxed the year numbers in red.
Most
of these inscriptions mention the month name, while some of them state the
tithi and the day of the month. Notable is the fact that the month name is not
always Vedic. In some inscriptions the Greek name of
the corresponding Vedic month is given. Such names are underlined in
blue.
The
1st inscription from Taxila refers to the month as “Panemus” – the Greek equivalent
of Ashadha – Sravana
of the Vedic system. This name was never in use in India. The king was ‘Moga’ (Maues) of foreign origin who occupied Bactria
and Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan where this inscription is found. There is
no name of an era (Śaka) but the statement of 78 years could not be the regnal
year of the king.
Another
inscription is also found in the same region (Taxila) attributed to king Azes, again a foreign name, made in the year 136. He
is identified as a Kushana King by the author in the Epigraphia Indica volume
(no. 8 in the list)
This
was issued on the same Ashadha month but on the 15th day, which
could refer to the day of the Full Moon. The absence of any reference to the
Full Moon - a tithi in the Vedic system - can have only two explanations, that
the tithi system was absent in the time scale of this dynasty or there was no
importance to the day of Full Moon as in the Vedic system. Only borrowed material
can appear devoid of core elements.
All
the above inscriptions mention the Vedic months and some of them the tithis
too. Most of these inscriptions were made in the times of the Kushana kings having their own era. “Gushanasa rajami” in Panjtar inscription (No 7) is an obvious reference to
a Kushana king. The Kushanas were not of Indic origin but moved from north
China to Greco-Bactria as per the Chinese Book of Later Han.[1]
The Hellenistic influence on them is seen in the names of the months in the
inscriptions. One-way transfer of the elements of Time from Vedic to Greek is
inferred from the adaptation of the tithi- months that have their own cycles
traceable from the beginning of Kali Yuga.
An
era is obviously detected in inscription No 11 and 12 while the others refer to
the regnal year of the king. The 13th inscription was made in the
reign of Devaputra
Kanishka of Kushana dynasty in the month Daisika, a Greek name. The
appearance of the Greek month name in the inscription need not be construed as
proof of presence of Greek language in the local vernacular.
Generally
the text of the grant is dictated or given by an officer of the royal court at
the order of the king. Greek names popping up here and there in the
inscriptions show the mix of local and Greek language in the royal court. It is
also probable that the issuing officer was of Greco- Bactrian origin. However
the use of tithi-lunar month is proof of the absence of indigenously developed
Time computation in the Kushana tradition but a liberal borrowing from the
Vedic calendar. In this backdrop the year numbers running up to 399 and 384
could only refer to the beginning of their dynasty.
The
month name “Apelaios”
in the 17th inscription is also alien to the Vedic calendar. But the
tithi of that month appearing in the inscription goes to show that only the
month name was altered, and nothing was done about the tithi “Dashahi” (Dasami).
The
common features running through all these inscriptions are,
·
No
name of the era is found in any of them. They have only
recognized a certain beginning and counted the years from that.
·
The blend of Greek names suggests the origin of these kings as different from the Indo-Scythians or the ‘Sacae’ tribes.
The location and the language suggest connections with the Yavana tribes, who
however appear along with the Śaka-s in Indic references to Mleccha tribes.
·
The Kushana kings appearing in these
inscriptions with Greek names indicate a high probability of Yavana- Kushana association in the past.
·
All these inscriptions similar in
language (either Brahmi or Kharoshthi) and in the expression of the dates point
to a same dynasty, i.e. Kushana.
The
common features hint at the Yavana – Kushana connection
and the assimilation of the features of the Vedic
calendar tradition. Historically too, the Yavana –Kushana connection had
existed. A brief historical analysis is done on their beginnings to pick out
the relevant connections.
Kushana history
The
Kushana origins are traced to the Yuezhi tribes from the valley of Gansu
on the northern borders of China who
migrated to the north of the Oxus River
(Amu Darya). Bactria in this region
was earlier lost to the Śaka tribes by the Greeks. The
Śaka tribes present at the time of Yuezhi migration were driven out to the
south by the Yuezhi. This happened
sometime during the 2nd century BCE.
The
Khalchayan archaeological complex in
that region represents the transition of the Yuezhi into Kushana leadership.[2]
The Khalchayan also reveals a “bridge between the Hellenistic art of Bactria
and the Hellenized Kushan Art.”[3] After
making Khalchayana their base, the Kushanas started moving out. They conquered
the south of Oxus and then entered the Indian subcontinent through Afghanistan
and Pakistan. The Taxila inscription by Moga could perhaps be the
earliest inscription by the Yuezhi-Kushanas.
There
is an alternate opinion that Moga was a Śaka king.
This is supported by the remaining part of the Taxila inscription stating, “of the Kshaharata
and Kshatrapa of Chukhsa - Liaka Kusuluka by
name - his son Patika - in the town of Takshasila..” This can also be read
as the identity of the donor, Patika, and not
the king. All these inscriptions in Kharoshthi and Brahmi indicating
donations to Buddhist or Jain establishments, it is probable that the pilgrims
of different ethnicities and different locations could have visited Taxila
ruled by the Kushanas.
More
details are available in the literary sources of the Chinese on Yuezhi
migration. According to the Chinese book called “Shiji” (Book of History)
authored by Sima Qian, the Yuezhi tribes
(mentioned as Da Yuezhi) initially migrated
westward from Gansu in China. The defeats they suffered on the way pushed them into Bactria in the north of Oxus in the year176 BCE. A
Chinese Ambassador by name Zhang Qian had visited them in the year 129/128 BCE and found them well settled by
then.[4] It
is more likely that they founded the Kushana dynasty and an era as well sometime
between 176 and 129 BCE.
According to scholars they had their own language that resembled the Śaka
language. The Bactrian influence had lent Greek words into their vocabulary.
This is reflected in the inscriptions found in the Indian sub-continent.
There
are diverse opinions among western scholars on the number of eras deduced from
Yuezhi – Kushana coins and inscriptions. Upto three different eras are hypothesized by them, but all of them are unsubstantiated. This uncertainty added
to the confusion of those working on the date of the Siddhantic works which can
never refer to an era outside the Kali era format.
The
unspecified “Old Śaka” seen in the above inscriptions can be resolved through
another literary source – an astrological text of the Yavanas. This text
written in Sanskrit and titled as “Yavana Jataka” refers to only one era of the Kushanas besides referring to an era of the Yavanas. It also
gives a conversion formula between the Kushana and Yavana years. This greatly
helps in solving the mystery of the so-called “Old Shaka” and also to prove
that it has no connection with the Siddhantic references to the Śaka years.
The Era of the Yavanas
The
Yavana Jataka is an astrological text of horoscopy written in Sanskrit. Two
authors are recognized in the colophon of the text in its last chapter. The
text was composed by Yavaneswara or Yavanacarya in his native tongue and was made into
Sanskrit by the King Sphujidhwaja. An alternate version exists in Bhattotpala’s commentary to Brihat
Jataka that both are the same.
In
the last chapter of Yavana Jataka the author makes significant references to the
Yuga of the Yavanas and the Śaka of the Kushanas .
The
Yavanas had a great Solar Yuga and a
Smaller Yuga for predicting
eclipses.[5]
The Yavanas had followed a Yuga
of 165 years. While stating this it is also told that some Yavanas find
it good to follow the opinion of sage Vasishtha,
but according to the best of the Yavanas the Yuga consists of 165 years![6]
The
reference to Vasishtha reminds us of the earlier occasions the Yavanas were
saved from Sagara by Vasishtha and
the Yavanas coming to fight on behalf of Vasishtha against Vishwamitra to restore the sacred cow. The Yavanas seemed to have
enjoyed cordial relationship with the lineage of the Vasishtha-s and at some
point of time received the knowledge of astrology from one of the Vasishtha-s.
By the time of the composition of Yavana Jataka, parallel development of
astrological theories seemed to have taken place. A major theory seems to be
the idea of the Solar Yuga
of 165 years. This is something unheard of anywhere in the world.
Yavana
Jataka continues to describe the marker for this Yuga.
“This solar Yuga begins on the first tithi in the Sukla paksa of Caitra
in the Spring, when the Sun and the Moon
in their course are in conjunction in
the first degree of Aries and when Aries
is in the ascendant (i.e., at dawn).”[7]
The
conjunction of all the planets except Rahu at the beginning of Aries marked the
beginning of Kali Yuga. In contrast the Yavana Yuga started at the conjunction of only the sun
and the moon at the beginning of Aries with Shukla Pratipat running at sun
rise.
This
implies that the sun entered Aries on the day after Amawasya in Caitra. This
close conjunction of the two luminaries at Caitra Shukla Pratipat in the
beginning of Aries can happen in Nija masa, with
the previous month being Adhika Caitra. Adhika Caitra can recur once in 15 to 17 years
on an average.
There
is another rider implied by the verse. The conjunction at the beginning of
Aries means that the star Aswini was transited
by both the sun and the moon.
Additionally
one more feature is given in the same text (quoted below), pertaining to the
week day. It was a Sunday when the Solar Yuga of
165 years began.
Thus
there are four features:
1. Caitra
Shukla Pratipat
2. Aswini
3. Sunday
4. 165
year cycle.
Of
these four, the conjunction of the first three can happen only once in 1890
years (LCM of 30 tithis, 27 stars and 7 week days).This number can be more if
Adhika masa occurrence is included.
Each
cycle starting every165 years, the probability of this conjunction is stretched
to 20,790 years. (The LCM of 30, 27, 7, 165 = 20,790)
At
best the subsequent cycles (of 165 years) could have started at Caitra Shukla
Pratipat. This is the same as the Yugādi observed in South India every year. The unique date of
the conjunction of the four factors was grabbed by the Yavanas to herald a new
Yuga of their own.
Yavana
Jataka further states the number of elapsed years of the Śaka when the Solar
Yuga began.[8]
Sunday as the first weekday of the Yuga is stipulated in this context. Let me
reproduce the verse along with two translations. [9]
The
verse clearly states the beginning of Ravir Yuga (the Yuga of the Sun) on a Sunday (Surya Dina). The confusion comes in the number of
elapsed years, whether it is 66 or 56. Number 56 is
more acceptable as half of hundred (50) and six.
The
main issue is the “idam
Śakānām” of the elapsed years.
Idam:
this
Śakānām:
of the Śaka (Plural, 6th case)
Fifty
six years of “this Śaka” were gone when the Ravi Yuga started at the conjunction
of the sun and the moon at the beginning of Aries on a Sunday when Shukla
Pratipat was running – this is the import of the verse.
The first year of the Śaka – the first
year of Ravi Yuga = 56 years.
The
identity of this Śaka is variously debated, with many writers referring to the Shalivahana Śaka of 78 CE. But in the
absence of even a suggestive reference to an outside era such as Shalivahana or
Vikrama anywhere in the text that is totally devoted to the astrology of the
Yavanas, we are led to treat this as the Śaka of the
Yavanas. If it is a Vedic Śaka, the author would have indicated as he
did when he quoted Vasishtha’s name to clarify that the Yuga of the Yavana was
different.
To
decipher the date of the Yavana Śaka we have to find out the Ravi Yuga
beginning. I checked Jhora astrological software to locate the date of Ravi
Yuga when the sun and the moon joined at the beginning of Aries on a Sunday at
the time of Shukla Pratipat. It threw up the biggest surprise. The date was close to Caitradi Vikrama Śaka! Since the
Yavanas were located north-north west of India, I had taken up Srinagar for
checking the date.
The starting date of Ravi Yuga of the Yavanas
All
the features mentioned in Yavana Jataka are fulfilled in this date.
·
Aries lagna
·
Sun- Moon conjunction with the sun
having just entered Aries
·
Caitra Shukla Pratipat
·
Sunday
As
expected Nija Caitra began on that day. This date coincided with Vikrama Śaka
at Kali 3045, a year later than the originally devised Vikrama Śaka date. This
was discussed in the
last part where I showed the rationale of Kartikadi Śaka of Vikrama in the
year 57 BCE after the lapse of 3044 years of Kali Yuga. By Caitra of 56
BCE, a year was gone in Vikrama Śaka of 135 years. That year was taken as the
first year of Ravi Yuga by the Yavanas considering the once-in-twenty thousand year
plus conjunction.
The
rarity of the date explains why the Yavanas had two time scales, a Śaka era and
Ravi Yuga. They had originally conceived the Śaka era. Nearly half a century
later they must have witnessed the Vedic people gearing
up for the change of their Śaka from Yudhishthira to Vikrama. Unfortunately
the Vedic people seemed to have been caught in a dilemma on the choice of the
starting date between Caitra Shukla Pratipat on 57 BCE when
Yudhishthira Śaka formally ended at Kali 3044 and the same tithi of the next
year (56 BCE) with alignment of the Sun and the moon as they were at the
beginning of Kali Yuga. They settled in between the two on the day of Tula Sankramana in 57 BCE having the conjunction of
many features.
The
56 BCE date was available up for grabs by the Yavanas who in spite of having
started a Śaka era by then, chose to make it part of their time scale by
starting a new Yuga from then
onwards.
Fifty
six years of the Yavana Śaka were gone by then when this Yuga was started. This
locates the beginning of the Yavana
Śaka at 112 BCE (56 years before 56 BCE). Therefore “idam Śakānām” in the verse cannot be about Vikrama
Śaka or Shalivahana Śaka but a Śaka of the Yavanas.
Further
evidence for this Śaka of the Yavanas appears in the next verse. Before going
over to that let me clarify two features, one about the simulation used for locating the Yavana Yuga and the other about Bhattotpala’s reference to a Śaka when
Sphujidhwaja composed his work.
Jhora Surya Siddhanta works for dates closer to zero ayanamsa
The
Ravi Yuga date could be derived only from the Surya Siddhanta astronomy and not from any other system.
No
researcher could get this Ravi Yuga right mainly because they had used western
astronomy based calculations which work on standard approximations for past
dates. But the date of the Yuga coming closer to zero degree ayanamsa, I
checked with the Surya Siddhanta model and it concurred perfectly.[10]
For comparison, let me show the same date for Lahiri ayanamsa, based on current
rate of precession approximated to 2000 years ago, almost in the same way the
western astronomy calculations are made.
Simulated to Lahiri ayanamsa
The
tithi had changed though it was a Sunday. But the sun was in Pisces, away from
Aries by 4 degrees. It would take four days for the sun to reach Aries but by
then the moon would have entered Taurus and the tithi would have advanced. No
other year comes closer to the required parameters. This is a very clear proof
of unworkability of Lahiri
ayanamsa beyond a few centuries in the past.
Bhattotpala on Śaka of Sphujidhwaja.
Bhattotpala
in his commentary to verse 7-9 of Brihat
Jataka has referred to a “Śaka”
when Sphujidhwaja made his compositon (Yavana Jataka). He has written,
“evaṃ sphujidhvajakṛtaṃ śakakālasyārvāg jñāyate”
Meaning:
evaṃ = thus, so, really
sphujidhvajakṛtaṃ =
done by Sphuji Dhwaja
śakakālasya = of saka kala
arvāk = near, within,
Jñāyate = is known, are
understood
Let me reproduce the
meaning of arvāk – the crucial word to understand the verse.
Sphujidhwaja
had done a work (Yavana Jataka) close to a Śaka era,
is the overall meaning.
The identity of the Śaka
era mentioned here is a matter of debate.
If Bhattotpala had meant
the Yavana Śaka, it means Yavana Jataka was composed close to the beginning of
the Śaka, i.e. 112 BCE. The gap between Yavana Śaka and the Yavana Yuga is too
huge to be treated as ‘arvāk’.
Considering the details
of Ravi (Yavana) Yuga described in Yavana Jataka more or less on the lines of Vedanga Jyothisha, Yavana Jataka seemed
to have served as the rule book for the Ravi Yuga. In all probability Yavana
Jataka must have been composed close to the beginning of Ravi Yuga, i.e. just
before that – outlining the details of that Yuga.
This notion is
supported by the fact that the details of the Ravi Yuga appears only in the
last chapter, as a kind of addendum. Any earlier Yavana writer, say, Yavanacarya recognized in
the text could not have conceived the Yavana Yuga. This also rejects Bhattotpala’s version that Yavanacarya
and Sphujidhwaja were the same. Sphujidhwaja had Sanskritized an earlier
text of Yavanacarya and added a chapter on Ravi Yuga.
It must have been completed before the Ravi Yuga started in Caitra 56 BCE.
At that time the nearest
Śaka was Vikrama Śaka, not the Yavana Śaka which was 56 years away.
With
the Yavana Yuga starting too close to the Vikrama Śaka there is scope to
interpret that Bhattotpala meant Vikrama Śaka only. It is logical to expect
anyone to remember or relate the development of a new astrological system of an
alien group in one’s own calendar date. Bhattotpala had recorded that memory
handed over through generations.
The Kushana Era.
After
stating the start of the Ravi Yuga, Sphujidhwaja goes on to give a formula to
derive the elapsed years in the Ravi Yuga for the corresponding Kushana years.[11]
The existence of the Kushana Era is made known from this.
“Take the number of years that have passed of
the Kosanas, add
149, and subtract from this (sum) the time of the Sakas
(i.e., the year in the Saka era); (the remainder) is the number of years in the
yuga which have elapsed.”
The
verse speaks about the Kushana (Śaka) years and a Śaka besides the Yuga of the
Yavanas. Taken along with the previous verse, the Śaka is understood to be that
of the Yavana (112 BCE).
The
verse gives a conversion formula between the Kushana years and the Ravi Yuga
years using the Śaka years.
The
known factors are:
·
Yavana Śaka started in 112 BCE
·
Yavana Yuga started in 56 BCE
·
There is a gap of 56 years between
Yavana Śaka and Yavana Yuga.
Deduction
of Yavana Śaka years from a constant number 149 added to the Kushana years
shows that the Kushana Era
was older than the Yavana Śaka.
I
attempted to write down the verse into a formula as follows:
Let
us assume the elapsed Kushana years as X.
{X
(number of Kushana years elapsed) + 149} – Years of Yavana Śaka = Years of the
Yavana (Ravi) Yuga elapsed.
Taking
up the known factors written above, I substituted 56 as the number of Yavana
Śaka years when the Yavana Yuga was born. Yavana Yuga year is then taken as
zero.
X
+ 149 – 56 = 0
X
+ 93 = 0
X
= 0 – 93 = -93
This
negative integer puts us in a spot, but this number being the elapsed years of
the Kushana Śaka, when the Ravi Yuga of the Yavanas had just begun it can be
taken as the number of Kushana years gone before the Yavana Yuga was
started.
In
modern calendar years, Ravi
Yuga = 56 BCE
By
adding 93 years to that we get the first year of the Kushana Śaka = 149 BCE (-56 (+) -93).
Kushana-Yavana Eras and Ravi Yuga
When
I tested with different number of elapsed years the result was not consistent.
With the verse conveying a relationship between the Kushana and the Yavana Śaka
it appears that it was meant to be a formula for deriving
the first year of the Kushana Śaka. Any
other derivations and explanations from readers are welcome.
However
we cannot miss out the fact that the derived date (149 BCE) remarkably matches with the beginning of Kushana dynasty.
On
the basis of the Chinese book of Shiji,
we earlier derived that the Kushana Dynasty was formed sometime between 176 and 129 BCE. The now
derived date of Kushana Śaka at 149 BCE is well within this period. The
literary, archaeological (Khalchayan) and astrological derivations are
concurrent with each other on the date of the Kushana Śaka with the
astrological input giving the exact date.
The
Śaka dates derived so far are listed below:
Yudhishthira Śaka
= 3101 BCE (Vedic)
Vikrama Śaka
= 57 BCE (Vedic)
Yavana Yuga
= 56 BCE
Yavana Śaka
= 112 BCE
Kushana Śaka
= 149 BCE
Our
search for the Old Śaka ends at the last two which were not Vedic, but used by
the people in the domains occupied by the Yavanas and Kushanas.
It
is erroneous to term these two as Old Śaka-s. They were Mleccha Śaka-s as far
as Vedic, particularly the Siddhantins were concerned. A Jyothisha Siddhanta
can never declare the date of composition from a Mleccha Śaka. As such Bhaskara
II could have never taken any of these Śaka-s of Mlecchas to specify the date
of composition. We would discuss that in the course of debunking such claims by
scholars. Meanwhile our next task is to establish the identity of the
Śakakāraka of Shalivahana Śaka.
(To be continued)
[2] Hans
Loeschner, “Notes on the Yuezhi – Kushan Relationship and Kushan Chronology” https://www.academia.edu/9062261/Notes_on_the_Yuezhi_Kushan_Relationship_and_Kushan_Chronology
[3] Kazim
Abdullaev, “Nomad Migration in Central Asia” https://www.academia.edu/6864202/Nomad_Migration_in_Central_Asia
[4] Hans
Loeschner, “Notes on the Yuezhi – Kushan Relationship and Kushan Chronology”
[5]
Yavana Jataka: 79-2
[6]
Yavana Jataka: 79 - 3
[7]
Yavana Jataka: 79-4
[8]
Yavana Jataka: 79-14
[9]
Bill M.Mak, “The Date and Nature of
Sphujidhvaja’s Yavanajātaka Reconsidered in the Light of Some Newly Discovered
Materials”
http://www.billmak.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/the-date-and-nature-of-sphujidhvaja.pdf
[10]
Zero ayanamsa years in Surya Siddhanta Model: 3101 BCE, 499 CE
[11]
Yavana Jataka: 79-15
