Page 69 - Lokmanya Tilak Samagra (khand 2)

S6 SAMAGRA 1'U:..u.- 2 • TIIB ORION

two Nakthatras in advance of ~c Krittikis. Wo.4l.vc now to sec
what evidence there is in the Vedic works from which this old
position of the four principal points in the ecliptic may be
established.
There appears to be no express passage in the Vedic works,
which states that Mrigashiras like the Krittik:As was ever the mouth
of the Nakthatras. But what is so lost may still be discovered, in
the words of Prof. Max MUller, "hidden in the secret drawers of
language. " Mrigashiras may not be specifically described as the
first of the Nakthatras; but the word Agraha~t which Amarsinba
( i. 3, 23 ), gives as a synonym for Mrigashiras, and which supplies,
according to PApini, a derivative word for the month of M&rga-
shirsha tells the same tale. Agrahayan£ literally means " commenc-
ing the year; and the question is how did the Nakthatra come. to
be so called ? In explaining the formation of this word all native
lexicographers begin by assuming that the full-moon in the month
of Mirgashirsha was the first night of the year, hence called Agra-
Mya,_, and as this full-moon occurred in the month of MArga-
shirsba the month itself was called Agrahayanika. There is no
grammatical inconsistency so far. But when these lexicographers
further tell us that the Nakthatra itself was called Agrahdyant, as
Amarsinha has done, because the full-moon in the vicinity of the
Nakthatra commenced the year in old days • one feels that there
is something wrong in this explanation. The ordinary course is to
name the full-moon or any other day after the Nakthatra, as Chai-
trl, Pau1h4m, Pau1ht etc. ( Pa~. iv. 2, 3 ), while in the present case
the oi'der is reversed and the Nakthatra, we are told, is named
after the full-moon. It is true that the lexicographers were, to a
certain extent, compelled to adopt such a course, as they could
not otherwise explain why AgrahdyD1Jt, a term usually denoting a
full-moon night, should have been given as a synonym for the
Nakthatra of Mrigashiras by Amarsinha. But whatever their
motive, we have now to see if their explanations, as well as the
statement in Amara, are correct. Turning to Pa:r;tini we find no
authority for this converse process. The word AgrahayD1Ji occurs
in Pll)ini iv. 2. 22 1 which lays down the rule that the derivative
• See Bhalnu Diksbit'a commentary on Amar, i. J. 23, He explains
the word thua :- eril ~r: 1 ~ 111~: 1 ~ 1 '(,.fqC(i~RI
VRII~ I ~ ~~ I d'ii1ili'lll(l"''iffit ~r I