Page 87 - Lokmanya Tilak Samagra (khand 2)

74 SAMAGRA TILAK - 2 Ill! THE ORION

present theory, than has bitbertQ been done, we may fairly con-
clude that we have rightly interpreted the passages from the Brah-
mapas; if not. we .shall hat'• .either to retviseou·t assumption or
to give it up entirely. But before we do so we must, as far as possible,
try to identify the asterisms and determine their forms as des-
.cribed in the ancient works.
.
.
We shall :first take .. up ~M rigas:biras or Agrahayapi accordi1,1g
tc Amarasinha,. The: very name of the Nak~hatra, which ·meap.s
' an antelope!s ·head, '~ suggests the figure of the asterism. But
the constellation consists .of -so many stars that it is-. very di-
ftidult to say which of them might have suggested the name. I may
here remark that· the docttine M ' Yogataras ' or the junction
stars cannot -be supposed to have'been d'eveloped in the early days
we are hei~ ~peaking ·of. I do not mean to say that single stars may
not have been or were not specifically named. But wherever a
consteilfltion is spoken of, it.is .more proQable that the whole group
was intended, as in, the case of the Seven. 'Bears or the Krittikas;
and .hence th~ detern;rination of the jUJJ,ction sta,rs, as given in
later astronomicaL :works, cannot help_ us beyond indicating where
we are to look .for tbj;: ~ot;lst~llation described in the old works .. For
instance, if we ta·keMrigashiTas we are told that one of the three
small $tars in the he~J.d of Orion is the junction star. This means
that we must look for Mrigashiras iJ?. the constellation of .Orion.
But how can these three stars give us the figure of an antelope's
·bead ! The three stars· are so close that between themselves they
~ve us no figure at all. It is, however, suggested that the two stars
in the shoulders· and two· in the knees of Orion give us the four
feet of the antelope, whose head may then be said to correspond
with the three sta.rS·in the Orion's head. In short it is the antelope's
·bead in the same way as it is the head of Orion. But besides being
()pell to the objection that this gives us the head and not the form
•i may here. once for all, remark that though I have translated
the word Mrigils-kUas by the 'antelope's head,' I do not mean to imply
that .:lf.riga necessarily- meant 'an antelope' in the Vedic literature. It
has been suggested that Mri:!a may mean a 'bullock' or some other ani-
mal like it. It may, b\lt we have nothing to do with it, inasmuch as the
word ·M.riga itself is still used in the -Sanskrit literature ~o denote the
<:onstellation. My translation of ltfrtgashiras must thererore be consi-
dered pro~isional, remembering that tho~1gh. it may change yet the
ar~ment in this chapter will still remain ·unaltered.