Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 25

The Great Clock

A Brief Essay on the Yuga Cycles:

A New Correlations for the Ages

Copyright Notice Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the author.

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

Contents. 1. The Holy Science: mistakes of ancient scholars. 2. When did Yudhishthira leave his Kingdom? 2.1 - The anchor Date of 3102 BC. 2.2 - Revati ( Piscis) and Apoapsis as an anchor. 3. Tzolkin Calendar adaptation and computing. 4. Testing the New Correlation. - Significant events in -3113 - Significant events in -550 - Significant events in 730 - Kali Yugas detail with Sandhi periods. 5. Conclusion. Appendix A - Mythological and Astronomical Basis for the 3102 BC anchor. Appendix B - The Inca connection. Bibliography.

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

1. The Holy Science: mistakes of ancient scholars.

Mistake #1 Sri Yuktesvar's work, The Holy Science, mentions some mistakes made along the ages. The first mistake which he addresses is that someone failed to reset the count at the end of the Descending Dvapara Yuga. So the first mistake switched the count of Kali 0001 as Kali 2401. Consequently, later scholars confused the date of Descending Dvapara 0001 for Descending Kali 0001. As a result, the two ages and their anchor date of 0001 got switched around. 1 Sri Yuktesvar states that this mistake finds its cause in the inability of King Parikshits sages to manage the calendar correctly. Mistake #2 Kulla Bhata, a 15th century hindu scholar and sage, made another mistake. He made the wrong calculation of 432,000 years for the Kali Yuga because he needed to account for such a long count for the Kali Yuga in his time. After the clock kept running over 2400, it had reached more than 3600 years by the time of Kulla Bhata. He multiplied the original values of the ages by 360 as a solution that could account for a Kali Yuga that was already running so long: Kulla Bhata 1,728,000 1,296,000 864,00 432,00 Method 4800 x 360 3600 x 360 2400 x 360 1200 x 360

Krta Yuga Treta Yuga Dvapara Yuga Kali Yuga

These figures are found in Khulla Bhatas commentaries on the Manusmrti (Laws of Manu) scripture, and they are also found in the Vishnu Puranas 2 . The text shows how the figures were obtained by multiplying the original values of the yugas times 360 as the table above shows. These 360 year periods were supposed to be years of the gods: a misconception which Sri Yuktesvar notices in his Holy Science. 3 After explaining these mistakes Yuktesvar goes on to correlate the calendar, adjusting its chronology in accordance to the following data: 1. Apoapsis is stated to occur when The First Point of Aries (Vernal Equinox) is aligned to the Fixed Star Revati ( Psc). 2. As of 1894 AD The Vernal Equinox displayed a 205436 deviation from Revati ( Psc). Yuktesvar adds that he calculated 1394 years from Apoapsis to 1894, so according to these figures, the rate of precessional is fixed at 0054 per year, and it gives a 24,000 year period for the Solar systems orbit around its binary companion. 3. Sri Yuktesvar fixes the point of Apoapsis at 500 AD, and by simple inference, we can see that he has set the Great Clock with the following dates and rates:

1 2

The Holy Science, p.xix. Horace Hayman Wilson translation, p.108, 1840. 3 The Holy Science p.xx. Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

Each Yuga derives it-s name from the proportion of the cycle it is depicting. 4

Dva-para-yuga means two-fold-age The first part of the word Dva- has an Indoeuropean root which Greek, Latin, and many European languages share. This can be clearly observed in the English two, Old English twa; the Greek duo. Treta-yuga means triple-age, and the term treta has obvious analogies in other IndoEuropean languages: tetra in Greek, triple in modern languages such as English, Spanish, and so on. The Satya and Kali terms refer more to the quality of the age itself in relation to the human experience that develops in it. The Kali-yuga is a one-point-age, because kali means one in Sanskrit. It is also related to the term Kali (quarrel, night, abuse, etc.), and it also holds a connection to Kaala (time), which denotes a basic unit of time in the yuga-cycle that we are following. Krta-yuga, the perfect-age is an allusion to the quality of the period: a time in which human mental virtue is perfect, complete, or whole. Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

2. When Did Yudhishthira Leave his Kingdom?

In the Holy Science, it is said that the grandson of Arjuna, Parikshit, reigned after Yudhishthira retired to the Himalayan mountains. He must have left, either at the beginning of the Descending Kali Yuga, or at the beginning of Descending Dvapara Yuga. Since Yuktesvar tells us that these two dates were switched after the scholars failed to reset the count, we can suppose that Yudhishthira left at Dvapara 0001, not Kali 0001. It is clear that Yuktesvar makes a mistake in his chronology: he places the end of Yudhishthiras reign in 700 BC, which is Descending Kali 0001 according to Yuktesvars correlation. This chronology is clearly mistaken. Since Yuktesvar states that King Parikshit began his reign at the beginning of the Kali Yuga (700 BC), he is implying that this event, which is part of the Mahabharata Epic, happened some 2700 years ago. But today we know that this is not so. The Kuru Dynasties of Ancient India actually came to an end around 800 BC, so that means that the Mahabharata War between Kurus and Pandavas must be older than this. The fact is that the Mahabharata War ended in 3138 BC, and it is stated in the scriptures that Krishna departed from the Earth some 26 years after the war was over. According to the Mahabharata 5 Yudishthira departed towards the Himalayas as soon as he heard that Krishna had ascended into heaven. This means that King Parikshit, actually began to reign in 3102 BC, not 700 BC as Yuktesvar suggests. 6 This is important, because we need to set certain historical events under the right chronology so we can later test the evolution/devolution cycles against the values we set for the Ages. The fact that this event took place in 3102 BC instead of 700 BC still fits Yuktesvars correlation perfectly. However, his chronology is mistaken. Yudhishthira's departure in 3102 BC is still a conclusive argument in favor of the Yuga Calendars capability of predicting important human events and shifts in consciousness and paradigms. However, we must be careful with the chronology and its relation to historical events. Although Yuktesvar misses the date of Yudhishthiras departure, 3102 BC is still present in his correlation as Descending Dvapara 0003. 7 So his correlation is only 2 years off at this stage.

2.1 The anchor Date of 3102 BC.

The 3102 BC anchor date is still being used in the mistaken 432,000 length for the Kali Yuga which Kulla Bhata proposed. Hence the Bhata date as of 2012 is Kali 5114. However, we know that 3102 BC it is actually signaling Descending Dvapara 0001, not Kali 0001, because we know that the yugas beginning was switched around. Nontheless, it is still true that 5114 years have gone by since Yudhishthiras departure. Although Sri Yuktesvar tells us that the yugas' anchors were switched around, he is not aware when this actually happened. It did not happen during the time of Parikshit, but much later on. The actual switching of the Ages must have occurred when Descending Dvapara was at a 2400 year count like Yuktesvar tells us, and this must have been sometime around 700 BC, but it was not Parikshit and his sages who made the mistake; it was someone else. Who? I cannot


Mahabharata, Book 17 (Mahaprasthanika-parva), Kisari Mohan Ganguli translation.

The scriptures say that this is Kali 0001 because they mix up the anchor date (Mistake #1). 7 Yuktesvars correlation fixes Descending Dvapara 0001 in 3100 BC. Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

say, but whoever it was, they evidently forgot to reset the count, and it is very probable that this was due to lack of knowledge about the Yugas relation to the precessional cycle. The authors of this mistake must have lost the ability to correlate the Yuga cycles by astronomical observations and calculations. Either that or they knew about the role of precession in shaping the ages, but somehow forgot that the count was supposed to be reset to 0001 as soon as the Descending Kali Yuga began. It seems that the former is a more reasonable explanation than the latter: the relation of the yugas to the precessional cycle must have been completely forgotten by the time the Kali Yuga set in. When the scholars lost the link between the Yugas and the astronomical record, it seems they just kept on counting as 2401, 2402, 2403, etc., in a very similar fashion that our Gregorian calendar just keeps on adding years to its count indefinitely. The 3102 BC anchor is the best anchor date we have to set an appropriate correlation for the yuga cycles, because it has been fixed by revising King Lists which date every dynasty since Yudishthiras departure 8 , astronomical observations which relate to the North Celestial Poles precessional displacement 9 , and dating through eclipse cycles. The latter information was exposed by Dr. S. Balakrishna: The war has been dated via eclipses that are notated in the texts and the observations have proved to be accurate. Here we learn that two eclipses occurred within 13 days. Dr. S. Balakrishna of NASA has arrived at a number of plausible dates for this war. Ultimately six eclipse pairs from 3129 BC, 2599 BC, 2056 BC, 1853 BC, 1708 BC and 1397 BC emerged as the most plausible candidates from an astronomical viewpoint for the Mahabharata war year. One of these, however, is an outstanding candidate as it also complies with the retrograde movements of Saturn, Jupiter and Venus [a time where they appear to go backwards in the sky]. This is an unusual situation, three retrograde planets and two eclipses within 13 days. As Balakrishna states: finally, it is found that two dates suggested by Indian astronomers Aryabhata, Varaha Mihira are credible dates for Mahabharata war. It would appear that 3129BC is a first candidate for Mahabharata war followed by 2559 BC. The first and oldest eclipse pair from 3129 BC is unique. Aryabhata estimated that Kali Yuga started in 3102 BC. So does Surya Siddhanta. These fit the Puranic description that Sri Krishna passed away in 3102 BC, which is 27 years after the war. Our study confirms that Kali Yuga could have started in 3102 BC. 10

It is clear that the chronology presented here is accurate. What is not accurate is the description of the Yuga which 3102 BC is setting in motion, because these scholars are not acknowledging the first mistake which Yuktesvar exposes in the Holy Science. The date is actually depicting the shift from Descending Treta Yuga into Descending Dvapara Yuga not from Dvapara to Kali. Nevertheless, 3102 BC is a reliable anchor date for the departure of Yudhishthira and the end of the Mahabharata War. http://www.thevedicfoundation.org/bhartiya_history/mahabharat.htm http://www.encyclopediaofauthentichinduism.org/articles/51_the_bhartiya_chronology.htm Note: they called the star Dhurva and it resembles the star Thuban, which was our North Pole Star in 3100 BC.
9 8


Sivertsen,Harry: Naksatras, Saptarisi Calendar, Yugas and associated elements, quoting Balakrishna S. 2003 NASA. Two Eclipses in thirteen days prior to the Mahabharata War. Indic Studies. Note: More information regarding the eclipse dating can be found at Dr. S. Balakrishnas website: http://www.vedicastronomy.net/mb_analysis.htm. Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

We also have another clear description of the chronology of the Mahabharata War:

The famous Aihole inscription of glorious Chalulaya King Pulkeshi II of the 7th century says,

It means, 3,735 (30 + 3,000 + 700 + 5) years have already elapsed in kaliyug after the Mahabharat war, and 556 (50 + 6 + 500) years of Shalivahan era is running (on this date of engraving this inscription). The inscription says that 3,735 years of kaliyug had already elapsed. It means the 3,736th year of Kali era was running in the Shak era 556 AD which was 556 + 78 = 634 AD. Thus, deducting 634 from 3,736 comes to 3102 BC. 11 The chronology of these figures is correct, but they are again reproducing the mistake of the Yugas beginning which Yuktesvar observed and corrected. The problem is that Yuktesvars chronology for the Mahabharata war is off by some 2400 years, while the people who have correlated the Mahabharata accurately are giving a mistaken detail of the Ages, because they are using Kulla Bhata's values. It is clear that much has been done since the time of Sri Yuktesvar to put Indias history back together. And it is clear that Yudhishthira left in 3102 BC, and that this date signals Descending Dvapara 0001. It therefore signals the first year of reign for King Parikshit and the Kuru dynasties after Duryodhanas reign. The funny thing about this is that most of the researchers which expose the 3102 BC figure, never mention Yuktesvar and how he corrected the mistakes of previous scholars, so they keep saying that 3102 signals the beginning of the Kali Yuga, which is supposed to last 432,000 years. As Yuktesvar says, a dark prospect: and fortunately one not true, because according to Kulla Bhatas figures, we should still expect 426,886 more years of Kali Yuga, which is preposterous. Kulla Bhatas correlation has no connection to astronomical cycles whatsoever, and it was only proposed to try and settle the previous mistake which failed to reset the count as soon as Kali Yuga began. The fact is that it didnt fix the mistake but actually made it worse.

2.2 Revati ( Piscis) and Apoapsis as Anchors.

A major issue concerning the correlation presented in The Holy Science is that Yuktesvar lived in 1894. And that is a problem, because he had no way of knowing how significant 3100 BC was in our human history. We must keep in mind that during the 20th century, archeological surveys from Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Indus Valley, the megalithic cultures of Europe, and the more recent discoveries in Caral, Peru, have shown us that 3100 BC signals a very significant shift in human consciousness and behavior on a global scale. It is perhaps the most significant shift that humanity has seen for the last 5000 years. Yuktesvar had no way of knowing how important 3100 BC actually was from a historical perspective in 1894, and although the 3100 BC figure appears in his correlation, the date had no historical significance to him because the major

See the Vedic Foundations website: http://www.thevedicfoundation.org/bhartiya_history/chronology.htm Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

archeological discoveries that showed us the true significance of 3100 BC were discovered after Yuktesvar passed away. 3100 BC showed him the beginning of Descending Dvapara, but no historical or archeological data emphasized the true importance of this date. Hence, nothing encouraged him to use this as a possible astronomical anchor from which he could have begun the correlation. Instead, he used the fixed star Revati ( Psc) as an anchor for Apoapsis. He inferred a 1394 year deviation from 500 AD to 1894 AD using a 0054 p/y rate of precession and an observable deviation of 205436 between the First Point of Aries and Revati ( Psc) in 1894 AD. Hence, his correlation solely depends on the rate of precession which one fixes; something that I find is not safest way to preceed. The objection I make is that the 24,000 year period mentioned in the Vedas should not be take literally: it is an ideal and rational expression, which means that its purpouse is to provide a matrix of proportions and ratios for the yugas. I find that taking ideal figures for real figures is a mistake, and I explain why in Appendix A. The point is that Yuktesvar couldnt have been drawn to use the 3100 BC year as an anchor, because it had no historical significance to him. It is safe to suppose that he never came across the alternative astronomical correlations which provide the date of 3102 BC, or the King Lists of the Kuru dynasties, so he used the method he considered best at that time which was to use the Revati ( Psc) / Vernal Equinox correlation with a 0054 rate of precession. It is precisely this method which I question, and I humbly propose a different method which I believe is more accurate and gives a better estimate of where we are right now in the Great Year. To know this we need a Great Clock which runs with an accurate chronometer. *Further details on the mythological and astronomical bases which support 3100 BC as a valid anchor date, are described in Appendix A.

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

3. Tzolkin adaptation and Computing.

In Appendix A, we explain that the equinoxes and solstices are aligned with the Four Royal stars: Aldebaran, Antares, Fomalhaut, and Regulus ca.3100 BC. This alignment is very significant and it has been depicted in esoteric and mystery schools for 5000 years now. The ideal values of the yugas which derive from a 24,000 year period should not be taken literally, just as much as the 26,000 year period for the Mayan estimate of precession should not be taken as a real figure. They are ideal figures which relate proportion and ratios within the cycle. In 3114 BC, the Tzolk'in Long Count was set running, and only 12 years before that, the Yuga clock began counting from Descending Dvapara 0001. The parallel between the Yugas and the Tzolk'in extends beyond a common anchor date: both calendars are tracking the precessional cycle, and both are using very precise proportional divisions of the cycle itself which happen to match perfectly.

As we can see, the 4/20th (or 1/5th) portion of the entire precessional cycle which the 13 Baktuns are counting, is of the same length that the two Kali Yugas and Descending Dvapara Yuga are supposed to count. They are both 4/20th of the precessional cycle, and their anchor dates are only 12 years apart. The difference between the calendars is that the Tzolkin uses an ideal 26,000 year period and a rate of 00'49.857 per year, while the Yugas use an ideal 24,000 period and a rate of 0054. The question is: what is the correct rate of precession? The fact that both calendars are tracking the same period is very clear, because the anchor dates are the same, and the proportion of the cycle which they are monitoring is the same as well. They also use the ideal value of 360 for the tropical year which means the mechanisms were set in accordance to ideal numerical expressions that follow rational principles. The Tzolkin is a very simple computing system which I have used to find the values of the Yugas, no matter what rate for precession we use. This is achieved because the yugas have a Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray

fixed proportion within the precessional period. In the following tables, we find the values for the yugas in both 24,000 and 26,000 year periods using the Tzolkin computer:

Hindu Precessional Cycle = 24,000 years Kin Tun Unial Katun Baktun Total in Years 20 18 20 20 12 4800 20 18 20 20 9 3600 20 18 20 20 6 2400 20 18 20 20 3 1200 Proportion 4/20th 3/20th 2/20th 1/20th

Krta Tetra Dvapara Kali

Mayan Precessional Cycle = 26,000 years Kin Tun Unial Katun Baktun 20 18 20 20 13 20 18 20 15 9 20 18 20 10 6 20 18 20 5 3 Total Years Proportion 5200 4/20th 3900 3/20th 2600 2/20th 1300 1/20th

Krta Tetra Dvapara Kali

The tables show the ratios at which the mechanism is working. It is a simple multiplication process: (ie. 20x18x20x20x13 = 5200 years). The number of Baktuns can be modified any of the values actually so that the Yuga periods can be computed with different values for the precessional period. The products of the Tzolkin computer gives the values in days, so in order to see the result in years, we must divide the amount of days by 360 or whatever value we use for the tropical year. In the tables above, we are using an ideal 360 day period for the tropical year (18x20), but we can use any irrational value we choose. The magic of the Tzolkin is that it was designed to work with proportions and ratios like the Yugas: this is why they match so elegantly. Since the Yugas are fixed in a 4:3:2:1 ratio, we can fix different values for the Ages depending on how long we suppose the precessional cycle is. With the Tzolkin computing mechanism we are able to calculate these periods very easily with any rate of precession we choose. The dates from the tables above would actually be written in a different manner in the Long Count formula. 12 Please notice that the tables are exposing ratios, not actual dates. For example, Descending Kali 0001, would be dated as on the Tzolkin, because 1/2 of the 13 Baktuns (2/20th precessional cycle) would have passed since Hence, 1/2 of 13 Baktuns is 6 Baktuns and 5 Katuns, ( The beginning of ascending Kali would be dated as, and now 3/4th of the 13 Baktun cycle would have past. 4/20th of the precessional cycle would be complete and dated as 13

The Mayas usually ordered the count from right to left, so 13 Baktuns would be: (Baktun:Katun:Unial:Tun.Kin). 13 Remember that 13 Baktuns is 4/20th of a 26,000 year period, while 12 Baktuns make a 4/20th cycle for a 24,000 year long precessional period. Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray



Now we present a comparison between Yuga dates and Tzolkin dates with anchor at 3114 BC. Both 24,000 and 26,000 year values for the complete cycle are shown and we are using the 4:3:2:1 ratio for the yugas.

Precessional Cycle = 24,000 Years Yugas Descending Dvapara 0001 Descending Kali 0001 Ascending Kali 0001 Ascending Dvapara 0001 Tzolk'in Length of Age 2400 1200 1200 2400

Precessional Cycle = 26,000 Years Yugas Descending Dvapara 0001 Descending Kali 0001 Ascending Kali 0001 Ascending Dvapara 0001 Tzolk'in Length of Age 2600 1300 1300 2600

The 24,000 and 26,000 periods are clearly the ancient method of calculus through ideal values, proportion, and ratio. They were using ideal figures so they could coordinate the orbital periods of the planets and the moon in harmonic patterns: something that Kepler was looking forward to accomplishing in his studies some 500 years ago. Thanks to Kepler, we now know that orbits do not follow ideal circular orbits. Hence, I consider that it is not a good idea to take the 24,000 or 26,000 periods as real values for the solar system's orbit around its binary. The real value for the suns orbit around its companion depends on the main rate of precession. Since the Tzolkin is actually measuring the same period that reaches from Descending Dvapara 0001 to Ascending Dvapara 0001, we only have to figure out the main rate of precession for the last 5125 years to know our actual place in this cycle. If the GMT correlation is correct, then this 4/20th portion of the cycle ends between 21 and 23 December, 2012 AD. It is perfectly clear that these calendars are tracking the same period of time, but the Maya and the Hindu use different ideal expressions for the precessional cycle. The question is; how long is this 4/20th period of time? Is it 5125 years long as the GMT proposes or only 4800 as Yuktesvar proposed? It surely cannot be both. According to GMT, the period in question lasts 5125,3658 years. This adds up to a 25626.829 period for the entire precessional cycle, so the main rate for GMT is fixed at 00'50.57" per year for the last 4/20th portion of precession. In the following table we have six different correlations givenfor this portion of the cycle and the length of the yugas by respecting the original 4:3:2:1 ratio:

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


Average Rate Period (years) (per year) Krta Yuktesvar 24.000 00'54" 4.800 Inca* 25.000 00'51.84" 5.000 J 2000 25.772 00'50.29" 5.154,4 GMT 25.626,829 00'50.57" 5.125,3658 Harmonic 25.625 00'50.58" 5.125 Tzolk'in 26.000 00'49.857 5.200

Treta Dvapara Kali 3.600 2.400 1.200 3.750 2.500 1.250 3.865,8 2.577,2 1.288,6 3.844,02435 2562,6829 1281,34145 3.843,75 2.562,50 1.281,25 3.900 2.600 1.300

*The Inca also counted a 5000 year period which seems to have begun sometime around 3100 BC (See Appendix B.) What we must notice at this stage is that Sri Yuktesvar Giri could have been counting too fast, and he could have proposed dates which set the changing of the Yugas too early. His chronometer is set at a very fast rate. If we use a 00'54" rate, and we begin the count in 3102 BC as Descending Dvapara 0001, the present year (2012 AD) will come out as Ascending Dvapara 314. This is only a two year difference compared to the original correlation he presents in The Holy Science. However, according to the GMT correlation we are still in Ascending Kali as of 2012, so we have a problem. It is undeniable that both Tzolkin and Yuga calendars are counting the same fraction of the precessional cycle, and both have the same anchor (12 years) to begin this fraction of the cycle. Hence, there is only one correlation which is accurate.. It is either the GMT or Yuktesvars correlation, but it could be neither one, because precession is a tricky subject. It all depends on the average rate at which we set the chronometer for the 4/20th fraction of the entire cycle that covers 13 Baktuns and the period between Descending Dvapara 0001 and Ascending Dvapara 0001. It must be said that the issue with the GMT correlation is that it was not arranged in accordance with the precessional cycle. We are trusting that the Maya recorded it very accurately, and that we can just correlate the Tzolkin in accordance with the Julian Day count and the Gregorian calendar without astronomical observations. If we trust the GMT, we are basically trusting the Mayas ability to measure time cycles with great accuracy. We know that Mayan astronomers did indeed achieve a great deal of accuracy, because they managed to calculate the Tropical Year at 365,242 days, and as far as we know, the Tzolkin is the most accurate astronomical computer of the ancient world. They also accomplished some of the most outstanding archeoastronomical alignments in the world, so if I had to choose between Yuktesvars correlation and the GMT, I would choose the latter, but I suppose at the present moment it is just a matter of what rate of precession we trust. One of the main objectives of my research is to provide the Binary Research Institute with data which can be correlated precisely, and I am sure the Institute has very intelligent people working on the subject who can set these figures running at a degree of precision which I cannot achieve on my own at the present moment. The GMT correlation for the yugas is not really that different from Yuktesvars estimates. Apoapsis occurs at 731 AD, while Yuktesvar uses the date of 500 AD. The problem is that when we use the 3100 BC anchor and move forward through time, the difference between GMT and Yuktesvar becomes increasingly noticeable, like two runners that race at different speeds from the same start point. The chronometer that runs at 0054 is running faster than that of the GMT whose rate is fixed at 00'50.57", so Sri Yuktesvar covers the periods of the ages faster than GMT, and as more time goes by, the more significant the breach between the correlations becomes. At Descending Dvapara 0001 they are the same; at Descending Kali they are 150 years Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


apart; at Ascending Kali 0001 they are 230 years apart, and at Dwapara 0001 they have a 300 year difference. 14 It is not a big difference, but at our present time it is considerable. If we allow this discrepancy to continue, the mistakes that Yuktesvar fixed will be of little use, because in the future we will have the same problems all over again. As a solution, I propose that a new correlation should be fixed. One that matches the Tzolkin and the Yugas, respecting every detail of proportion and ratio. What should not be taken literally are the 24,000 or 26,000. It is obviously somewhere in between these two figures. As far as I am concerned, it is a mistake to consider these figures as precise and real values. They are ideal figures and their purpose is to provide rational equations between orbital periods or lengths of time within the time frame of precession. The other purpose for round figures is that they are a hint at the cycle which is being mentioned. For example, when we come across the number 360 we know it is the tropical year which is being depicted, and when we see 24,000 or 26,000 we know it is a reference to precession. Other references are, for example, 1 Katun, which equals one rotation of the Earths core, or 1 Tun, which signals the Saturn-Jupiter synodic period. I believe these calendars were set with ideal values for the very reason that they permit the use of simple calculations of ratio and proportions which can then be adjusted to real values that derive from astronomical observations.


(12 years) for these values for 3102-3114 BC discrepancy.

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


4. Testing the New Correlation.

To simplify the reading of the following diagrams, we must keep in mind that the parameters have been set in accordance to a 5125 year value for the 4/20th period in question. The dates are exposed by Astronomical Dating, so there is a year zero. Hence, we will see the Gregorian date of 3114 BC as -3113. The 5125 correlation (Harmonic in the Table above) is a simplification of the GMT correlation: a harmonic expression of its values. If this correlation is correct, then it should be able to pinpoint significant historical events of the past, and the following diagrams show that this is exactly what this new correlation is capable of achieving. As far as I can see, this correlation is actually better than Yuktesvars at predicting significant events of the past.

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


Notice how 500 AD (Yuktesvars date for Apoapsis) is actually the beginning of the Dark Ages, not its midpoint or worst stage. Renaissance is at 60% of the Ascending Kali, while Age of Enlightenment is at 75%, and in 1884 Tesla arrives in the United States and begins his work for Thomas Edison. 75% backwards from Apoapsis also depicts the time of Ashoka the Great (-240).

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


These diagrams show that the correlation is still tracking the evolution-devolution cycles with outstanding precision. If GMT is correct, then 2013 is Ascending Dvapara 0001. But the Vedas state that the order of the Ages may shift when the Kali Yuga ends. This remains to be seen, but the fact that we are living in the last Years of Ascending Kali is very obvious. The ancients have prophecies which are awaiting to be fulfilled, and if we are actually at Dvapara 312 in 2012 like Sri Yuktesvar suggests, then the Hindu prophecies of the Vishnu Purana and the Kalki Purana that speak of the final Avatara of Vishnu coming at the End of Kali Yuga must be mistaken. I doubt that they are, and I believe Yuktesvars correlation is inaccurate.

The million dollar question is: what has been the average rate of precession for the last 4/20th fraction of the cycle? That is a question that I cannot answer. The Binary Research Institue has people who are much more capable of solving this issue than myself. The main objective of my work is to present the Institute with some of the parallels that this Yuga cycle has with other ancient calendars. If the Tzolkin and Yuga mechanisms both pinpoint the same anchor date, and both count 4/20th of the precessional cycle, we cannot ignore they are clocks set with the same dates. The problem is that their chronometers are not counting at the same speed. However, the fact that they are monitoring the same period of precession is difficult to deny. The correlation which I present is not pretended to pose as the right one; it is the one I have chosen. It is my best shot at it, but I could be wrong. I do believe that Sri Yuktesvar Giris correlation is mistaken, and I have presented the data which I believe suggests this is true. I have nothing but great respect for Sri Yuktesvar Giri: his spiritual wisdom exceeds my own by an amount which is too great to measure, of that I am sure, but I believe it is only natural that as the ascending of the yugas progress, humans are able to correct past mistakes. Perhaps someone in the future will address these same issues and make corrections which we fail to address, for precession and the Ages of Man is truly a fascinating subject. I believe the question of the Yuga cycles and their measures should be revised. The new correlation presented in this brief essay has met with the necessary parameters that prove this issue must be revised. These parameters are: 1. Pinpointing significant shifts in human collective consciousness and behavior. 2. Precise Astronomical correlations. 3. Link between astronomical correlations and historical anchor dates. 15 4. Link between other ancient calendars and time recording mechanisms with astronomical bases. 5. Acceptable correlation to radiocarbon dating and archeological discoveries since the 20th Century. As far as I can see, the correlation presented in the Holy Science does not meet parameters 3,4, and 5. I believe these parameters are very important, because the more information we manage to fit into a harmonic picture, the more solidity we provide to our theories and speculations. The Yuga Calendar clearly has a very intelligent design, because By historical anchor dates I mean dates which are deliberately depicted in historical documents, such as the Mayan codices, or the Sumerian tablets, for example.


Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


whoever developed the Tzolkin or the Yuga calendar knew many things we do not. I believe it is a gift of our ancestors: a gift that will help us remember many great things about who, where, and when we are as a species. We are related to a fractal cycle that penetrates the micro and macrocosmos. We call this time, but we do not understand it completely. We are just beginning to remember the effects this specific cycle has on human nature and the collective psyche of our species: a subject that even mainstream science does not acknowledge in academic circles. It is a cycle of birth, growth, decay, death, and rebirth: the great wheel of Samsara which is setting in motion human experience as individuals, as a species who abide on a revolving sphere across the Universe. It doesnt matter how big or small we think: life is a cyclical process under the guidance the mysterious will of Chronos. If we are granted the gift of learning the science of our ancestors, and if they were more developed than us, we must pay attention to these gifts of knowledge, because they hold the key to our destiny.

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


Appendix A: Mythological and Astronomical Basis for the 3102 BC anchor.

It must be stated, that our strongest anchor point is 3102 BC, not the point of Apoapsis which Yuktesvar chose to make his correlation. The reason is that the point of Apoapsis actually depends on what rate of precession we choose to fix to set our Vernal Equinox back to the star Revati. If the star really signals the point of Apoapsis when it matches the position of the Vernal Equinox, then that is great because we have a marker. The problem is that we have to calculate our way back to that marker to see how far past it we are, and to do so, we must set an accurate rate of precession which is very complicated. If we begin in 1894 and use a 0054 per year rate, we will arrive at 500 AD as Yuktesvar suggests, because 205436 is covered in 1394 years at that rate. But if we use a 0052 rate from 1894 backwards, our Vernal Equinox should have pointed at Revati in 448 AD, because we should have covered 1448 years between 1894 and Apoapsis. This would put 1894 at Ascending Dvapara 247 instead of 194, and it is apparent that the method is extremely sensitive to the rate we fix. It is clear that this correlation method is not precise, and it leaves a great deal of margin for speculation about the precessional rate. It is obvious that the 0054 rate that Yuktesvar used was not deribrf from astronomical observations or astronomical records. The 24,000 year value for the precessional cycle that he uses is literally taken from the Vedic scriptures. And that is were I see a mistake, not because I believe that the ancient scriptures are mistaken, but because the figures which are found in Vedic scriptures have been misinterpreted as real values, when in reality they are ideal values whose main purpose is to expose the proportions and ratios of the Yuga cycle mechanism. If you are familiar with sacred geometry and ancient philosophy, you will know that ideal values were used for fixing proportions and ratios, while the real values were actually very rarely used at all. Numbers had a different significance in ancient times than they do now. Today most people are concerned with the quantitative properties of numbers, and we have forgotten that there is a much profounder meaning to numbers which has to do with their quality. Sacred Geometry teaches us to think in the ancient way when it comes to numbers, (ie. through proportion and ratios). This is the reason why the Vedic scriptures speak of 360 day years: something that we encounter in the Mesoamerican and Egyptian calendars as well. These ideal expressions for the tropical year were used to fix proportional values between the Earths orbital period and the orbital periods of the moon and the rest of the planets. This point is particularly evident in the Mesoamerican Long Count Calendars, such as the Mayan Tzolkin or the Aztec Tonalpohualli. These cultures used a very simple system to track the precessional cycle, and it is the basis of the New Fire Ritual which they celebrated every 52 years. It is no accident that this is a 1/100th expression of the 5200 cycle of 13 Baktuns. It is directly related, and its relation is the harmonic patterns that the orbital periods of the planets have. The way they used to track the precessional cycle was by observing Venus transits, and its retrograde motion in the sky. They compared this movement with the background stars, especially the Pleiades cluster, and they could observe that there was a slow but steady displacement caused by precession. The interesting thing about this method, is that it tells us that indeed the Mayas and Aztec astronomers knew that the planets apparent orbits did not accuse a wobble of the Earth, but a movement of the entire Solar System. This is one of the main issues which support the binary theory. If the apparent trajectory of Venus is fixed in relation to our own, then the retrograde motion of Venus and its transits can be used as a very

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


precise method for keeping track of the precessional cycle. This is the method that the Mesoamerican cultures used, and it is probably the Incas used as well. 16 What is perhaps more important is that these cultures are pinpointing 3114 BC as the anchor for their year one, just 12 years earlier than the Hindus. And this is no accident, because 3100 BC has a very significant and very evident astronomical alignment. In 3100 BC, our Equinoctial and Solsticial markers were anchored with the stars that the Persians called Royal Stars or Watchers. These fixed stars are Aldebaran, Antares, Regulus, and Fomalhaut, in the Taurus, Scorpio, Leo, and Piscis Austrinus constellations respectively. The Persians depicted this astronomical anchor date of 3100 BC in their famous winged bull and winged lion with a human head: the Lamassu. This is also the apocryphal code of Ezekiels visions, and the esoteric meaning of the 4 apostoles chosen for the Biblical Gospels. Only four are chosen from 12, and they resemble not only the four signs of Taurus, Scorpio, Leo, and Acuarius in zodiac, but also the four ages themselves. This is mentioned in the work of Fulcanelli Mytsery of the Cathedrals, right at the last pages where he also mentions the four yugas of the Hindu. The Judeo-Christian mystery schools have their secrets in plain sight at the Chartes Cathedral of France, or the Notre Dame Cathedral.

Notre Dame being Our Lady: The Virgin Mary, who is a Christian adaptation of Isis, while the latter is an adaptation of the prehistoric Hathor, the Milky Way Goddess. She is the Ushas of India and Hera of Greece: all Cow Goddesses associated to the Milky Way. The myth of precession, as you know, is found everywhere among ancient traditions, and it is even present in modern traditions. The four Bacab of the Mayan are the Four Pillars of the Earth which hold the sky, and this description is also present in the Book of Revelations as the four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth (Ap. 7:1) This description comes in a chapter of revelations which is called The 144,000

I am currently researching Inca astronomy, and it appears that they also compared Venuss trajectory to the Pleiades cluster to keep track of precession. Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray



of Israel Sealed, and it describes the zodiac apocryphally as the 12 Tribes of Israel. It is interesting to note that 144,000 is the number of days for one Mayan Baktun. The Mayan Bacab are also the same as the four horsemen of the apocalypse: they ride on white, yellow, red, and black horses which are the same colors the Mayas used to depict the four cardinal points. These beings are also mentioned in the Book of Enoch as Gabriel, Michael, Raphael, and Uriel, and it is cleat that these watchers are the same watchers that the Persians mention as guardians of the four cardinal directions. We also have the Egyptian version of the four sons of hours, who are the same thing. The depiction of Horus as a child who stands on two alligators heads, and holds four serpents with the form of a bull, a lion, and a scorpion, is a clear depiction of the myth about these Four Royal Stars and their zodiac signs. In the earlier Pyramid Texts, these astronomical markers are called Pillars of Shu: pillars of the sky, which are the same as the Angels of the book of revelations, the Mayan Bacabob, and the Persian Royal Stars. One more interesting detail about the 3100 BC anchor is found in the Pyramid of Kukulkan in Chichen-Itz. If you use an astronomical software such as Stellarium, your can fix your position at N 204058.44 W 88347.14 which is the position of the Pyramid, and then set the date to August 13, -3113. 17 These are the alignments of the pyramid of Kukulkan on that day: 1. At sunrise, the Zenit is marking the Galactic Anticenter, while the Nadir is pointing at the Galactic Center. 2. Hence, the meridian is marking the position that the solstices will have 13 Baktuns later (ie. in 2012 AD). 3. On the day of August 13, -3113, which is the first day of the Fifth Sun Age on the Tzolkin, the sun passes directly over the Zenith of the Pyramid at midday. As you know, they had a very specific interest in zenital passage of the Sun. A few days earlier, when the Sun is aligned with Regulus, it crosses the Zenith of the pyramid, while Fomalhaut is at Nadir, Aldebaran is directly in the East, and Antares is in the West. Hence, the Pyramid is signaling the alignment of the Four Royal Stars or Four fixed zodiac signs in question as well as the Galactic Center and Anticenter on the date the 13 Baktun Cycle bagan, and it pinpoints the day of zenital passage. Too many coincidences to suppose this is accidental. It was without any doubt intentional, and Chichen Itz must have been a very old sacred site where astronomical observations were carried out before the magnificent structure was ever constructed. We could speak a lot more about archeoastronomy, and its relation to ancient mythology, but the subject at hand is another: the correlation of the Yuga Cycles. I just want to make it clear that the 3100 BC date has a very important astronomical significance throughout many ancient cultures, because the Equinoxes are very clearly aligned with Aldebaran and Antares in the Taurus and Scorpio constellations, while our planets solsticial markers are aligned with to Regulus and Fomalhaut in the Leo and Piscis Austrinus constellations. These are the four fixed/royal stars of the Persian Magi, who were excellent astronomers, and they inherited the myth of the Yugas through the Indo-Iranian culture which introduced Vedic wisdom to the Persians through Zoroastrianism. The background of these astronomer priests called Magi is quite interesting because they seem to have combined an Indo-Iranian calendar with a Babylonian zodiac. Zoroastrian religion is clearly Vedic in origin; that is more than clear by the linguistic, philosophical and theological parallels. The calendar of the Zoroastrian Magi states that there was a cycle of


Remember that Astronomical Dating uses a year zero, so -3113 is 3114 BC on the Gregorian.

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


12,000 years which was divided into four parts, just like the Yugas of India. 18 However, they divided these four periods into even 3000 year cycles, instead of following the 4/20th, 3/20th, 2/20th, and 1/20th proportions and 4:3:2:1 ratio of the yugas. If we contemplate the time in which the Magi developed their astronomical magic, we find that we are in the year 550 BC. By this time it was only natural that the original Yuga cycles periods would have been severely misinterpreted, and especially in the case in question, because we are speaking of a culture that is an extension of the Vedic culture with a with a Babylonian ingredient of astrology. The point about the Persian astronomer priests is that they are the link between the Yuga cycles and the later esoteric depiction of the ages through the 4 Zodiac signs of Taurus, Scorpio, Leo, and Aquarius. They are also the ones who introduced this knowledge through alchemical encryptions that later reached the Jews through the prophet Daniel of Babylon, Hesiod in Archaic Greece, Ovid in Roman times, and the Arab suphis who adorned their esoteric schools with alchemical encryptions. Even the Egyptians picked up this Babylonian iconography for the ages during the Ptolemaic period as is seen in the depiction of Horus the child. It later crept into Christian myths through the 12 Apostoles, and the four gospels that were chosen for the biblical cannon. As you know, the cross is also a symbol related to the precessional cycle, and the end of the current age. I am sure you know all this, but my goal is to drive our attention to the fact that this myth of the Four Fixed stars has its basis upon the astronomical alignment which fixed our equinoxes and solstices in the direction of these stars. The relation between the Four Royal Stars and the Yuga Calendar is simple: they pinpoint the positions of the equinoxes and solstices in 3100 BC (Dvapara 0001). Hence, the myth gives us an anchor date which we can work with. I am truly convinced that this astronomical anchor is better for the task of correlating the Yuga Cycles than the method which Yuktesvar used by calculating the distance from apoapsis or periapsis through the 0054 rate. As I said, the latter method is relative to the parameters by which we adjust the Great Clocks chronometer. This is also true for the 3100 BC anchor, but in this case the work has already been done by the Mayan. The correlation between 3114 BC and 2012 AD has already been made through the Goodman-Martinez-Thomspon (GMT) correlations of the Mesoamerican Long Count, so we can suppose with a certain degree of security that GMT must be very close if not completely accurate in describing the length of the last 2/20th fraction of the cycle, while offering us a main rate of 00'50.57" for the period in question.

Appendix B: The Inca Connection.

The Inca apparently monitored 500 and 1000 year cycles, which they called Pachakuti and Inti respectively. 19 It is believed that 10 Pachakuti have been completed which makes for a total of 5000 years. I am currently working on a possible relation between these cycles and the 4/20th cycle that we work with in this paper. It seems that the Inca were tracking the precessional cycle in a very similar way that the Maya and Aztecs astronomers did: by tracking the Venus

B. Asghari , Annapurna M. Contrastive Study of Time in Iranian-Indian Mythology, Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology 2011, vol. 7. n. 1. 19 Merejildo, James A. Camino Iniciatico Inka: El Despertar del Puma. Cuzco, Peru, Shamanic Productions, 1999, pp. 14-17. Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


transits and its apparent retrograde motion, and comparing these movements to the position of the Pleiades cluster. The Aztecs used a 52 year cycle and a 104 year cycle (huehuetiliztlii) which they extended up until the 5200 year period. The Aztec Long Count was called Tonalpohualli, and its astronomical basis is the one we have just mentioned. Merejildo presents us with a date of 1992 for the completion of 9 Pachakuti, which places us at the beginning of the 10th Pachakuti: Pachakuti 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th Beggining -2508 -2008 -1508 -1008 -508 -8 492 992 1492 1992 End -2008 -1508 -1008 -508 -8 492 992 1492 1992 2492

However, this may not be entirely accurate. It is interesting to see that the 1st Pachakuti appears to begin in 2508 BC, because adding one more Pachakuti places us in 3008 BC. If we add to this figure one huehuetiliztli cycle of the Aztec Tonalpohualli, we come up with the date of 3112 BC. This correlation is still at its earliest stage of development, but I hope to acquire interesting information on my next visit to Peru in June. Although it may seem that the Aztec calendar may have nothing to do with any of the Incan calendars, it seems that the Unu Pachakuti was the time of the Great Flood, and according to my research this occurred ca. 3100 BC. Unu Pachakuti must be the first cycle, and it is very likely that the 500 year figure could be 512 or 520 like the case of the Mesoamerican Long Count.

- Biraben, Jean-Nol. 1980 An Essay Concerning Mankind's Evolution. Original paper in French: Essai sur l'volution du nombre des homes. Population, January-February Vol. 34 (no. 1), pp. 13-25. - Buhler, Georg. 1886 The Laws of Manu. Translated, with extracts from seven commentaries. Lomdon, England Oxford University Press. pp. 15-17. - De Santillana, Giorgio & Von Dechend, Hertha. 1969 Hamlet's Mill: An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time. Boston, United Status, Gambit. 61-63; 82-85. - Del Busto, Jose Antonio. 1977 Peru Incaico. Lima, Peru, Libreria Studium, pp. 184-194; 317-336. Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


- Fulcanelli 1967 Le Mystere des Cathedrales. Barcelona, Spain, Plaza and Janes, Spanish translation by J. Ferrer Aleu (8th edition 1976). pp. 193-200. - Gabucci, Ada, Aimi, Antonio, et al. 2009 Los Diccionarios de las Civilizaciones: Mayas y Aztecas. Barcelona, Spain, Random House Mondadori Press, pp. 107-117. - Gabucci, Ada, Fassone, Alessia, et al. 2009 Los Diccionarios de las Civilizaciones: Egipto. Barcelona, Spain, Random House Mondadori Press, pp. 152-157; 164-166; 170-179. - Gabucci, Ada, Ascalone, Enrico, et al. 2009 Los Diccionarios de las Civilizaciones: Mesopotamia Asirios Sumerios y Babilonios. Barcelona, Spain, Random House Mondadori Press, pp. 274-281; 340-361. - Jnanavatar Swami Sri Yuktesvar Giri 1894 The Holy Science. Los Angeles, United States Self-Realization Fellowship (1977), pp.iii-xxii. - Lawlor, Robert. 1982 Sacred Geometry: Philosophy and Practice. London, England, Thames & Hudson, pp. 48-52. - Magli, Giulio. 2009 Mysteries and Discoveries of Archeoastronomy: From Giza to Easter Island. New York, United States, Copernicus Books. pp. 148-194. - Merejildo, James A. 1999 Camino Iniciatico Inka: El Despertar del Puma. Cuzco, Peru, Shamanic Productions, pp. 14-17. - Pas, Bhumipati. 2006 Sri Kalki Purana. Mathura, ndia, Jai Nitai Press, pp. 1-377.

- Wilson, Horace H. 1840 The Vishnu Purana, a System of Hindu Mythology and Tradition. London, England, John Murray (Press), pp. 108-110.

Website References:
01. Ancient India Chronology: - http://www.encyclopediaofauthentichinduism.org/articles/51_the_bhartiya_chronology.htm - http://www.thevedicfoundation.org/bhartiya_history/chronology.htm - http://www.thevedicfoundation.org/bhartiya_history/mahabharat.htm Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray


02. Vedic Astronomy (Dr. S. Balakrishna) - http://www.vedicastronomy.net 03. Details on Eclipse dating for Mahabharata War: - http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=Articles&ArticleID=1052 04. Sumerian Uruk III period and evolution of Mesopotamian scripture: - http://cdli.ucla.edu/ Cuneiform Digital Library Iniciative (CDLI) - http://cdli.ucla.edu/wiki/doku.php/uruk_mod._warka 05. Binary Research Institute - http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/

Copyright 2012 Christian Irigaray