Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 29

Modern Equations On Ancient Principles

Deduction of Exact Equations of Modern Astronomy through Ancient texts of

Siddhnta Jyotia
Vinay Jha

Disclaimer from uploader:

I feel that this paper presented herein as authored by Vinay Jha has a lot
of merits and, only for aesthetic reasons, the presentation (layout) has
been altered as well as corrections were made while some (unnecessarily)
wordings have been struck out wherein it was deemed necessary in order
to maintain the simplicity of this great research for the sake of ease in
digesting such a sagaciously-written scientific writeup.

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 2
Comparison of Tropical Planetary Longitudes for Ujjain on March 3 .................................................................... 4
Difference in Tropical Planetary Longitudes : Dk vs Saura, in Arc-Sec ................................................................. 5
DECLINATION: Deduction of Modern Equation from Srya-Siddhnta .................................................................... 7
LATITUDE OF MOON....................................................................................................................................................... 9
Exact Differential Equation Of Physical Moon.............................................................................................................. 10
Evidence Of Lost Portions Of Srya-Siddhnta............................................................................................................. 12
Deduction of Modern Astronomical Constants from Srya Siddhnta ..................................................................... 20
Theorem of Dk-Pakya Sidereal and Tropical Years and of Precessional Period .............................................. 21
Vedic (ie, Srya-Siddhntika) Theorem of Lunar month ........................................................................................ 23
Lunar Binomial Theorem : .......................................................................................................................................... 24
Srya Siddhntika Theory of the Rotation of Material Universe ................................................................................ 25
Ancient Cosmogony and Geography .............................................................................................................................. 27
The Cycles of Lord Brahm ......................................................................................................................................... 28

Viu Dharmottara Pura of Vedavysa

yantra vedhdi njta yad bja gaakaistata

grahadi parketa na tithydi kadcana
Sage Vysa has clearly said in Viudharmottara Pura (

) that in examining perceivable

events like eclipses etc., where an actual observation is needed, the position of the planets should be
further corrected using Dk-Karma corrections (i.e., adding the Ayana to get the Tropical longitude) so
that they can be used in determining the actual event, but these Dk-corrections should never be made use
of in computation of Tithis and others.

Niraya Sindhu

ada phala sidhyartha yathrka gaita kuru

gaita yadi drtha tad dy udbhava tassad
Niraya-Sindhu also states that Srya-Siddhnta should be used for knowing invisible results ("Ada
Phala" i.e., things like Destiny or Fortune).
The mathematics of Srya-Siddhnta is given in the Nrada Pura too. In all other Puras too, SryaSiddhnta has been made use of for the purpose of computation and its ideas have been presented at
many place. But since the time of Graha-lghava (cir.1440 AD), materialists have begun to dominate the
scene gradually. They consider physical planets to be exactly same as the astrological planets.

dk-karma correction ( - ) is an essential part of ancient Siddhnta skandha of Jyotia. But dkkarma saskra are never used in finding True Longitudes of planets (graha-spa-karaa | - )
in any ancient Siddhnta text It is used only when perceivable phenomena like eclipses, heliacal risings
& settings (skrdi udaysta | ) etc., are needed. Two chief components of dk-karma

correction are

1. ka & yana dk-karma saskra (corrections) ( - - ) and

2. ayana-dk-karma saskra (- - )
both of which, are explained in ancient siddhntas, chief of which is Srya-Siddhnta.
But these 2 dk-karma corrections give only that position of a planet which is needed for phalita

astrology, e.g. udaysta of Jupiter & Venus is needed for determining Muhrtas of auspicious events like
Vivha|marriage, Upanaya|sacred thread ceremony, etc. Positions of physical planets as perceived by our
naked-eyes is not given by the equations given in any Siddhntika texts.
It is for this reason, many medieval scholars like Gaea Daivaja of Graha-lghava or Divkara
Daivaja of Makaranda-Vivaraa have all declared that the Srya-Siddhnta treatise has now become
obsolete and some changes are needed in its formulations or methods. They advocated removal of manda-

phalrdha | from the 4 corrections made in Mean Longitude of a planet to get the True Longitude,
while ignoring completely that, if such a thing were to be indulged, the very fundamental theory of
siddhntika texts likewise will become distorted. Unfortunately, no any siddhntika text or its commentator
never explained the basis of the fundamental theory involved in those 4 corrections of siddhnta texts,
1. ghra-phalrdha | ,
2. manda-phalrdha | ,
3. manda-phala | and,
4. ghra-phala |
Rev. Eveneger Burgess, the translator & commentator of Srya-Siddhnta, candidly accepted that he could
never understand the rationale behind these 4 corrections in spite of having spent 8 years among Indian
experts to learn the Srya-Siddhnta. Other commentators of this text were even worse, they neither
explained nor had the humility to admit their inability to explain the WHYs behind these calculations. All
ancient Siddhntas and Puras which deal with graha-spa-karaa are unanimous in the applicability
and order of aforementioned 4 corrections, but none of them explain the mathematical reasoning and
related geometry.
Although 2 medieval so-called Indian experts, namely Gaea Daivaja and Divkara Daivaja,
rejected the applicability of manda-phalrdha, they did not bother to go into the rationale behind either

manda-phalrdha or even the remaining 3 corrections.

If manda-phalrdha was rejected, what is the mathematical reason of ghra-phalrdha then?

manda & ghra phala are accepted in modern astronomy too, as equation of centre and the reduction of
heliocentric to geocentric position, respectively. But what about their halvesmanda & ghra phalrdha?
Modern astronomy knows NO SUCH THINGS as manda & ghra phalrdha. Nobody
understands them, but surprisingly enough they are taught by Jyotia departments of Sanskrit universities.
Here, a question arises if no commentator has ever succeeded in unravelling the mathematical logic
behind the most essential aspects of siddhnta texts, dont you think there is something mysterious about
siddhnta texts? Either all siddhnta texts are wrong or, all medieval and modern experts are ignorants
in the field of siddhnta skandha of Jyotia.
A false excuse is invented by some experts claiming that these ancient siddhnta texts were
then-accurate in ancient times but as of now have become outdated. This false logic was first invented by
the author of Graha-lghava, Gaea Daivaja and is flaunted by majority of modernisers of astrology.
Here is the irrefutable proof of falsity of such statements in tabular form, which shows there was no period
in known history during which difference between

1. Dk and,
i.e., perceived, or physical planets

2. Saura,
i.e., of Srya-Siddhnta
tended towards any minimum value.
The First table (below) gives the planetary longitudes from both methods, and the second table following
this gives differences, at regular intervals of 100 years.

Comparison of Tropical Planetary Longitudes for

Ujjain on March 3








343:33:59 001:39:24 304:06:20 320:29:20 238:48:12 310:08:09 050:58:12

Saura 344:09:44 002:18:18 306:00:04 317:26:27 236:14:05 307:10:43 058:18:51



344:18:44 318:25:11 347:52:07 319:15:50 025:16:49 027:27:47 209:22:01

Saura 344:47:48 319:25:52 350:42:50 324:10:33 021:03:18 025:40:02 214:40:16



345:03:34 253:57:54 029:03:14 335:51:57 188:46:46 325:47:33 337:17:06

Saura 345:25:49 258:28:12 031:42:36 343:39:19 185:05:00 322:54:50 342:03:42



345:48:00 215:27:37 073:50:27 358:38:34 342:03:44 028:07:06 128:39:19

Saura 346:03:50 214:34:27 076:53:20 000:13:16 338:05:47 031:01:54 138:56:21



346:33:23 152:21:34 157:55:10 357:25:17 136:30:39 342:28:19 272:56:05

Saura 346:41:49 154:02:50 165:14:47 350:55:52 132:22:37 340:03:29 276:49:23



347:18:01 109:07:50 260:33:02 322:29:25 298:43:55 323:44:48 044:58:58

Saura 347:19:46 107:58:29 261:48:04 320:02:06 295:40:57 335:09:06 051:04:16



348:02:48 052:09:32 311:52:48 324:01:45 085:44:25 359:21:07 205:23:02

Saura 347:57:41 052:17:24 312:05:43 328:07:58 081:53:55 357:30:27 209:48:18

1082 Dk

348:48:22 000:17:10 355:34:55 341:21:32 253:17:16 302:24:10 335:41:00

Saura 348:35:35 000:24:57 356:47:17 347:45:54 251:39:09 301:33:34 337:05:04

Tropical (Syana) longitudes have been chosen for this comparison so that the controversies related to
Ayanas do not intervene. The differences are clearly due to manda & ghra phalrdha, because the
difference in mean values of longitude will result in a linear increase in difference with time which is not the
case, while the differences in manda-phalrdha plus ghra-phalrdha will also show another line of linear
increase in difference with time, because both dk & saura systems use manda as well as ghra phala.
Even if manda-phalrdha is discarded, as Gaea Daivaja once proposed, still, this non-linear anomaly
does not vanish, because differences due to ghra-phalrdha are much more than those due to manda-


Difference in Tropical Planetary Longitudes : Dk vs

Saura, in Arc-Sec





Mercury Jupiter Venus

-2145 - 2334

- 6824


-1744 - 3641

-10243 -17683

+ 9247


+10646 -26439

+15211 + 6465



-1335 -16218 - 9562


- 950

+ 3190 -10973 - 5682





- 506

- 6076

+14882 + 8690



- 105

+ 4161 - 4502

+ 8839

+10978 -41058



+ 307 - 472

- 775


+13830 + 6640


- 4342


+ 5887

- 5044

1082 + 767 - 467


-26377 +23365

+13306 +10363 -17196

+ 3036

This highly irregular non-linearity proves that no changes in Siddhntika values of manda-phala-paridhi
or ghra-phala -paridhi can reduce this anomaly, because those changes will be linear while actual
difference is highly non-linear, ranging from over +6 to less than -11, which is an unacceptably high
anomaly because ryabhaa or Varhamihira and all other scholars could not be so great fools to have
failed to notice such errors.
Had Srya-Siddhnta been created around 400 AD or on any other date through sensory observations, this
anomaly should be minimum around that date. The fact is that there is no such period in history. Sun's
anomaly is minimum around 900 AD, but the anomaly of Venus is maximum then and other planets also
have very high divergences.
Actually, it is around 2000 AD when sidereal differences in longitudes of Dk and Saura planets become
minimum (regardless of the Ayana value), although these differences still remain huge. All these
findings cannot be presented here. There are handy softwares freely available online through which anyone
can check these conclusions.
Therefore, it is clear that

Srya-Siddhnta was not created on the basis of observation of

physical planets. This result conforms with the statements in Srya-Siddhnta and all other available
siddhntas and texts like Nrada Pura mentioned above, which say Dk positions should not be used in
Phalita Jyotia.
Now, the problem gets intensified instead of being solved. If physical planetary positions and the
astronomy of modern scientists cannot explain the equations of our ancient siddhntas, what is the rationale
and what is the use of such siddhntas?
The utility aspect is very simple to answer predictive astrology, although this utility of siddhntas
is unpalatable to modern secularists who cannot tolerate the very mention of "astrology". But whether
astrology is a true or a false science, it is a fact that all known societies had great faith in and reverence for

astrology in ancient ages and astrology was the mother of modern astronomy too. Scientists deliberately
omit to mention that not only ancient astronomers like Ptolemy but even the forerunners of modern
astronomy like Copernicus and Kepler were practising astrologers and the motivating force behind their
interest in astronomy was to find better means for predictive astrology.
The problem with materialists is that they cannot agree to test the validity or falsity of Srya-Siddhnta on
the criterion of predictive astrology. Not only anti-astrologers, but even supporters and users of Vedic
Astrology using Dk astronomy are not ready to test Srya-Siddhntika astrology without any bias. During
past few decades, I have found only a handful of Dk-supporters ostensibly ready to test Srya-Siddhntika
astrology, but they push their own habits and biases and therefore could not test it in its own frame of
reference. This is a common problem with all materialists. On the other hand, most of the spiritualists have
no interest in Jyotia.
Therefore, Srya-Siddhntika astrology is used by a few among internet astrologers. But even
today, overwhelming majority of traditional Pacgas are made with some medieval tables which have
been either directly created by means of Srya-Siddhnta (such as Makaranda Tables) or were indirectly
based on some earlier source derived from Srya-Siddhnta (such as South Indian Vkya texts). For those
who are not ready to test the validity of Srya-Siddhnta just because its planetary positions do not tally
with physical planets, isnt there any method available to prove the validity of Srya-Siddhnta? The
following sections outline some of the answers to this question.

DECLINATION: Deduction of Modern Equation from

The apparent srya vth the ecliptic which is the path of the Sun is slanted on the projection of
Equatorial Plane by a variable amount which is about 23.4393 at present according to modern astronomy
but this value is exactly equal to 24 according to Srya-Siddhnta. If both modern astronomy and SryaSiddhnta describe the same Sun, then Srya-Siddhnta is certainly a wrong text. But if the integral SryaSiddhntika values give the results obtained through modern astronomy with a very high degree of precision
through simple Dk-karma correction, what should we deduce ? As cited above, Sage Vysa said that
perceived positions of planets should be obtained by means of finding proper bja-corrections. Let us take
the case of Declination of Sun for any given date, for which the Srya-Siddhntika equation is thus :

Sin D = Sin L x Sin P


D is Declination for a given time,

L is Tropical Longitude of Sun for that given time, and
P is the maximum possible value of Declination.
Modern value of maximum declination is less than the Siddhntika value by 2018.6" arc-seconds. If we
neglect the effect of nutation whose maximum value ~17 is negligible in respect to this huge difference,
then the Siddhntika equation mentioned above can be comfortably used to create modern table of solar
declination, provided we replace Siddhntika value of P (maximum declination) with modern value.
Thus, we can create the modern scientific table of solar declination, as given in N. C. Lahiri's book
Advance Ephemeris, shown in the picture below. Using a scientific calculator, anyone can check the
Siddhntika equation cited above with reference to Lahiri's table below. Out of 180 entries in the table at
intervals of 1, a difference of one arc-minute will be noticed at a handful of places, which is due to effect
of nutation which is always less than 17.23 (arc-seconds) but sometimes results in 1 (arc-minute)
difference when value are rounded off in arc-minutes as given in Lahiri's Table. It proves that the
Siddhntika equation of declination was absolutely correct, excepting the effect of nutation which was never
used in any siddhnta.
Has any historian of science ever credited Srya-Siddhnta with invention of the correct equation of solar
declination which is used by even modern scientists ? No.
All of them insist that Ptolemy preceded the date of composition of Old Srya-Siddhnta which is
supposedly lost, while so-called modern Srya-Siddhnta is of a much later unspecified date. But it has
been shown in this paper that the so-called modern Srya-Siddhnta cannot be ascribed to any date of
known history without accepting very high amounts of errors in all planets, which will result in declaring all
ancient Indians as idiots who made such errors.
Now, the real question is this if the author of Surya-siddhnta was capable of finding such a fine
formula for computing declination, why the value of maximum declination could not be measured within
tolerable limits of inaccuracy ?
Historians of science have a handy answer : Indians stole the equation from Greeks, but could not
measure planetary positions accurately. They can never accept the reality which is much more astounding
than anyone can ever imagine Srya-Siddhntika equation of Declination can give exact modern values
of solar declination down to the limit of less than one arc-second. Two bja corrections are needed. The
major correction is simple : multiply the Srya-Siddhntika declination P with the cosine of its exactly halfvalue :

Sin D' = Sin D x Cos P/2

It gives a maximum value of 23.443745 which is only 16 arc-seconds more than modern value obtained
by NASA scientists. Its geometric implication is that Dk ecliptic is exactly 12 slanted to Saura ecliptic,
which means Dk Sun is a completely different entity than the Saura Sun. Now comes the second bjacorrection

Sin D" = Sin D' x Cos M/2

where 'M/2' is maximum possible value of Siddhntika manda-phalrdha, which Gaea Daivajya and his
followers tried foolishly to expel from traditional astronomy without understanding its significance. Maximum

manda-phala is equal to 2 10 32 according to Srya-Siddhnta. Thus we get a final value of 23 26

22.27 , nearly equal to 23 26 22.27 which is the value given by latest DE-series ephemerides from
NASA's JPL, the difference is merely of 0.8654 (arc-second). Here it must be noted that NASA's values
change with time, while Siddhntika values are changeless which scientists may like to explain as longterm average. This Siddhntika value is equal to NASA's value for 2000 AD, which confirms another major
finding that with proper Ayana the period of minimum difference between sidereal Siddhntika solar
longitude with sidereal Dk longitude was 2000 AD, as mentioned in previous section. Here only
summarized results of many important themes are shown.

The page from Lahiri's Advance Ephemeris given above gives table for lunar latitude. Its formula is simple:

Sin Lm" = Sin (Moon - Rhu) x Sin Lm

Here, Lm is the latitude of Moon to be known, Lm is the maximum possible Latitude of Moon, while Moon
& Rhu are their longitudes, tropical or sidereal. The only problem is Lm, whose value in modern astronomy
is higher than in Srya-Siddhnta.
In Srya-Siddhntika system, planets are not physical bodies, hence have no masses and gravitation.
Therefore, there is no effect of barycentre. Second effect is of Meru. Srya-Siddhntika astronomy is MeruCentric and not geocentric (Ptolemaic astronomy was also not geocentric; geocentricity is a wrong

propaganda of medieval Church). If we take these two effects into account, it is easy to compute Lunar
latitude of modern astronomy from Srya-Siddhntika terms. Srya-Siddhnta has maximum lunar latitude
equal to 4.5. Multiply its sine with the distance of Earth's centre to the tip of Mt. Meru (Mt. Kenya) at
equator, which is 6383.362 KMs. We get 500.8328KMs which is equal to 0.001302891538 multiplied with
Moon's average distance from Earth. Substract it from Sine of 4.5 which is Siddhntika maximum latitude

of Moon, and get the arc-sine of the result. Thus we get the reduced latitude due to effect of Meru-Centricity
versus geocentricity. Now, add 'Moon / Earth' mass ratio (nearly 1/81) to the sine of this reduced latitude in
order to get the effect of barycentre, and get arc-sine of the resultant, which is the maximum Dk latitude of
Moon, equal to slightly more than 5 08. Accuracy needs correct Earth:Moon ratio. A very small correction
is further needed due to effect of finer motions around Mt. Meru, but its explanation is lengthy and tedious.
This is a crude method, taking help from mass ratio, which is un-Siddhntika. Siddhntika corrections in
Saura latitude to get Dk lunar latitide is easy, but requires such terms whose explanation is highly
complicated. Even the crude method given above is enough to show that Siddhntika terms are neither
wrong nor outdated, but need Dk corrections to make Saura entities visible. The complicated geometrix
around a few yojanas around the tip of Mt. Meru (Mt. . Kenya) is required to get the Dk corrections to get
Dk Sunrise from Siddhntika equations of Sunrise. (This was published in a Hindi book by me in 2005 AD.)
Maximum Manda-Phala of Moon is 5 02 48 in Srya-Siddhnta, but 6 17 19.7 or 22639.7 in modern
astronomy (cf. NC Lahiri's Pacga Darpaa). Take the difference of sine of manda-phalrdha of both,
which is same as difference of saura & dk eccentricies. Multiply it with distance of Moon and add the
Meru correction of 500.8328KMs deduced above, the resultant will be barycentre with 83KM anomaly
whose reason lies again in the intricate mathematics around the tip of Mt. Meru. If this small anomaly is
neglected, dk manda-phala of Moon can be thus deduced from Saura Moon's terms. Adding effects of
barycentre to Meru's effect, we get dk manda-phala of Moon. Hitherto, some simple terms were being
discussed, but now let us get something out of Srya-Siddhnta which is beyond the reach of modern

Exact Differential Equation Of Physical

Setting up an empirically correct planetary differential equation is most difficult part of modern astronomy.
Statistically arranged empirical data are analyzed through various statistical tools and Fourier Transforms
to find out proper differential equations, but after few years the constants terms and co-efficients in these
equations change due to reasons not known to modern astronomers (real reason in rotations and
revolutions of physical entities and the whole physical Universe in the permanently fixed ka), and
therefore these equations need revisions after few years. The above equation deduced Siddhntikaally
conforms with Lahiri's and later equations admirably, and perfectly satisfies the procedures of differential
calculus perfectly for 2000 AD when dk & saura universes coincided (it happens at intervals of 42000
years). Here is the Siddhntika explanation of the most troublesome equation of modern physical
astronomy, the equation of Mean Moon (converted into Niryaa following NC Lahiri's method):

The Siddhntika equation for deducing any term in the above equation is this

Ys is Siddhntika Niryaa year equal to 365.258756481481481 Svana days,

Yd is Dk tropical year equal to 365.24219878125 days,
n is the number of term in the following differential equation of Niryaa Mean Moon,
t is Julian centuries of 36525 days,
T = Julian years of 365.25 days,
261 10 1.24 is Mean Moon on Zero date of 1900 AD (Greenwich Noon 31 Dec, 1899)
387 is the total number of revolutions of Siddhntika mandoccha (apogee) in one Kalpa (1 Kalpa = 4320
million years)

K is deduced Siddhntically in following manner:

K = [{(Ys-Yd) / Ys} - (1/42000)]-1 x (Ys / t) = 464.65408706471303027753666827

Then the wanted term in the Siddhntika equation of Dk Niryaa Mean Moon is

Mn = [360 / (n - 1)! ] x [ t x [{ 1 + ( 1 / 387 ) } / K ] n ]

Following is my Siddhntika Dk formula of Niryaa Mean Moon created from above equation,
published in Hindi in 2005, built from purely Srya-Siddhntika terms using Taylor's and Lagrange's
formulas of modern differential calculus :


The equation above can be extended upto infinite number of terms, although there is no use of higher
terms because of impossibility of empirically verifying the higher terms.
Now, here is NC Lahiri's formula of Mean Moon published by him in Bengali book "Pacga Darpaa".
Latest equations do not differ significantly.

It is clear that the modern scientific formula is a crude form of the exact Siddhntika equation. Even after
supercomputers and other sensitive instruments used by NASA scientists, they have not been able to
discover any equation approaching this Vedic equation. Vedic here means based on Vedic-PurnicSiddhntika traditions and being eternal, changeless, perfect.
Materialist cannot digest such things and start abusing, instead of studying the mathematics and trying to
prove it wrong on the basis of pure mathematics or pure science. They are guided by their materialist
prejudices. But following section is a concrete proof of the fact that the entire Srya-Siddhnta has never
been written down.

Evidence Of Lost Portions Of SryaSiddhnta

Modern Value of Precession in Bhskarcrya's Work based on Srya-Siddhnta
In the chapter Direction, Place and Time (Srya-Siddhnta, Ch.3), E. Burgess writes
(bracketed words are mine):

The (Srya Siddhntika) theory which the passage (verses 9-12), in its present form, is
actually intended to put forth is as follows : the vernal equinox librates westward and
eastward from the fixed point, war Piscium, assumed as the commencement of the
sidereal sphere the limits of the libratory movement being 27 in either direction
from that point, and the time of a complete revolution of libration being the sixhundredth part of the period called the Great Age (ie, Mahyuga as defined by Burgess
in chapter i, 15-17, where he gave it a span of 4320000 years), or 7200 years; so that
the annual rate of motion of the equinox is 54.
This is the interpretation of existing version of Srya Siddhnta (triatktyo yuge bhn cakre

prkparilambate | , SS, iii.9) in own words of E. Burgess

[as it is actually intended to put forth] by all traditional commentators.
This is exactly what I illustrated with example in the illustrated example of computation of ayanamsha.
The moot point is this : Burgess knew the traditional interpretation (bhn cakre | .., ie pendulum
like motion of nakatra orbit itself) , but gave his own meaning based upon modern concept of precession
of equinoxes , and tried to create doubts about the authenticity of these verses (Ch.3.9-12) by putting forth
deliberately false arguments.
Let us examine Burgess. In verse-9 (Srya-Siddhnta, Ch.3.9), he translates pari-lambate as falls
back, although he says lambate means lag, hang back, fall behind and pari means about, round

Therefore, pari-lambate should have been translated as fall back roundabout and not merely as fall back
according to own logic of Burgess. If the circle of asterisms lags roundabout any fixed point (whether Revat
or Citr), it is a to and fro motion as all traditional commentators accepted. Modern concept of precession
is something different from the original concept of Ayana. Theon in West had mentioned this oscillating
motion, Arab astronomers also accepted it, and almost all Europeans accepted it upto Renaissance, after
which Hipparchus was rediscovered and modern concept of precession became a well established fact in
astronomy. But this concept of equinoctial precession (as well as anomalistic precession) was also known
to ancient Indians and Greeks.
Burgess wrongly quotes Bhskara-II, because he relied upon a wrong translation of Bhskara by
Colebrooke (As. Res., xii 209 ; Essays, ii, 374, etc) and did not try to examine Siddhnta iromai which
was wrongly translated by Lancelot Wilkinson due to Colebrooke's influence.
Bhskara-II did not give his own opinion at all, and merely quoted Srya Siddhnta and Mujla (elsewhere
Mujla and Manjula), saying

Srya-Siddhnta gives -30000 revolutions of sampt or equinoctial point per Kalpa while ayana
has a motion of +199669 revolutions per Kalpa (of 4320 million years).
Bhskara's own opinion was that these should be followed, which means both Srya Siddhnta and Mujla
were correct in Bhskara's opinion. Colebrooke, Burgess, Wilkinson, etc., have misquoted Siddhnta
iromai and created an impression that ancient Indians were inept in astronomical observations, as
Whitney shamelessly declared in his prologue to Burgess, but the Hindi translation by Satyadeva Sharma
is correct, although he could not get the real meaning.
The startling fact is that Siddhnta iromai clearly says that the point of intersection of equatorial

plane and ecliptic (which is the very definition of equinox) has a negative motion of 30000 revolutions
per Kalpa according to Srya-Siddhnta, while Mujla's value of ayana's motion is +199669, and both
(Srya-Siddhnta and Mujla ) must be added to get the final motion (of the equinox ). Hence, we get
+169669 revolutions per Kalpa, which gives (4320000000 / 169669 =) 25461 years per revolution or 50.9"
per year, which is very near to modern value of about 50.3" per year for precession of equinoxes.
Fuller discussion of Siddhnta iromai's text is given below. We must not forget that Hipparchus had given
a period of 36000 years for precession, which was not corrected by Europeans till the onset of modern age.
It is unfortunate that Siddhnta iromai is still being misinterpreted by foreigners, and if a true rendering
is offered by Indian scholars, they are abused, esp by those who do not care to consult the originals and
declare the forign missionaries to reliable. Bhskara-II neither excluded Srya-Siddhnta, nor Mujla, but
mentioned the both must be used, which is clear from verse-19, where he clearly asks to add Mujla's
ayana-chalam to Srya-Siddhntika sampt-calanam (this sampt-calanam is anomalistic precession with
a period of 144000 years per cycle, not far from modern value). Another startling fact is that Bhskara-ii
differentiates sampt-calanam of Srya-Siddhnta from ayana-calanam of Mujla, and says both must be
added before computing phenomena like declension, ascensional differences, etc. But modern
commentators like Colebrooke misinterpret Bhskara-II deliberately, and imply that sampt-calanam of
Srya-Siddhnta quoted by Bhskara-ii was an erroneous thing which must be forgotten, while ayanacalanam of Mujla was a crude approximation of modern precession. But this interpretation is falsified by
Bhskara's original verses (and his own commentary Vsanbhshya) as shown above. The root of this
problem lies in the fact that sampt-calanam of Srya-Siddhnta is a distinct phenomenon from ayanacalanam of Mujla according to Siddhnta iromai, but readers are not informed of the real meaning of
Siddhnta iromai and false quotation from Siddhnta iromai was quoted by Colebrooke and Burgess
(12th verse, Ch.3). This is a sign of intellectual incompetence and dishonesty of Western "experts" who are
blindly followed by brown shibs of India. Those who do not consult the original texts cited above will not
believe me.

Siddhnta Tattva Viveka by Kamalkara Bhaa is a medieval text, which clearly states that
Saura-Paka is distinct from Dk-Paka. Saura-Paka (astronomy of Bhuva-Loka) is Srya-Siddhnta as it
exists. Dk-Paka (astronomy of Bh-Loka or physical/material/sensory world) is that version of SryaSiddhnta which was not preserved because it was useless in astrology.

Siddhnta iromai uses many concepts of Dk-Pakya astronomy, as the instance cited above
proves. Saura-Pakya Srya-Siddhnta does not contain any refence to 30000 cylces per Kalpa mentioned
by Bhskara-II. He was quoting from Dk-Pakya Srya-Siddhnta which as a text had been lost ;
Bhskara-II said in his own Vsanbhshya commentary of Siddhnta-iromai that Srya-Siddhnta is
gama. Modern commentators confuse both variants of Srya-Siddhnta. Siddhnta-Tattva-Viveka is
prescribed in post-graduate (Ganitcrya) syllabus of Sanskrit universities, but no modern commentator
has ever tried to translate it or comment on it.
According to Bhskara-ii, negative sampt-calanam of Dk-Pakya Srya-Siddhnta should be
added to positive ayana-calanam of Mujla to get final Dk-Pakya precession, which is very close to
modern value. Ayana-calanam of Mujla is also Dk-Pakya, because Saura-Pakya entities are not used
in Dk-Pakya astronomy, and vice versa.

I had put some of the

most important extant
theorems of Dk-Pakya
Srya-Siddhnta at a
website. I had put parts of
it at one of most popular
websites, where a German
Indologist deleted it and
abused me profusely; later
I found those deleted
materials at an Australian
website, without any
name of author!! But I am
here divulging one
important secret of
ancient science of India
which has been neglected
by wrongheaded

Mujla's ayana-calanam, as mentioned in Siddhnta iromai, gives

a period of (4320 million / 199669 = ) 21636 years per cycle. Siddhnta
iromai says that it is ayana-calanam according to Mujla & his
followers but it was not accepted as precession by Bhskara,
precession is obtained after substracting (Saura-Pakya) SryaSiddhntika samptcalanam. If this 21636 year cycle is not precession,
what is it??
Readers should read Milankovitch cycles (wiki) which informs:

Earth's axis completes one full cycle of precession approximately every

26, 000 years (25771.5 precisely at present, 25789.5 years is long term
mean). At the same time, the elliptical orbit rotates, more slowly,
leading to a 21, 000-year cycle between the seasons and the orbit
This orbital precession is in the opposite sense to the gyroscopic motion
of the axis of rotation(cf. anomalistic precession as distinct from
equinoctial precession), shortening the period of the precession of the
equinoxes with respect to the perihelion from 26, 000 to 21, 000 years.
Note: at some sites of NOAA of USA, 22000 is mentioned instead of

yana-calanam of Mujla is not orbital precession, it is the most important of all components of
Milankovitch cycles as this Wikipedian definition shown. If we take cue from siddhnta

iromai, the afore-mentioned Wikipedian clause can be rewritten thus:

This orbital precession of equinoxes is in the opposite sense to the gyroscopic motion
of the axis of rotation, shortening the period of the precession of the equinoxes with
respect to the perihelion from 25771 to 21, 636 years.

Siddhnta iromai also says that Mujla's ayana-calanam (21, 636 years per cycle) is opposite to
sampta-calanam. Bhskara-ii clearly defines sampta-calanam as,

the point of intersection of equatorial plane and ecliptic (which is the very definition of equinox).
Hence, what Siddhnta iromai says is exactly what Wikipedia informs us, the only difference is that
Siddhnta iromai is misinterpreted and declared to be obscurantist, and the great cycles mentioned in
Siddhnta iromai is discovered by 20th century scientists. But we must remember Bhskara-ii did not
discover these things, he acknowledged Srya-Siddhnta and Mujla. Bhskara-ii knew Dk-Pakya
Srya-Siddhnta, which has not survived because it was not useful in astrology. In his formula of
precession, Bhskara-II used a figure 30000 cycles per Kalpa. Bhskara-II got an approximate value of
50.9 per year, which was the most precise value before modern astronomy developed in the West. Here I
quote a Purnic verse which proves knowledge of equinoctial precession in Purnic times :

uttnapdaputro'sau mehbhto dhruvo divi
sa hi bhraman bhrmayate nitya candrdityau grahai saha

Uttanapda's son Dhruva is the fixed point in the Heavens, round which all planets including Sun and
Moon, but Dhruva himself also moves round.
Round what? Ans.: Mt. Meru, which is the only fixed point in Cosmos according to Purnic epics. Hence,
the bhacakra also librates with respect to this fixed point Meru. According to Bhskara-II, orbital precession
is derived by substracting anomalistic precession (sampt-calanam) from the first component of
Milankovitch cycles (Mujla's ayana-calanam). Bhskara-II acknowledged earlier authors. Hence, we

must conclude that modern values and concepts of orbital precession, anomalistic precession, Milankovitch
cycles, etc were known to ancient Indians well before Bhskara-ii.
But 2 things about confusing terminology must be borne in mind
1. this sampt-calanam he finally gets by combining the two quantities mentioned above. According
to Bhskara-II, Srya-Siddhntika sampt-calanam is 30, 000 per Kalpa. He does not give a name for
the term which is finally obtained by combining this sampt-calanam with Mujla's ayana-calanam,
but the definition he provides for Srya-Siddhntika sampt-calanam is exactly the definition of the
final quantity whose name he does not provide. Hence, there were many types of sampt-calanams !!
This is not a case of confusion of terms. It is a result of Saura-Pakya term with Dk-Pakya terms
bearing same names but having different magnitudes and sometimes even having difference in basic
properties !

2. Second confusion is due to use of the term ayana-calanam for Mujla's precession. It is quite distinct
from Saura-Pakya Srya-Siddhntikan ayana-calanam (trepidation) as mentioned in existing text.

Burgess could not digest this theory of libration (oscillation or trepidation, ie, Ayana - motion) and tried
to distort the meaning of terms to fit modern view of orbital precession with this Saura-Pakya precession.
Bhskara-ii knew and respected Srya-Siddhnta which he cited and used in his computations as shown
above, and gave exact value of Dk-Pakya precession. Therefore, it is foolish to impose Dk-Pakya
precession (50.9" per year according to Bhskara-II, 50.3" really) upon Saura-Pakya ayanamsha (54 per
year, oscillating within a range of 27). (There are further corrections on Dk-Pakya precession which
give a final value of one revolution in 25771.4 years, exactly equal to the value deduced by NASA - JPL ,
but these corrections requires some long theorems to prove).
I do not want to say that all ancient texts are true and should be blindly followed. But it is equally
wrong to deride them as outdated and obscurantist just because they could not be understood by
moderns.We have yet to discover the real Wonder that Is India. Unless and until ancient texts are proven
false, it is suicidal to reject them. Here is the photographed copy of relevant page from Siddhnta iromai
for those who want first hand proof, followed with discussion on its obscure passages :
Vsans Bhya (commentary) by Bhskara-ii on his own work Siddhnta iromai has never been
translated or explained. Bhskara-ii knew Siddhnta iromai will be misunderstood, hence he wrote its
commentary Vsan-Bhya himself. This commentary also needs a commentary. In it, Bhskara clearly
writes that,

sa evyam
refers to krntipta, not to ayana-calanam.
If verses 17-19 are taken together, we have six lines, and sa evyam occurs in third line, which says that
the ayanacalanam as defined by Mujla & others [his school of thoughts] is same as Krnti-Pta defined
in first line.
This meaning from Vsan-Bhya is further reinforced in same passage in Vsan-Bhya which says

tatra mandoccha ptnm gatirasti

the second line (minus 30000 revolutions per Kalpa) must refer not to Krnti-Pta but to motion of apogee
Thus, Bhskara has made it clear that the definition of Krnti-Pta as given in first line applies not to -30000
revolutions per Kalpa ( the latter being motion of mandoccha) but applies to +199669 revolutions per Kalpa
(="ayam") which is same as the ayana-calanam (= "sa") as said by Mujla and his followers (Mujldi
means Mujla and others beginning from Mujla, di means beginning; hence the sense of Mujldi
is not Mujla and others but, Mujla and his followers).

tat pake relates to ayana-calanam.

If one Kalpa of 4320 million years is divided with 199669 given by Mujla, we get one revolution
in 21635.8 years, which is equal to annual motion of 59.9 seconds of arc which was rounded to one minute
of arc by Mujla (read the footnote of Siddhnta iromai's photograph given above which gives the
verses from Mujla about precession). Karana texts use crude numbers in order to facilitate panchanga
making, and after long time when errors accumulate new Karana texts are made from same Siddhnta
(Vsan-Bhya of verse 17-18 says

yad punarmahat klena mahadantaram bhaviyati

tad mahmatimanto brahmaguptdinm samnadharma evotpatsyante
But this crude figure on one minute per year will give 200, 000 revolutions per Kalpa and not the
figure 199669 said by Mujla. Rationale for 199669 is unexplained. Now, let me summarize the whole
Verse 17 defines Krnti-Pta, and then gives a figure,

minus 30000 revolutions per Kalpa as said in Srya-Siddhnta

which Bhskara elaborates in Vsan-Bhya to be the motion of solar apogee.
The next verse mentions +199669 revolutions of ayanacalanam as said by Mujla & others [his school of
thoughts], and clarifies that the Krnti-Pta defined in preceding verse in same as ayanacalanam of
Mujla. But Bhskara does not accept Mujla's notion of Krnti-Pta and says that real motion of KrntiPta should be deduced by combining -30000 with +199669. This is clear in the third verse (19th):

tat-samjtam ptam kiptv khee-apama sdhya

krntivat-caram-uday-caradala-lagngame tata kepya
apama means Krnti-Pta = the declination of a planet. (Monier Williams).
khea means planet.
Hence, Bhskara says

Uttanapda's pta born out of that / those should be used to deduce declination

of a planet.
tat normally is singular, but in samaasa it is used for dual and plural too. Pta means the intersecting
point of two circles. Hence, here the [intended] meaning is thus

The pta born out of intersection of circles / ellipses of mandoccha and

ayana-calanam should be used for computing declination of planets, and
phenomena like chara, udaya-mnas, caradala, lagna, etc., should be
computed from this final declination.
What Bhskara says is in current-practice by all pacga-makers in India. Cara is a term used for
intermediate quantities needed in computation of Sunrise, Lagna (ascendant) & others and, is defined as
the difference of rising time a rasi in equatorial plane from the rising time of same rasi in ecliptic.
Bhskara says pta born out of tat should be used for deducing declination.
By definition, a pta is a resultant of two entities. Hence, the two entities mentioned in preceding verses
must be combimed to give the Krnti-Pta of Bhskara.
Existing Srya-Siddhnta does not give a motion of -30000 per Kalpa of any entity, while Bhskara
claims Srya-Siddhnta says so. But Bhjaskar says Srya-Siddhnta is gama and therefore must be

accepted as final proof (prama). Hence, some version of Srya-Siddhnta available to him mentioned 30000 per kalpa as the motion of SOLAR APOGEE.
But Srya-Siddhnta gives a value of only 387 revolutions for solar apogee, and Siddhntairomai
gives a figure of 480 per Kalpa (verse 5 in bhagadhyya). Bhskara's value is +93 more than that given
in Srya-Siddhnta. Late NC Lahiri wrote in Advance Ephemeris (page 90) that some corrections were
needed in Srya-Siddhntika figures for making it scientifically correct, and the value of one such term
given by him was equal to nearly 109 revolutions per Kalpa, not too far from Bhskara's bja correction in
Srya-Siddhntika mandoccha value. But Bhskara never said Srya-Siddhnta was incorrect. Hence,
there were two versions of Srya-Siddhnta:
1. one was Dk-Pakya, ie related to the phenomanal world revealed directly to the senses, and,
2. the other was Saura-Pakya manifest only astrologically.
Astrologers did not preserve the Dk-Pakya Srya-Siddhnta. Bhskara says Srya-Siddhnta's solar
apogee has a motion of -30000 revolutions per Kalpa, or a period of 144000 years, which is not too far
away from modern value of physical astronomy. Bhskara also says Srya-Siddhnta is itself a PROOF
and needs no other proof for its correctness because it is gama. But the figure of -30000 per kapla is never
used in Srya-Siddhnta used and preserved by astrologers, and Bhskara's own value of 480 per Kalpa
is also near to this version. Hence, he knew about two versions of Srya-Siddhnta. Bhskara's statement
about gravitational force and its proportionality to distance was also related to sensory (i.e., material) world.

Deduction of Modern Astronomical

Constants from Srya Siddhnta
Kamalkra Bhaa (author of Siddhnt-tattva-viveka, as yet untranslated) an ardent supporter of Srya
Siddhnta and an opponent of Bhskara II had strongly advocated in 16th century that Srya Siddhntika
planets are to be distinguished from the material planets.
In the beginning of 20th century, terms like Dk-Paka and Saura-Paka came into vogue in India,
to distinguish planets and phenomena of Sensory World from that of Srya Siddhnta.
1. Dk-Paka meant the world perceived by means of sense organs, and therefore it denoted the fold of
modern astronomy, while,
2. Saura-Paka denoted the gods of Next World bearing same name as the material planets but being

Ketaki system of almanac used these concepts in actual practice. But the Srya Siddhntika viewpoint of
Dk-Paka was never elaborated by anyone.

Unfortunately, after the disappearance of the Srya

Siddhntika commentary of ryabhaa, the Elder, even the Saura-Pakya mathematics became obscure,
and all the commentators kept on repeating hackneyed phrases whose practical significance was clear to
none. Ranganath, Kamalkara Bhaa, Sudhkara Dvived, Kapilevara stri etc., wrote voluminous
commentaries on Srya Siddhnta, elucidating everything except the practical ways of using the formulas
and the Meru-Centric geometrics.
Let us examine some orally transmitted occult theorems of Srya Siddhntika school which show that DkPaka can be deduced from Saura-Paka mathematically, without the aid of any observatory.

Theorem of Dk-Pakya Sidereal and Tropical Years

and of Precessional Period
Saura-Pakya eccentricity of Sun's elliptic orbit round the centre of Cosmos (Mt. Meru) is exactly equal to
1/60 (= ), although Saura-Pakya equation of centre requires an equant, which will be elaborated in the
section 'The True Places of Surya Siddhantic Planets'. Let us denote 1/60 by and 'pi' by . Then,

Ys=[122+12(1+2)]=[36002+0.5+17200]=365.25640000130486608685495644391 days
This is the limiting value of scientific sidereal year by means of Vedic (i.e., Surya Siddhantic) equation.
The Vedic (i.e., Surya Siddhantic) theorem of scientific Tropical Year Yt (=365.24219878125) will be
demonstrated later, let us first get the value of mean sidereal year with the help of following equation :

41689259003252668 days
Now we can get the Period of Precession PP :

PP=Yt(YsYt)=25789.488323276570161593347095778 years
This mean value needs two complex correction which are too intricate to be shown here. Let us deduce
the value of scientific Tropical Year first.We will not explain all the intermediate terms here, which can be
easily recognised by students of modern astronomy.
Let sidereal lunar month be equal to :

Mss = 27. 321660641391789747802454274321 days, which will be proven later. Then, synodic month
Ms will be :

Ms=Ys(YsMss1)=29.53058780664716371374 days.
Metonic Year Ym is equal to :

Ym=235Ms19=365.246743924320182775185653635 days
Precessional Period due to Moon's effect (PPM1) :

PPM1=1(YsYm))=37978.09022183997109169737 years
Precessional Period due to Sun's effect (PPS1), intermediate term :

PPS1=11PP1PPM1=80356.674413324332490977057144470 years
Precessional Period due to Sun's effect from alternative equation (PPS2) , intermediate term :

PPS2=1Ys(1Yt1Ym)=80356.674413324332490977057250561 years
The difference between PPS1 and PPS2 is due to computer's errors and is equal to a negligible quatity :

Difference=1.32025125210 27 years
Intermediate terms are :

A1 = PPS1 / PPM1 = 2.1158692799964388041303958720096.

A2 = PPS2 / PPM1 = 2.1158692799964388041303958748028.
Precessional Period due to Sun's effect (PPS) , final value :

PPS = PPS1 + A1 = 80358.790282604328929781187540342

PPS = PPS2 + A2 = 80358.790282604328929781187646436

There is difference in two values of solar precessional period shown above (PPS) in 27th digit only.
Hence, the computations are highly reliable.
There are three equations for obtaining scientific Tropical Year (in days) :

Dk-Pakya Tropical Year is the most precise constant known to modern astronomy, whose empirical value
is 365.24219878125 0.00000000058 days.
The error of 0.00000000058 days is due to errors in modern instruments. The three values we obtained
above through Vedic equations have errors in 34th digit which is due to 34-digit precisiuon of Windows
Calculator used to obtain above results. The net result is startling : value of 'pi' is the basic term used to
deduce exact value of most important astronomical constants, if you know the exact value of 'pi' then you
can deduce the exact value of astronomical constants. Modern physicists know many such equations,
which are called coincidences by atheists, and as proofs of Intelligent Design of Universe by believers in

Vedic (ie, Srya-Siddhntika) Theorem of Lunar month

M1 = 365.256400001304866086855 / (42/) = 27.321114831446531255657
K1 = M1 / ( Mss - M1 ) = 50056.095658915529
K2 = 42000(Ys-Yt) = 594.8226718002415

Now raise (Ys/360) to the power (1/K2):

Z1 = (Ys/360)^(1/K2) = 1.014601^(1/594.82267) = 1.000024369635568.
K3 = 1-[(180/)* {(Sin(Z1+1)-Sin(Z1)}]

= 1-[57.296*{(Sin(2.000024369635568)-Sin(1.000024369635568)}]
= 0.0003553741530559558546620855628939

K4 = K3 * 1000000 = 355.3741530559558546620855628939
K5 = 1+(1/K1)

Now we get the value of Dk-Pakya synodical or lunar month :

Ms = [(K4 / K5)-1}/12 = 29.53058780664716371373841555 days.
Sidereal lunar month will be :
Mss = Ys / [(Ys/Ms)+1] = 27.321660641391789747802454274321

Now we show some more intricate Vedic (Srya-Siddhntika) theorems. First of all, let us see :

Lunar Binomial Theorem :

A1 = 12/(K4-1) = 1 / 29.5311794213296538
A2 = Ys / 365.256400001304866086855

Here is the Lunar Binomial Equation :

Roots of this binomial are :
M1 = [-1 + Sqr(1-(4A*Ys)] / 2A = -29.5305886713712313156 days.
M2 = [-1 - Sqr(1-(4A*Ys)] / 2A = +27.3216613815891770963 days.
M2 - Mss = 0.063953054266910187950698752 seconds.
This apparent 'error' is equivalent to the error of 104.643228673117 years in 4.1748 billion years ( = 14
manavantara of 71 Mah yugas each, where each Dk-Pakya Mahyuga = 4.2 million years).

This is the value of Dk-Pakya correction in Kalpa-Mandoccha, for which Bhskarcrya deduced the
value 93 in Siddhantairomai and stated Kalpa-Mandoccha to be equal to 480 (= Saura-Pakya Kalpa
Mandoccha 387 + 93 Dk-Pakya correction). Its elucidation will be shown later.

Srya Siddhnta states Saura-Pakya period of precession to be of 24000 years exactly, while modern
value is near the Dk-Pakya value of PP deduced above ( = 25789.4883233 years). Let us see its logic.

1/K' = (1/24000) - (1/25789.4883233) = 1/ 345879.71975438125

Mt. = Mss - (Mss/K') = 27.32158164959469683453 days.
This constant Mt. is the modern value of tropical sidereal lunar month !

Srya Siddhntika Theory of the Rotation

of Material Universe
According to modern physical science, material universe cannot be said to be rotating even if it rotates,
because all space-time-continuum is intrinsically related to matter as part of a unified whole, and there can
be no space or time outside the realm of matter. Since there is no space or time outside material universe,
rotation of this material universe cannot be measured because there is no external space-time.
Let us call the space of time of this material universe as material-space and material-time. There are 14
universes (Bhuvanas) in the Multiverse (= Creation or Si), and we live in the middle universe. Since all
forms of matter have shown to be associated with SPIN, from galactic to sub-atomic levels, it is natural that
the material universe should also rotate. But it can be measured only with reference to the non-material
universe or Bhuva-Loka, which is the world of Saura-Pakya Srya-Siddhnta. Srya-Siddhnta states our
universe to be finite, and according to Godel's theorem a finite system cannot be fully explained on account
of its internal properties and phenomena only. There must be something outside this finite universe which
should explain the workings of this universe and its raison-detre.
Now we show the Vedic Theorem of Rotation of the Material Universe .
Surya Siddantic Kalpa is equal to 4.32 billion years. The Creator (Brahma) took 47400 divine yuears to
create the Creation, which is equal to 47400 * 360 human years. Hence the total Age of Creation = 4.32
billion - (47400 * 360) = 4302936000 years.
4302936000 / 24000 = 179289 is the extra years due to Saura-Pakya precession. Hence total
number of Saura-Pakya tropical years in one creation is equal to 4302936000 + 179289 = 4303115289
years. Divide this number with (Saura-Vara / Candra-Vara) = (Saura-Pakya Sidereal Year / 12 Saura-

Pakya synodical months) = 365.258756481481481 / (12*29.53058794607) = 1.0307356481481. The

result is 4174800101.976788423. In it, 4174800000 is the duration of Dk-Pakya Creation ( =
4200000*71*14), and 101.976788423 is the exact value of Dk-Pakya correction in Kalpa-Mandoccha, for
which we had got a crude value 104.643228673117 above, and Bhskarcrya had got 93. A quantity of
101.976788423 years in 4.1748 billion years is equal to 0.107065 hours in 500 years. Nirmala Candra

Lahiri was the secretary of Pacga Reform Committee of Government of India. He analysed the
differencebetween Dk-Pakya and Saura-Pakya tithi (elongation of moon), and found a difference of
0.11 hours in 500 years, which he assumed to be due to error in Srya Siddhntika values (NC Lahiri, 1968,
But Srya Siddhntika values do not belong to this physical Universe. This apparent error of
0.107065 hours in 500 years is a result of extra 102 rotations of the Dk-Pakya solar orbit during one
Creation : Saura-Pakya value is 387 while Dk-Pakya value is 489 (Bhskarcrya-II gave 480 only in
Siddhntairomai). This Dk-Pakya rotation of solar ellipse is in addition to the normal Dk-Pakya
rotation per 136000 years which is the cause behind anomalistic year.
In the same book NC Lahiri gives data of Srya Siddhntika beej corrections applied to lunar anomaly in
comparison to modern scientific values, which shows that beej correction needed in lunar anomaly in order
to get Siddhntika tithi from scientific tithi increases at a rate of one revolution in 42000 years(NC Lahiri,
1968, p.90). Difference between modern scientific tropical Sun and Siddhntika Sun also show 360 change
during 42000 years. Sun and moon do not move in same orbits. Hence we must conclude that the physical
Universe itself is revolving at the rate of one revolution per 42000 years round some point very near to
Earth's centre, which suggests that the centre of Universe is not far from Earth's centre. Before dealing with
this centre (Meru or Mt. . Kenya in Africa), let us first elucidate the 42000 year cycle of the Sun.
Siddhntika sidereal year (365.258756481481)and Dk-Pakya tropical year(365.24219878125) differ at
the rate of one revolution or one year in 22059.75174 years. But in reality both divurge from each other at
the rate of one revolution in 42000 years. For instance, Kaliyuga commenced at Ujjain midnight 17-18 Feb,
3102 BCE, when Siddhntika nirayan(=sidereal in Indian system) Mean Sun was at zero longitude. 5106
years later Siddhntika zero Sun was to be found on 16 Apr, 2005 at 5:03:15 AM (Ujjain). If mean Sun
differs by 44.2106 days in 5106 years(taking into account 13 days of Gregorian reform), it should differ by
one year in 42182.8 years. Due to non-linearity of elliptical paths, we get here 42182.8, the exact figure is
an integer 42000. It raises a question : if mathematically Siddhntika year and scientific year should show
a difference of one revolution in 22059 years, why do they differ by one revolution in 42000 years in reality
? Where does 19941.24826 years come from ? We have here compared sidereal Siddhntika year with
tropical scientific year, hence this extra difference of 19941 years must be related to precession.
Siddhntika period of precession is 24000 years and scientific period is 25789.4883233 years. Both form

cycles of 100000 12000 years with respect to 19941 in harmonic series. Thus, we are now getting close
to constants of Milankowitz, just by means of analysing Srya Siddhntika constants !
An excess of 101.9767884 years of anomaly in 4.1748 billion years as we got above means one year of
anomaly in each 40938727.965116279069767363571421 Dk year. Substract one 4, 200, 000 Dk years
to get another periodic constant of 36738727.965116279069767363571421 years we will need in some
computations needed to get modern value of precessional period. We found precessional period equal to
25789.48832327657 years.
1. Divide the number


as obtained in the previous paragraph with

this precessional-period value, and one will get 1424.56211246181876.




25789.4883232765702 with the derived-value amounting to

1424.56211246181876 which stands for (lets call it that way) per dk year value per

2. Now, dividing the value of



3. and finally, to get the modern precessional value period as used by scientists, you go about to
substract the previously-derived value from 25789.48832327657

= 25771.3848737339530562881748

Modern value [abeit slightly differs but having seeming resemblance to the derived one] is
25771.4021 years.

Ancient Cosmogony and Geography

Srya Siddhntika system is neither heliocentric nor geocentric. It clearly states in Bhoogoladhyaya
that Mt. Meru resides at the centre (equator) of globe in the region of Zamboodweep. In Africa, Mt. . Kenya
is situated upon equator in a region where many modern place names are reminiscent of Srya Siddhnta
: Meru town near Mt. . Kenya, another Mt. Meru slightly southwards, a place named kinyan-giri which means
Mt. Kinyan or Mt. . Kenya in sanskrit, river Zamboonadi > *zamboodi > *zambedi > *zambezi, Mu-zambique,
Zambia, Zimb-abwe, Gabon (< *Zamboon), Congo (< *Gongo < *zambo), etc. Homo genus of mankind is
known to have evolved in that region around 4 million years ago. Indian Purnic ttreadition also mention

that modern races of mankind evolved near Meru in 3891194 BCE when the present Mahayuga
commenced. Srya Siddhntika formulae of making true planets from mean ones require the use of
distance from Earth's centre to a point in space 28.913 kilometres above the top of Mt. Meru (Mt. . Kenya),
which was believed to be centre of all universes by Purnic authors. Srya Siddhntika universe is much
smaller in comparison to material universe, and Sun's distance from Earth is only 861.7 times of Earth's
equatorial radius. Material Sun's distance is 23455 times of Earth's equatorial radius ! Ptolemy used a figure
1210, which is not much removed from Srya Siddhntika figure. Ptolemic system is well known, but Srya
Siddhntika system is rather obscure, known to a few initiated brahmanas only. Due to lack of knowledge
of orally transmitted and unpublished portions of original Srya Siddhnta, European commentators believe
that Srya Siddhntika system was influenced by Ptolemy's Almagest.
But those who know the secrets of Srya Siddhnta say that its framework is too complex and
organically self-contrained to have been influenced by any other system. For instance, Srya Siddhntika
daily motions of all planets are exactly equal to a constant, but this rule is not followed in Almagest.
Srya Siddhntika system is based upon a cosmic centre at Meru, which is absent in Almagest.
Srya Siddhntika solar epicycle is equal to 14 yojanas per degree, which is equal to 5040 yojanas for
360. Its diameter is 1604.3 yojanas, which is 4.3 yojanas more than Earth's equatorial diameter. 4.3
yojanas equals 5.199 kilometres ( height of Mt. Meru or Mt.Kenya) plus 28.913669 kilometres. Solar
epicycle equals to 14 yojanas, which gets reduced to 13:40 at perigee of this elliptical epicycle, which when
divided by 2 gives 2 10 31 which is the maximum value of equation of centre (manda-phala =
difference between mean & true Sun) for Sun.
Srya Siddhntika theory, therefore, relates yojana to degrees in an intrinsic manner, which makes
it clear that it was not borrowed from Almagest. Earth's diameter is an integer 1600 yojana. Moon's diameter
is also an integer 436 yojanas. These rations are perfectly scientific. Such integral values seem to be
mysterious when they are confirmed with modern science. This value of yojana was not only prehistoric,
manifest in the story of Jarasandha's 99 yojanas from Girivraja to Mathur proving that siddhantic yojana
was prevalent in pre-historic era of Girivraja's kings, as mentioned in Mahabharata, but was also intrinsically
related to many native concepts of Srya Siddhnta, discussed in other sections of this article.

The Cycles of Lord Brahm

Every Creation is repeated after 60.24 billion years, in which half or 30.24 billion years comprise
the existence of Universe or Day of Lord Brahm and the other half is Dark Band which is Night of Lord
Brahm. Modern instruments have started to get some faint views of these distant bands, which are actually
due to illusion : telescopes reveal only the past states of our Universe but scientists imagine these past

states to be co-existent. Each visible band is actually seven concentric rings of seven universes, each
lasting for 4.32 billion years (= value for one Kalpa). Present universe is 1.95885115 x 7 = 13.7 billion light
years according to scientists.
The dimension of Time is viewed as Space by them, although Einstein had proved that Time is the fourth
dimension of Space. If some star is 1 billion light years away, it means we are viewing something which
existed one billion years ago, not the present state of that thing, Its present state may be very near to us.
In physical astronomy, orbital elements are not constants, but in siddhantic astronomy, everything is
constant. Siddhntika Astronomy is fundamental from which physical (= material = sensorily perceived =
My) is created.

The revised version of Steady State Theory originally propounded by Hoyle-Narlikar which now includes Big Bang
Theory is the correct theory, which is in tune with Vedic Astronomy : each universe is created, appears to be expanding
in a Big Bang manner due to illusion created by the dimension of Time viewed as dimension of Space, and then
collapses, in order to give rise to next Big Banga, hence the theory of Oscillating Universe is joined with Big Bang
theory to give a Steady State in the long run. Each existence or Big Bang is Day of Lord Brahm, and Collapse into
Cosmic Black Hole is Night of Lord Brahm. There are 72000 such Oscillations in the life of one Brahm ji, after
which Brahm ji passes into the navel of Lord Vishnu and next Brahm ji comes. This is Vedic-Purnic view.
Only the most simple and easiest aspects of Srya-Siddhntika mathematics has been
presented here. The details are highly intricate and difficult. Kaliyuga is not fit for SryaSiddhnta and therefore calls it obsolete. The extant text of Srya-Siddhntika provides
sufficient clues for unravelling its unwritten marvels.
-Vinay Jha