Chapter 8
The Date of Āryabhaṭa, Lāṭadeva, Vriddhāryabhaṭa and Parāśara
Āryabhaṭa was the greatest and most celebrated mathematician-astronomer of ancient India. He pursued his independent and radical research on astronomy and presented the most scientific Siddhānta in his treatise “Āryabhaṭīyam”. He was far ahead of his contemporary astronomers in mathematical astronomical research. Since his approach was drastically different from the traditional Indian astronomy, it took a considerable time to acknowledge the accuracy of Āryabhaṭa’s Siddhānta in Indian astronomy. Unfortunately, there is still a controversy about the date of Āryabhaṭa and his birthplace. In fact, there are numerous unresolved issues in the chronology of ancient India due to the wrong sheet anchors.
Brief history of ancient Indian astronomy before the Mahābhārata era
Vedic lunisolar calendar had followed a concept of five-year Yuga for intercalation of two months (Pauṣa and Āṣāḍha) in five years. According to Lagadha Siddhānta, the first day of the first year of a five-year Yuga was Māgha Śukla Pratipadā and the last day of the fifth year was Pauṣa Krishna Amāvāsyā (Māgha-śukla-prapannasya Pauṣa-Krishna-samāpinaḥ). Autumnal equinox or Śarad season was the beginning of Saṁvatsara. Atharvaveda also confirms the same (Ayanam Maghāsu cha).
Initially, only one scheme of intercalation had been followed in Vedic astronomy but it realized the importance of Kśayatithis, Kśaya Ardha-māsas and Kśayamāsas in the scheme of intercalation. Consequently, numerous astronomical Siddhāntas have been evolved, based on multi-generational record-keeping of astronomical observations. There were eighteen astronomical Siddhāntas, namely Paitāmaha (Brahma), Vyāsa, Vasiṣṭha, Atri, Kaśyapa, Nārada, Garga, Marīchi, Manu, Aṅgira, Lomaśa, Puliśa, Chyavana, Yavana, Bhrigu, Śaunaka, Sūrya and Parāśara, in the tradition of ancient Indian mathematical astronomy. At the end of Kritayuga, Maya, a great Asura, authored the first version of Sūrya Siddhānta around 6778 BCE. Yavana Siddhānta evolved based on Sūrya Siddhānta of Mayāsura after the Rāmāyaṇa era (5677-5577 BCE). Parāśara refers to the 19th Siddhānta of Pulastya.
Three Āryabhaṭas
There were three Āryabhaṭas in the tradition of ancient Indian astronomers. Historians generally agree that there were only two Āryabhaṭas. One was the author of Āryabhaṭīyam and another was the author of Mahārya-Siddhānta. But the author of Mahārya-Siddhānta clearly mentions that Parāśara and Vriddhāryabhaṭa Siddhāntas had been established after very little time had elapsed from the epoch of Kaliyuga (एतत् सिद्धांतद्वयं ईषद् याते कलौ युगे जातम्).
Parāśara was the father of Vyāsa and lived before the Mahābhārata War. Vriddhāryabhaṭa flourished before Āryabhaṭa. Therefore, we can conclude that Vriddhāryabhaṭa also lived before the Mahābhārata War (3162 BCE). The author of Mahārya-Siddhānta also records that he has recompiled the Siddhānta of Vriddhāryabhaṭa in his words (वृद्धार्यभटप्रोक्तात् सिद्धांतात् यन्महाकालात् । पाठगतमुच्छेदं विशेषितं मया स्वोक्त्या….). Historians have speculated that Āryabhaṭa might have written another book called "Āryabhaṭa-Siddhānta", which is now lost. In reality, the text of Vriddhāryabhaṭa Siddhānta was available in ancient times. Later, another Āryabhaṭa has recompiled the ancient Vriddhāryabhaṭa Siddhānta in his treatise “Mahārya-Siddhānta”.
Thus, there were three Āryabhaṭas. Vriddhāryabhaṭa (Āryabhaṭa I), the founder of Ārya-Siddhānta, lived before the Mahābhārata War (3162 BCE). Āryabhaṭa (Āryabhaṭa II), the author of Āryabhaṭīyam, lived after Vriddhāryabhaṭa. Al Beruni also records that a senior Āryabhaṭa lived before the Āryabhaṭa of Āryabhaṭīyam. Āryabhaṭa III, the author of Mahārya-Siddhānta lived after Brahmagupta. Let us discuss the birthplace and the date of Āryabhaṭa II.
The Birthplace of Āryabhaṭa II, the author of Āryabhaṭīyam
Bhāskara I, who wrote a commentary on Āryabhaṭīyam, refers to Āryabhaṭa as “Aśmakīya” and Āryabhaṭīyam as “Aśmakatantra”. Evidently, Bhāskara I indicates that Āryabhaṭa belonged to Aśmaka janapada. Nilakantha Somasutvan unambiguously records that Āryabhaṭa was born in Aśmaka Janapada. The Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata texts mention Aśmaka Mahājanapada of Dakśiṇāpatha. Vāyu and Brahmānḍa Purāṇas refer to Aśmaka janapada as a Dākśinātya janapada. Buddhist texts indicate that Aśmaka janapada was located on the banks of Godāvarī River. Aṅguttara Nikāya mentions Aśmaka as Mahājanapada. Buddhist texts also mention another janapada known as Assaka. Assaka is Aśvaka or Aśvakāyana, which is located close to Indus and Kurram Rivers. Varāhamihira’s Brihat-Saṁhitā mentions Aśvaka, not Aśmaka. Greek historians refer to Aśvakāyanas as “Assakonoi”. Some historians mistakenly consider Assaka and Aśmaka as the same but Assaka was located in Afghanistan, close to Indus River, whereas Aśmaka was situated between Godāvarī and Krishna Rivers.
According to the Rāmāyaṇa, Kalmāṣapāda was the son of Ikśvāku dynasty and became the King of Kosala. Madayanti was his queen. She gave birth to a son named Aśmaka from Vasiṣṭha by Niyoga ritual. The Mahābhārata and Purāṇas mention that Kalmāṣapāda was the son of Sudāsa. Thus, the Rāmāyaṇa, the Mahābhārata and Purāṇas indicate that Aśmaka, the son of Ikśvāku King Kalmāṣapāda, was the founder of Aśmaka Kingdom. He also founded the city of Pauḍanya. Thus, Aśmaka Kingdom came into existence in the pre-Rāmāyaṇa era. In Sanskrit, Aśma means stone. Since the area between Godāvarī and Krishna Rivers has many big rocks and boulders, it was named as Aśmaka.
Aśmaka kings supported Pāndavas in the Mahābhārata War under the leadership of Dhriṣṭadyumna. Pāṇini also mentions Aśmaka janapada. Matsya Purāṇa informs us that twenty-five kings of Aśmaka reigned before Mahāpadma Nanda who eliminated Kśatriyas of all janapadas.3 Thus, the Aśmaka Kingdom, established by Ikśvāku King Aśmaka in the pre-Rāmāyaṇa era, was ended by the Nanda Dynasty of Magadha (1664-1596 BCE). Many copper plates of Ikśvāku kings have been found in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. It appears that the descendants of ancient Aśmaka kings re-established themselves later but their kingdom got absorbed into the Kingdom of Śātavāhanas after 828 BCE.
The City of Kusumapura, a Center of Astronomy
Āryabhaṭa himself tells us that he pursued his astronomical research in the city of Kusumapura (आर्यभटस्त्विह निगदति कुसुमपुरे अभ्यर्चितं ज्ञानम). A śloka mentions that Āryabhaṭa was the Kulapati of the Gurukula at Kusumapura.
सिद्धान्तपञ्चकविधावपि दृग्विरुद्ध - मौढ्यओपराग- मुखखेचरचारक्लरिप्तौ।
सूर्य: स्वयं कुसुमपुर्यभवत् कलौ तु भूगोलवित कुलप आर्यभटाभिधान : ॥
(When the methods of five Siddhāntas [Pauliśa, Romaka, Vasiṣṭha, Paitāmaha and Saura] began to yield results conflicting with the observed phenomena such as the setting of planets and the eclipses, etc., there appeared in Kali age at Kusumapura Sūrya himself in the guise of Āryabhaṭa, the Kulapa (Chancellor) well-versed in astronomy.)
Many commentators of Āryabhaṭīyam simply identified Kusumapura as a city where Āryabhaṭa lived. Al Beruni also called him “Āryabhaṭa of Kusumapura”. According to Bhāskara I, Āryabhaṭa was born in Aśmaka janapada. Evidently, Kusumapura was the capital of Aśmaka janapada. The Aśmaka Kingdom declined during the period of the Nanda Dynasty of Magadha (1664-1596 BCE). Mahāpadma Nanda annexed the Aśmaka Kingdom. Kusumapura was the center of education in Aśmaka Janapada, which was located on the banks of the Godāvarī River. Bodhan was the capital of the Aśmaka kings.
In all probability, Kusumpur village in Khanapur sub district of Adilabad district, Telangana, was the real Kusumapura of Aśmaka janapada. Puṣpapura of Magadha cannot be identified as Kusumapura of Āryabhaṭa because Yugapurāṇa mentions that King Śiśunāga's son Udāyī founded Puṣpapura around 2000 BCE. Āryabhaṭa lived 1150 years before the foundation of Puṣpapura of Magadha.
Historians generally agree that Kusumapura was Pataliputra of Magadha Kingdom. In fact, Puṣpapura was another name of Pataliputra. Therefore, historians conclude that Pataliputra was indeed Kusumapura. Āryabhaṭa went to Pataliputra for his studies and became the head of Nalanda University. Historians also quote a passage from the commentary of Bhāskara I to establish that Kusumapura was Pataliputra.
“kusumapure abhyarcitam jñānam ।
It may be noted that the available commentary of Bhāskara I on Āryabhaṭīyam is in fact a commentary of Someśvara on the commentary of Bhāskara I. It is not the original commentary of Bhāskara I. Someśvara himself states at the end of the commentary that “I have presented the gist of Bhāskara’s “Āryabhaṭoktasūtravivriti” in my commentary on Āryabhaṭīyam”.
“spaṣṭārthapratipādakam mṛdudhiyām sūktam prabodhapradam tarkavyākaraṇādiśuddhamatinā
Someśvara also quoted “Mahābhāskarīyam” many times in his commentary. If it is the original commentary of Bhāskara I, why did Bhāskara I quote his own work to justify his viewpoint? It is absurd to imagine that Bhāskara I quoted himself. Moreover, Kerala astronomer Śaṅkaranārāyaṇa clearly tells us that Bhāskara I first wrote his commentary on Āryabhaṭīyam, then Mahābhāskarīyam and thereafter Laghubhāskarīyam.
If the commentary on Āryabhaṭīyam was the first work of Bhāskara I, how could he quote from his second work “Mahābhāskarīyam”? Therefore, the available commentary is essentially the commentary of Someśvara who also presented the gist of Bhāskara I’s commentary and quoted extensively from Mahābhāskarīyam of Bhāskara I.
As I have already explained that Aśmaka was an ancient janapada. It was founded in the pre-Rāmāyaṇa era but Mahāpadma Nanda of Magadha annexed Aśmaka Kingdom in the 17th century BCE. Thus, the Aśmaka Kingdom lost its glory by 1600 BCE. Someśvara lived around 628-629 CE because he mentions that a total of 1986123730 years had elapsed since the beginning of Kalpa. Therefore, Someśvara wrote his commentary in Kaliyuga 3730, i.e. 628-629 CE. Since Someśvara lived 2000 years after the fall of Aśmaka Kingdom, he mistakenly identified Kusumapura as Pataliputra, considering Puṣpapura and Kusumapura to be the same. Therefore, we must identify Kusumapura as the city of Aśmaka janapada and not Pataliputra of Magadha janapada.
The Date of Āryabhaṭa
Āryabhaṭa himself records his date of birth in the treatise “Āryabhaṭīyam” (“Ṣaṣtyabdānām ṣaṣtir -yadā vyatītāḥ trayaśca yugapādāḥ । Tryādhika vimśatir-abdāḥ tadeha mama janmano’tītāḥ ॥). There is a controversy about the exact reading of this verse. TS Narayana Shastry and Kota Venkatachalam claimed that the original manuscripts of Āryabhaṭīyam had the text as “Ṣaṣtyabdānām ṣadbhir” (60 x 6 = 360) and not “Ṣaṣtyabdānām ṣaṣtir” (60 x 60 = 3600) but somebody has edited it during the 19th century. Though they claimed so, they could not produce any concrete evidence to prove it. We have not found any manuscript of Āryabhaṭīyam till date that contained the text as “Ṣaṣtyabdānām ṣadbhir”. All commentators of Āryabhaṭīyam also gave the verse as “Ṣaṣtyabdānām ṣaṣtir” (60 x 60 = 3600). Therefore, we have to accept that the original verse reads as “Ṣaṣtyabdānām ṣaṣtir” and not as “Ṣaṣtyabdānām ṣadbhir”.
Before discussing the exact date mentioned by Āryabhaṭa, it is extremely important to discuss the date of other Indian astronomers who quoted Āryabhaṭa or wrote commentaries on Āryabhaṭīyam.
Varāhamihira (146-74 BCE)
Varāhamihira mentions Āryabhaṭa in his work “Pañchasiddhāntikā” (Laṅkārdharātra-samaye dina-pravrittim jagāda cāryabhaṭaḥ). Varāhamihira records Śaka 427 elapsed (156-155 BCE) as the Karaṇābda for calculation of Ahargaṇa (counting of days) [Saptāśvivedasaṅkhyam Śaka-kālamapāsya Chaitra-śuklādau]. Āmarāja Daivajña, who wrote a commentary on “Khandakhādyaka” of Brahmagupta, mentions that Varāhamihira died in Śaka 509 (74 BCE) [Navādhika-pañca-śata-saṅkhya-śake Varāhamihirācāryo divam gataḥ]. Considering the epoch of Śaka era (583 BCE), Varāhamihira undoubtedly lived between 156 BCE and 74 BCE. A śloka of Kutūhalamañjari mentions that Varāhamihira was born in Jaya Saṁvatsara, i.e., 146 BCE.
Interestingly, Varāhamihira refers to Lāṭadeva, a renowned disciple of Āryabhaṭa. Moreover, Varāhamihira used the verb “Jagāda” in the remote past tense (Parokśa bhūtakāla) with reference to Āryabhaṭa. Thus, Āryabhaṭa was a historical personality for Varāhamihira and both can never be contemporaries. According to Sanskrit grammar, the remote past tense (Parokśa bhūtakāla) cannot be used for living or contemporary persons and is to be used only for events occurred earlier than the lifetime of the user. Therefore, Āryabhaṭa lived at least before the lifetime of Varāhamihira (146-74 BCE).
Bhāskara I (100-20 BCE)
I have already explained above that historians have mistakenly identified Someśvara’s commentary as Bhāskara I’s commentary. Since Someśvara records the date as Kaliyuga 3730 in his commentary on Āryabhaṭīyam, it has been wrongly assumed that Bhāskara I lived around 628-629 CE. In reality, Someśvara lived around 628-629 CE and not Bhāskara I. Therefore, we must fix the date of Bhāskara I based on the internal evidence of his available works “Mahābhāskarīyam” and “Laghubhāskarīyam”.
Interestingly, Sh. Bibhutibhushan Datta wrote an article titled “The Two Bhāskaras” in 1930. He obtained two copies of “Laghubhāskarīyam” from Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, Madras. He says that there is a verse containing Śakābda correction in these manuscripts. The epoch used in that verse is the year 444 (139 BCE) of the Śaka era (583 BCE). Evidently, Bhāskara I must be dated after Śaka 444 (139 BCE). It may be noted that Śaṅkaranārāyaṇa places Bhāskara I after Varāhamihira and Bhāskara II (Śaka 1036-1105 = 453-522 CE) places him before Brahmagupta. Brahmagupta himself records that he was born in Śaka 520 (63 BCE) and wrote “Brahmasphuṭasiddhānta” in Śaka 550 (33 BCE). Brahmagupta also wrote “Khandakhadyaka” in Śaka 587 (3 BCE). Therefore, we can fix the date of Brahmagupta around 63 BCE-17 CE. Thus, Bhāskara I was a junior contemporary of Varāhamihira and senior contemporary of Brahmagupta. Accordingly, we can fix the date of Bhāskara I around 100-20 BCE.