०६ मन्वन्तराणि कालमानञ्च

There are Six other Manus, high-souled and mighty, who belong to the same race as this Svāyambhuva Manu, and have called into being, each his own offsprings.—(61)

उपाध्यायो धर्मान् पृष्टो जगदुत्पत्त्यादि वर्णितवान् । तथैव शिष्यो ऽपि तन्नियुक्तस् तच्छेषम् एव वर्णयितुम् आरब्धः ।** अस्येति** साक्षात्कारेण मनुं प्रत्यवमृश्यति । अस्मदुपाध्यायस्य स्वायंभुव इत् ख्यातस्य षड् अन्ये ऽपरे मनवो वंश्या एकस्मिन् वंशे कुले जाताः सर्वे वंश्याः । सर्वे हि साक्षाद् ब्रह्मणा सृष्टा इत्य् एककुलसंभवाद् वंश्या उच्यन्ते । अथ वा एकस्मिन् कार्ये ऽधिकृता वंश्या एककर्मान्वयेन प्राणिनां वंशव्यवहारो भवति । “द्वौ मुनी व्याकरणस्य वंश्यौ” । तं¹ चैकं धर्मं दर्शयति सृष्टवन्तः प्रजाः स्वाः स्वाः इति । मन्वन्तरे मन्वन्तरे यस्य मनोर् अधिकारः स एव पजानां पूर्वमन्वन्तरविनष्टानां स्रष्टा पालयिता च । अतो येन याः प्रजाः सृज्यन्ते तास् तस्य स्वा भवन्ति ॥ १.६१ ॥

When the Teacher (Manu) was asked (in the beginning of this work) to explain Duties, he proceeded to describe the origination of the world and other cognate matters; hence when the pupil (Bhṛgu) has been directed to expound the Law, he also begins with the remaining parts of the same process of world-creation.

‘Of this’—the pronoun refers to the Manu before their eyes;—our teacher, who is known as ‘Svāyambhuva.’ There are six other Manus who belong to the same race as himself,—persons horn in the same family are said to ‘belong to the same race,’ and since all Manus are called into being directly by Brahmā himself, they are born in the same family, and are hence said to ‘belong to the same race.’ Or, persons engaged in the same work are also said ‘to belong to the same race’; as a matter of fact, living beings are often distributed among ‘races’ in accordance with the work done by them; e.g., we have such statements as—‘related to grammar there are two sages who belong to the same race.’

The text proceeds to point out one such work common to the Manus:—“They have called into being each his own offsprings”; in each Manvantara, created beings destroyed during the previous Manvantara are again created and protected by that particular Manu who holds sway over that Manvantara; hence the offsprings that each of them creates are called ‘his own.’—(61)

061 Six other high-minded, very powerful Manus, who belong to the race of this Manu, the descendant of the Self-existent (Svayambhu), and who have severally produced created beings,

[These six Manus are]—Svārociṣa, Uttama, Tāmasa, Raivata, Cākṣuṣa, and the glorious Vivasvat-suta (the Son of Vivasvat).—(62)

तान् मनून् नामतो निर्दिशति । महातेजा इति विशेषनम् । अन्यानि नामानि रूढ्या निबन्धेन वा । विवस्वत्सुत इति समासपदरूपं शब्दान्तरं कृष्णसर्पनरसिंहादिशब्दवत् ॥ १.६२ ॥

The aforesaid Manus are now mentioned by name.

‘Glorious’ is a qualifying epithet.—The other words are names; some being merely conventional, and others based upon relationship; the last name ‘Vivasvat-suta,’ ‘Son of Vivasvat,’ is a different kind of word; it is a name bearing the form of a compound; just like the names ‘Black-serpent,’ ‘Narasiṃha’ (Man-Lion) and the like.

062 (Are) Svarokisha, Auttami, Tamasa, Raivata, Kakshusha, possessing great lustre, and the son of Vivasvat.

These seven almighty Manus, of whom Svāyambhuva is the first, having called into existence the whole of this world, consisting of movable and immovable beings, sustained it, each during his own regime.—(63)

अत्र सप्त मनवो मया प्रोक्ताः । अन्यत्र चतुर्दश संपद्यन्ते । स्वे स्वे ऽनतरे ऽवसरे प्राप्ते ऽधिकारकाले इति यावत् । उत्पाद्य प्रजा आपुः पालितवन्तः । स्वे स्वे ऽन्तरे ऽधिकारावसरे, यस्य मनोर् यस्मिन् काले प्राप्तः सर्गस्थितिपालनाधिकारः । अन्ये त्व् अन्तरशब्दं मासादिशब्दवत् कालविशेषवाचिनं मन्यन्ते । तद् अयुक्तम् । मनुशब्दोपसंहितः कालविशेषविषयो मन्वन्तरो नाम कालो, न तु केवल इति ॥ १.६३ ॥

Here seven Manus have been mentioned by me; elsewhere they are spoken of as fourteen.

‘Each during his own regime’—during his time, i.e., during the time of his sovereignty.—‘Having called into being’ the offerings, they ‘maintained,’ nourished, them.—‘During his own regime’—means during the time of his sovereignty; i.e., that Manu whose time or turn it was to create and maintain the continuity of the world.

Others explain the term ‘antara’ as denoting a particular time-period, just like the words ‘month’ &c.

But this is not right; it is only when the term ‘antara’ occurs along with the term ‘Manu’ (i.e., in the compound ‘Manvantara’) that it becomes expressive of a time-period,—i.e., the time-period known ns ‘Manvantara,’—and not when it stands by itself (as it does in the text).

063 These seven very glorious Manus, the first among whom is Svayambhuva, produced and protected this whole movable and immovable (creation), each during the period (allotted to him).

Ten and eight ‘nimeṣas’ (should be known as) one ‘Kāṣṭhā’; thirty such (Kāṣṭhās) one ‘Kalā’; thirty ‘Kalās’ one ‘muhūrta’; and as many ‘muhūrtas’ one ‘Ahorātra’ (Day and Night).—(64)

स्थितिप्रलयकालपरिमाणनिरूपणार्थं ज्योतिःशास्त्रगोचरं कालविभागं वक्तुम् उपक्रमते । अष्टादश निमेषाः काष्ठा नाम कालो भवति । त्रिंशत्काष्ठाः कलाः । त्रिंशत्कला एको मुहूर्तः स्यात् । तावतः त्रिंशद् इत्य् अर्थः । त्रिंशन् मुहूर्तः अहोरात्रम् । विद्याद् इति क्रियापदम् आहृत्य तावद् इति द्वितीयाबहुवचनम् । अथ² को ऽयं निमेषो नाम । अक्षिपक्ष्मणोर् नैसर्गिककम्प उन्मेषसहचारी । अन्यैस् तु पठितं यावता कालेनाविकृतम्³ अक्षरम् उच्चार्यते स निमेषः ॥ १.६४ ॥

The author now begins to describe the measures of time, which are taught in the Science of Astronomy, for the purpose of determining the exact duration of time of the continuance of the world and its dissolution.

Eighteen ‘nimeṣas’ go to make that measure of time which is known as ‘Kāṣṭhā’;—thirty ‘Kāṣṭhās’ make one ‘Kalā’;—thirty ‘Kalās’ make one ‘Muhūrta,’ and ‘as many’—i.e., thirty;—thirty ‘muhurtas’ make one ‘Ahorātra’ (Day and Night).

‘Should be known as’—this verb has got to be supplied.

‘Tāvataḥ,’ ‘a s many,’ is the Accusative Plural form.

“What is it that is called Nimeṣa?”

‘Nimeṣa is the natural winking of the Eye-lashes, which accompanies every opening of the eye. Other people have declared that ‘Nimeṣa’ is that time which is taken in the distinct utterance of one letter-sound.—(64)

‘Nimeṣa’—(1) The time taken by one wink of the eye, or (2) the time taken in the distinct pronouncing of one syllable.

‘Tāvaṭaḥ’—in the Accusative necessitates the supplying of the Transitive verb ‘vidyāṭ,’ ‘one should know’. Nārāyaṇa and Nandana however favour the nominative form ‘ṭāvanṭaḥ’ which obviates the necessity of adding any words.

Cf. in this connection Wilson’s Viṣṇu-Purāṇa—Ed. Hall, Vol. I, pp. 47-50.

**(Verse 64-73)
**

Mahābhārata, 12.231.12-31.—

• 15 Nimeṣas make one Kāṣṭhā,
• 30 Kāṣṭhās make one Kalā,
• 30 Kalās make 1 Muhūrta,
• 30 Muhūrtas make 1 Day or Night,
• 30 Days and Nights make 1 Month,
• 12 Months make 1 Year
• 2 Ayanas solstices (Northern and Southern). make 1 Year

‘In the world of human beings it is the Sun that divides the Day and Night, the night is for the sleep of creatures and the day for active operations;—the Month constitutes the Day-Night of the Pitṛs, the brighter half being the Day, for active operations and the darker half, the Night, for sleeping. The year constitutes the Day-Night of the gods, the northern solstice, the Night…. 4,000 years constitute the Kṛtayuga and each succeeding yuga [Tretāyuga, Dvāparayuga, Kaliyuga] is a quarter less, etc., etc.’

Arthaśāstra, p. 265.—‘The divisions of these are the following—Tuṭa, Lava, Nimeṣa, Kāṣṭhā, Kalā, Nāḍīkā, Muhūrta, Divasa, Rātri, Pakṣa, Māsa, Ṛtu, Ayana, Saṃvatsara and Yuga.

*= During the months of Chaitra and Aśvina; during other months the extent of the day and night vary to the extent of three Muhūrtas.

064 Eighteen nimeshas (twinklings of the eye, are one kashtha), thirty kashthas one kala, thirty kalas one muhurta, and as many (muhurtas) one day and night.

The Sun divides the ‘Day’ and ‘Night’ of Men and Gods; [of others] what is conducive to the repose of beings is ‘Night,’ and what is conducive to activity is ‘Day.’—(65)

अहश् च रात्रिश् च अहोरात्रे । तयोर् विभागं करोति आदित्यः । उदित आदित्ये यावत् तदीया रश्मयो दृश्यन्ते तावद् अहर्व्यवहारः । अस्तम् इते तु प्राग् उदयाद् रात्रिव्यवहारः । मनुष्यलोके देवलोके वा । यत्र तर्ह्य् आदित्यो न व्याप्नोति रश्मिभिस् तत्र कथम् अयम् अहोरात्रविभागो विज्ञेयो ऽत आह । रात्रिः स्वप्नायेति । स्वयंप्रभेषु भूतेषु नित्यप्रकाशित्वात् कर्मचेष्टाकार्यारम्भेण स्वापेन च विभागः । यथैवौषधीनां नियतः प्रादुर्भावकालः स्वाभाव्याद् एवं कर्मचेष्टास्वापाव् अपि कालस्वभावत एव नियतौ ॥ १.६५ ॥

‘Ahorātra’— ‘day’ and ‘night’; of these the Sun makes the division; the Sun having risen, so long as his rays are visible, it is called ‘day’; and from the time that the Sun sets to the time that he rises again, it is called ‘night.’ Such is the case in the region of men and in the region of Gods.

“In a place where the Sun does not reach with his rays,—how is one to make this division of ‘day’ and ‘night’?”

The answer to this is given in the second line—‘what is conducive &c.’ For such beings as are self-illumined, as the light is always there (and it never ceases) the division of ‘day’ and ‘night’ is made according to the undertaking of actions and going to sleep. Just as in the case of herbs, the time for sprouting is fixed by nature, exactly in the same manner, in the case of the beings in question, the times of ‘activity’ and ‘repose’ are fixed by the nature, of time itself [and are not variable].—(65)

‘Rātriḥ svapnāya &c.’—This line supplies the definition of ‘Day’ and ‘Night’ for those regions that are beyond the reach of the Sun;—‘Day’ being the period of activity, and ‘Night’ the period of repose.

See the comparative notes for [Verse 1.64 (Measures of Time)].

065 The sun divides days and nights, both human and divine, the night (being intended) for the repose of created beings and the day for exertion.

One month (of men) forms the ‘day and night’ of the ‘Pitṛs’; and their division is by fortnights: the darker fortnight, conducive to activity, is ‘Day,’ and the lighter fortnight, conducive to repose, is ‘Night.’—(66)

यो मनुष्याणां मासः स पितॄणाम् अहर्निशम् । कतरद् अहः कतमा च रात्रिर् इति प्रविभागः । इदम् अहर् इयम् रात्रिर् इत्य् एष विभागः । पक्षयोः पञ्चदशरात्रिसंमितयोर् अर्धमासाख्ययोर् व्यवस्थितः । पक्षाश्रित इत्य् अर्थः । एकः पक्षो ऽहर् अपरो रात्रिस् तयोश् च भिन्नस्वभावत्वान् नियतक्रमत्वाच् च विशेषम् आह । अहः कृष्णः पक्षः । शुक्लः पक्षः शर्वरी रात्रिः । “कर्मचेष्टाभ्यः” इति युक्तः पाठः, यथा “स्वप्नाय” इति । तादर्थ्यम् एव विषयभावेन विवक्षितम् । वृत्तानुरोधाद् अतः सप्तमी ॥ १.६६ ॥

That which is the ‘month’ of men is a ‘day and night’ of the ‘Pitṛs.’ As regards ‘division’ as to which part is ‘day’ and which ‘night,’—this division, that ‘this is day and that is night,’ is determined ‘by fortnights,’ i.e., the fifteen days, which are known by the name of ‘half-month.’ That is, the said division is based upon fortnights: one fortnight is ‘day,’ and another fortnight is ‘night.’ In view of the fact that ‘day’ and ‘night’ differ in their character and occur in a fixed order of sequence, the author adds the following distinction:—The darker fortnight is ‘day,’ and the brighter fortnight, ‘night.’

The right reading (in view of the meaning intended) would be ‘Karmaceṣṭābhyaḥ’ (the Dative form), just as we have ‘svapnāya’; for the meaning meant to be conveyed is that the day is for the purpose of ‘activity.’ Hence the Locative ending in the text can be explained only as used on account of the exigencies of metre.—(66)

The ‘day’ and ‘night’ of Pitṛs is regulated by the Moon, just as those of gods and men is by the Sun.

This verse has been quoted in the Kālaviveka (p. 112) in support of the view that the seasons and other calculations are not governed by the ‘Lunar Month,’—which only serves the purpose of being the ‘Day-Night’ of Pitṛs; the darker fortnight being their ‘day,’ and the brighter fortnight ‘night’.

The same work quotes it again on p. 308, in support of the view that ‘from Pratipat to Amāvāsyā is the dark fortnight, and from Pratipat to Purṇamāsi is the Bright Fortnight.’

See the comparative notes for [Verse 1.64 (Measures of Time)].

066 A month is a day and a night of the manes, but the division is according to fortnights. The dark (fortnight) is their day for active exertion, the bright (fortnight) their night for sleep.

One ‘year’ (of men) forms the ‘Day and Night’ of the Gods; and the division of these is that the ‘Northern course’ is the ‘Day,’ and the ‘Southern Course’ the ‘Night.’—(67)

वर्षं मनुष्याणां द्वादसमासास् तद् एकम् अहोरात्रं देवानाम् । तोयोश् च विभाग उदगयनदकिष्णायनाभ्याम् । तत्रोदीचीं दिशम् अभिप्रतिष्ठमानस्यादित्यस्य षण्मासा उदगयनं भवति । अयनं गमनम् अधिष्ठानं वा । तस्यां दिशि षण्मासान् आदित्य उदेति । ततः परावृत्तस्य दक्षिणायनम् । तथा हि दक्षिणां दिशम् आक्रम्योदीचीं हित्वा ह्य् उदयं करोति ॥ १.६७ ॥

‘One year,’ of men,—i.e., twelve months,—‘forms the Day and Night of the Gode.’—The division of these is by means of the ‘Northern Course’ and the ‘Southern Course’; the six months during which the Sun moves towards the North is the ‘Northern Course,’ ‘Udagayanam’; the term ‘ayana’ standing for moving or occupying; the meaning being that during the six months the Sun rises towards that particular quarter. Turning hack from that, there comes the ‘Southern course’; during these six months the Sun abandons the Northern quarters and rises towards the South.—(67)

067 A year is a day and a night of the gods; their division is (as follows): the half year during which the sun progresses to the north will be the day, that during which it goes southwards the night.

Learn in brief, in due order, the measure of the Brahmic ‘day and night,’ as also that of the ‘Time-cycles’ (Yugas) one by one.—(68)

ब्रह्मा प्रजानां स्रष्टा, तस्य यो लोकस् तत्र क्षपाहस्याहोरात्रस्य यत् प्रमाणं युगानां चैतत् समासतः संक्षेपेण निबोधत मत्सकाशाच् छृणुत । एकैकशः एकैकस्य युगस्य ।

• वक्ष्यमाणस्य प्रकरणस्य पिण्डार्थकथनार्थो ऽयं श्लोकः श्रोतॄणाम् अवधानार्थः । तथा च संबुध्यन्ते निबोधतेति । प्रकृते कालविभागे पुनः प्रतिज्ञानं प्रकरणान्तरत्वज्ञापनार्थम्⁴ । तेन वक्ष्यमाणो ऽर्थो न शास्त्रारम्भशेष एव, अपि तु धर्मायापि । तथा च वक्ष्यति “ब्राह्मं पुण्यम् अहर् विदुः” (म्ध् १.७३) इति । तद्विज्ञानाच् च पुण्यं भवतीत्य् अर्थः ॥ १.६८ ॥

‘Brahmā,’—The creator of living beings, has a region of his own; and what is going to be described is of Day and Night as obtaining in that region;—‘as also of the Time-cycles.’—‘Learn’ all this, ‘in brief,’ summarily; i.e., hear it from me.—‘one by one’—that is, of each time-cycle separately.

The present verse serves as the summary of what is going to be described, intended to draw the attention of the audience; it is with this view that they are exhorted to ‘learn.’—The ‘division of time’ having been already mentioned as the subject-matter of the context, the reiterated promise (implied in the exhortation to ‘learn’) is meant to indicate that a fresh subject is going to be introduced; the idea being that what is going to be described now is not merely what remains of the afore-mentioned ‘division of time,’ but it is also conducive to merit; as will be directly stated in verse 73, where it is stated that ‘Brahma’s day is known to be sacred’; which means that the knowledge of it brings merit.—(68)

068 But hear now the brief (description of) the duration of a night and a day of Brahman and of the several ages (of the world, yuga) according to their order.

They say that four thousnd ‘years’ are what is the ‘Kṛta-cycle’; as many hundred ‘years’ form the ‘Juncture’ (Morning); and of equal measure is the ‘Juncture-end’ (Evening).—(69)

प्रकृतत्वाद् दैविकानि वर्षाणि परिगृह्यन्ते । तथा च पुराणकारः-

• इत्य् एतद् ऋषिभिर् गीतं दिव्यया संख्यया द्विजाः ।

• दिव्येनैव प्रमाणेन युगसंख्या प्रकीर्तिता ॥

तानि चत्वारि सहस्राणि कृतयुगं नाम कालः । तस्य कृतयुगस्य तावन्त्यैव शतानि चत्वारि संध्या । संध्यांशस् तस्य तथाविधस् तत्परिमाणश् चत्वारिवर्षशतानीत्य् अर्थः । यत्रातीतस्य⁵ कालस्यागामिनश् च स्वभावानुवृत्तिः सा संध्या । उभयकालधर्मानुविधानं संध्यांसः, यत्रेषत्पूर्वधर्मानुवृत्तिर् भूयसी भाविनो युगस्य ॥ १.६९ ॥

The ‘years’ here spoken of are taken as the years of the Gods; as it is this that has been mentioned last. Says the Author of the Purāṇas—‘O Brāhmaṇas, all this has been described by the divine measure: the measure of the Time-Cycles has been described by the divine measure.’—‘Four thousand’ such ‘years’ of the Gods constitute the Time-Cycle known as ‘Kṛta’:—of the ‘Kṛta’ cycle, ‘as many’, i.e. four ‘hundred’ ‘years’ form the ‘Juncture’; and of the same ‘Kṛta’ Cycle, the ‘Juncture-end’ is consisting of a period of four hundred years. That period of time which partakes in equal degree of the character of the preceding as well as that of the succeeding Cycle, is called ‘Juncture’; and ‘Juncture-end’ is that period of time which also partakes of the character of both, but in a less degree, of the preceding and, to a greater degree, of the succeeding Cycle.

The text contains the word ‘tāvacchatī’; and it is necessary to And out the rule under which the final I has been lengthened. The only grammatical explanation of the word possible is that it should be expounded as ‘tāvat śatānām sa māhārah’, ‘the collection of as many hundreds’; the term ‘tāvat’, ending in the ‘vatu’ affix, becomes a numeral according to Pāṇini’s Sūtra 1.1.23, by which words ending in ‘vatu’ are regarded as ‘numerals’; so that the said compound having a numeral for its first number becomes a ‘Dvigu’, according to Pāṇini 2.1.25; and since the Feminine affix ṭāp is precluded from Dvigu compounds, we have the Feminine affix ṅīp; and the word ‘tāvat’ means ‘one whose measure is tat (that)’: it being derived from the pronoun ‘tat’ with the ‘vatup’ affix, added according to Pāṇini’s Sūtra 5.2.39; the vowel in ‘tat’ being lengthened by the sūtra 6.3.91. If the form ‘tāvātī’ were explained in any other way,—for instance, if it were taken as a Bahubrīhi compound, being expounded as ‘tāvanti śatāni yasyāḥ’,—then, since the word ‘śata’ ends in ‘a’, it would take the Feminine affix ‘ṭāp’ according to Pāṇini 4.1.1; so that the form would be ‘tāvaccatā.’ This is the meaning.—(69)

‘Sandhyā’—it is not clear whether the succeeding or preceding twilight is meant. Kullūka, and possibly Medhātithi, accepts the former view.

Medhātithi (p. 34, l. 24) for ‘Svabhāvānuvṛttiḥ’; how would it do to read ‘Svabhāvānanuvṛttiḥ’—the meaning being that the preceding Twilight has the character of neither Day nor Night?

069 They declare that the Krita age (consists of) four thousand years (of the gods); the twilight preceding it consists of as many hundreds, and the twilight following it of the same number.

In each of the other time-cycles, along with their ‘junctures’ and ‘juncture-ends’, the ‘thousands’ and ‘hundreds’ are reduced by one.—(70)

कृतयुगाद् अन्येषु त्रेतादिषु त्रिषु युगेषु संध्यासंध्यांशसहितेषु वर्तन्ते । हानिर् अपायः । एकं सहस्रं हनिं त्रेतायां कृतयुगात् । एवं त्रेतातो द्वापरस्य द्वापरात् कलेः । एवं च त्रीणि वर्षसहस्राणि त्रेता द्वे द्वापर एकं कलिर् इति भवति । शतानि हीयन्ते संध्यातदंशयोः । विशिष्टो ऽहःसंघातो युगाख्यस् तस्य विशेषाः कृतादयः ।

• “तावच् छती” इति ईकारः स्मर्तव्यः । इह स्मृतिः । तावतां शतानां समारारः । तावच् छब्दस्य “बहुगणवतुडति” (पाण् १.१.२३) इति वत्वन्तत्वात् संख्यासंज्ञायां सत्यां “संख्यापूर्वो द्विगुः” (पाण् २.१.५२) इति द्विगुसंज्ञायां सत्याम् टापो ऽपवादो “द्विगोः” (पाण् ४.१.२१) इति ङीप् । शतं⁶ परिमाणम् अस्य इति । “यत्तदेतेभ्यः”⁷ (पाण् ५.२.३९) इति वतुप् । “आ सर्वनाम्नः” (पाण् ६.३.९१) इत्य् आकारः । अन्यथा बहुव्रीहौ तावन्ति शतानि यस्याः, शतशब्दस्याकारान्तत्वात् “अजाद्यतष्टाप्” (पाण् ४.१.४) इति टापा भवितव्यम् । तस्मिन् कृते तावच्छता इति स्याद् इत्य् अभिप्रायः ॥ १.७० ॥

Among the three Time-cycles other then the Kṛta,—i.e. in Tretā and the rest,—along with their ‘junctures’ and ‘juncture-ends’,—the ‘thousands’ are reduced (in each) by one; ‘reduction’ means dimunition. That is in Tretā, the number of ‘thousand,’ is one less than that in Kṛta; similarly the number in Dvāpara is one less than that in Tretā; and that in Kali is one less than that in Thus Tretā consists of three thousand years, Dvāpara of two thousand years, and Kali of one thousand years. Similarly the number of ‘hundred’ goes on diminishing in the ‘junctures’ and ‘juncture-ends’ of the Cycles.

‘Time-cycle’, ‘yuga’, is the name given to a particular aggregate of days; and ‘Kṛtā’ and the rest are particular names of the said ‘Time-cycle’.—(70)

070 In the other three ages with their twilights preceding and following, the thousands and hundreds are diminished by one (in each).

This period of the four time-cycles that have been just computed,—twelve thousand such periods are called the ‘time-cycle of the gods.’—(71)

यद् एतद् इति लौकिकी वाचो युक्तिः । समुदायेन प्रक्रान्तो ऽर्थः परामृश्यते । यद् एतच् चतुर्युगं परिसंख्यातं चत्वारि सहस्राणीत्यादिना निश्चितसंख्यम् आदौ प्राग् अस्माच् छ्लोकात्- एतस्य⁸ चतुर्युगस्य द्वादशभिः सहस्रैर् देवानां युगम् उच्यते । द्वादशचतुर्युगसहस्राणि देवयुगं नाम काल इत्य् अर्थः । सहस्रशब्दात् स्वार्थे ऽण् । द्वादशचतुर्युगसहस्राणि परिमाणं यस्मिन्न् इति विग्रहः ॥ १.७१ ॥

‘Yadetat’ (in the sense of ‘this’) is an ordinary expression; and as a whole it means that which has been spoken of.—‘This period of four Time-cycles that has been computed’—i.e., the exact number of years in which have been definitely determined before this verse,—e.g. in verse 69, where the number of years in the Time-cycles is declared to be four thousand etc., etc.,—‘Twelve thousand’ of this period of four Time-cycles are called the ‘Time-cycle of the Gods’. That is to say the Divine Cycle consists of twelve thousand ‘Four-Cycles.’

The word ‘Sāhasram’ is derived from the word ‘sahasra’ with the reflexive affix ‘aṇ’; and the compound ‘dvādaśasāhasram’ is to be expounded as ‘dvādaśa-sahasrāṇi parimāṇe yasmin’, ‘that in which the measure is that of twelve-thousands’.—(71)

Burnell remarks—“According to the commentators the translation should run thus: ‘The four Yugas just reckoned (consisting of) twelve thousand years are called a Yuga of the gods.” This is the translation adopted by Buhler also. What is not quite accurate is the statement that such a translation is “according to the commentators”,—when we find that according to Medhātithi at least, the meaning of the verse is as it is represented by Burnell in his text. Medhātithi says explicitly—‘dvādaśa-chaturyuga—sahasrāṇi devayugam nāma kāla ityarthaḥ’.

In face of the fact that the words of the text themselves convey this meaning—which involves the ‘lengthening’ of the ordinary into divine years,—it is difficult to understand Burnell’s remark that this ‘lengthening’ ‘is the work of commentators.’ On the contrary, on Burnell’s own showing, the ‘commentators’ would appear to have shortened the great length of the divine year clearly expressed by the words of the text.

071 These twelve thousand (years) which thus have been just mentioned as the total of four (human) ages, are called one age of the gods.

The ‘Time-cycles’ of the Gods, one thousand in number, should be regarded as one ‘day’ of brahmā; and (his) ‘night’ also is of the same extent.—(72)

देवयुगसाहस्रं ब्राह्मम् एकम् अहः । तावती ब्रह्मणो रात्रिर् देवयुगसहस्रम् एव । परिसंख्यया संख्यानेन यत् सहस्रम् इति संबन्धः । श्लोकपूरणार्थश् चायम् अनुवादः । न ह्य् असंख्यया सहस्रादिव्यवहारः । हेतौ तृतीया ॥ १.७२ ॥

Thousand ‘Time-cycles’ of the Gods make one ‘day’ of Brahmā.—Brahmā’s night also ‘is of the same extent’—i.e., as long as thousand ‘Time-cycles’ of the Gods.—‘In number’ —i.e., which in computation, is one thousand; the adding of this term is only for the purpose of tilling up the verse; for a thing cannot be spoken of as a‘thousand’ except in number.

The instrumental ending (in ‘Sāṅkhyayā’) denotes causality.

072 But know that the sum of one thousand ages of the gods (makes) one day of Brahman, and that his night has the same length.

Those who know the ‘Day of Brahmā’ as ending with the (said) thousand ‘time-cycles,’ and the ‘night’ also as of the same extent,—are people who alone know what is ‘day and night’, and acquire merit.—(73)

युगसहस्रम् अन्तो यस्याह्नस् तद् युगसहस्रान्तम् । ये मनुष्या⁹ एतज् जानते ते ऽहोरात्रविदः । किं तेषाम् इत्य् अपेक्षायां पुण्यं भवतीति संबन्धः । ब्राह्मस्याह्नः परिमाणवेदनं पुण्यम् अतस् तद् वेदितव्यम् इति स्तुत्या विधिप्रतिपत्तिः ॥ १.७३ ॥

‘Yugasahasrāntam,’—‘that of which the thousand cycles are the end;’—those men who know this, ‘they are the people who alone know what is Day and Night.’

If it be asked—what happens to the people who know this?—it is added that ‘they acquire merit.’ Such is the connection (of the word ‘puṇyam’). The sense is that ‘knowledge of Brahmā’s Day and Night is conducive to merit, and hence this knowledge should be acquired;’—this injunction (of acquiring the said knowledge) being implied by the valediction contained in the verse.—(73)

‘Puṇyam’—Medhātithi takes this not merely as an epithet of ‘ahaḥ,’ but as constituting a distinct sentence by itself.

073 Those (only, who) know that the holy day of Brahman, indeed, ends after (the completion of) one thousand ages (of the gods) and that his night lasts as long, (are really) men acquainted with (the length of) days and nights.