The book from which this article comes is called Kriya Secrets Revealed. Please order it from CreateSpace online at:
Lahiri wrote the following, rather
startling and simplistic, interpretation of the Yuga scriptures in the Bhagavad Gita (c. 1885, Arya Mission
Institution publishers):
“Satya Yuga is to hold onto the Kutastha, or the inner Self.
Treta Yuga is to see the Kutastha.
Dwapara Yuga is to generate Happiness through Kriya practice.
Kali Yuga is to initiate into Kriya” (1:86 Manusanghita).
Originally the
Yugas were defined as simple units of time, which evolved in later writings
into periods of rising and declining virtue in mankind. More recently, Swami
Sri Yukteswar added his own interpretation in a book first published in 1894
entitled The Holy Science. Manusanghita, or the Laws of Manu Commentary by Yogiraj
Shyama Charan Lahiri was published several years earlier; however, it is not
clear that Sri Yukteswar was even aware of its existence, as he never mentioned
it, and had instead offered a totally different and extremely controversial
alternate interpretation. Yukteswar made the following three controversial claims:
- The Yugas were measured in
years, not years of the gods as commonly understood by scholars.
- The precession of the equinoxes
is actually tied to the cycle of the Yugas. Even though the period of precession is currently
accepted as lasting 25,772 years, Yukteswar claimed that this number was a miscalculation
by modern science, and that the length is exactly 24,000 years. He explains
this by saying the period of Earth’s rotation slows up and speeds down to
accommodate this difference.
- The cause of precession is the
rotation of our sun around a dual.
The first
controversial claim was that, in fact, the years mentioned in the Laws of Manu were not years of the gods,
but years of man. One divine year is equal to 360 human years. The following
table illustrates the differences in Sri Yukteswar’s system versus common
belief, and later writings found in other Indian texts.
Age
|
Common interpretation in Years
|
Sri Yukteswar’s interpretation in Years
|
Kali
|
432,000
|
1200
|
Dwapara
|
864,000
|
2400
|
Treta
|
1,296,000
|
3600
|
Krita
|
1,728,000
|
4800
|
When reading the
Laws of Manu as original text it is
easy to find the ambiguity; and thus it is not so farfetched to come to Sri
Yukteswar’s conclusion.
From the first
chapter of the Laws of Manu (c. 1500 BCE):
65. 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.
66. 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.
67. 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.
68. 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.
69. 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.
70. In the other
three ages with their twilights preceding and following, the thousands and
hundreds are diminished by one (in each).
71. These 12
thousand (years) which thus have been just mentioned as the total of four
(human) ages, are called one age of the gods.
72. 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.
73. 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.
The words in
parenthesis are not in the original text. If we look at line 69 in the Sanskrit,
it actually reads:
69. They declare
that the Krita age is four thousand years; the twilight preceding it consists
of as many hundreds, and the twilight following it of the same number.
Since the Laws of Manu are the basis of later
texts which refer to Yugas, Sri Yukteswar’s hypothesis that the years
delineated are human and not divine years seemingly stands on solid ground.
Just from a
practical point of view, since the Yugas are associated with the decline and
rise of mental virtue, times spanning millions of years makes little sense for
a race which has not even existed so long. Even if one believes for whatever
reason that the human race has been around much longer than the archaeological
records support, recent history shows that attitudes and civilizations shift
much faster than that. Even 24,000 years may be too long.
The next claim
by Sri Yukteswar is that the precession of the equinoxes is tied to the Yugas,
and that the 25,772 year cycle is in fact a 24,000 year cycle. This is a
difference of 7% which is extremely significant. His claim that Earth’s
rotations slows down during the ascending arc of the Yugas does not seem to be
observed in the degree required to fit this discrepancy. The Earth’s rotation
is slowing down. The average length of a day has increased by 17 milliseconds
over the past century. If we assume a linear slowing, then this would mean the
length of the day will increase to a little over 2 seconds in 12,000 years to
what it is now. However, a year is not measured by the number of days, but
rather from solstice to solstice. Even if the Earth’s rotation slowed by 7% each
year, it would still take a year because its duration has nothing to do with
the length of a day, but rather the radius of its orbit. In order for Sri
Yukteswar’s hypothesis to be true, the Earth would need to move farther away
from the Sun and then closer every 24,000 years. Besides being against well-established
laws of physics and every laboratory and real world observation ever made since
the beginning of time, this was not the explanation given by Sri Yukteswar.
It seems this
particular claim by Sri Yukteswar could not possibly be valid, even from a
purely logical point of view. This may be because Sri Yukteswar, by his own
omission, did terribly in science, even dropping out of college because he had
difficulty in his first physics class. He decided after that point that
astrology was better suited to his temperament.
And so, we are
then left with only three possibilities: (1) The Laws of Manu are faulty by 7% in the number of years; (2) The Yugas
have nothing to do with the precession of the equinoxes; or (3) The Yugas as
presented in the Laws of Manu are a
hoax. At this point, any of these three explanations are possible.
Until Sri
Yukteswar wrote the Holy Science,
scholars had never made the correlation between the precession of the equinoxes
and the Yugas. Frankly, because, even in the ancient world, it was known that
this precession occurs much faster than the several millions of years required
to pass through an entire cycle.
The third controversial
claim is that the Yugas, the precession of the equinoxes, and man’s spiritual
state are all linked by our movement through space around a
yet-to-be-discovered dual star. (Some claim this is actually a central sun,
Alcyon, located 400 light years away.)
To be clear,
science has yet to discover this star; furthermore, if it did exist, it is
expected to be much farther away, and therefore have a much longer orbital
period than simply 24,000 years. It would also need to be a brown dwarf which
would mean that its gravitational pull would be very weak. It must also be
weak, because we would have detected it already if it were not.
But the nail in
the coffin to Sri Yukteswar’s claim is not that the dual star does not exist,
but that, in fact, it in no way could be the cause of the precession. The cause
of precession has long been known to be caused by the gravitational pull of the
Sun and Moon with insignificant contributions from the other planets. This has
been known since 1600 when Isaac Newton made the calculations in his monumental
work, Principia (1687). A spinning
body when left on its own without outside forces will continue to spin in the
same direction; its axis will always point in one direction in space. To
illustrate this, take a top and spin it on the floor. If the axis is tilted,
you will notice that it will precess or make a small circle with its axis. This
is because the gravitational force of the Earth is causing precession. In the
same way, the Sun and Moon are causing the Earth to precess. There is no other
way that precession can occur. This is the only mechanism without question.
And so if a
dual star did significantly contribute to precession, it would mean that its
gravitational pull on the Earth would have to be at least to within a fraction
of that caused by the Sun and Moon. However, we know from observations that
this is not occurring simply by looking at the tides. We also know this is not
the case by observing the orbits of all the planets in the solar system. We are
rotating around the center of the galaxy every 250 million years. Some alternatively
claim we are rotating around a galactic arm or a central sun such as Alcyon;
however, this would be easily observable, as we would need to be travelling at
10% the speed of light in order to complete one orbit within the required
24,000 years.
Therefore, none
of these explanations given by Sri Yukteswar and others has anything to do with
observed precession, which is clearly caused by the Sun and Moon’s
gravitational effect upon the Earth. Sri Yukteswar’s explanation that we are
moving closer and farther from the galactic center just is not observed in even
the slightest. This third claim in his theory is actually not only illogical
but against all known well-established laws of physics and centuries of careful
observation. If he had completed his first physics class, he would have come to
that understanding.
Is it possible
then that Sri Yukteswar was only partly correct about the Yugas? Yes. It does
appear that the Yugas are more likely in the thousands and not millions of year
ranges. However, he was clearly mistaken about the link between precession and
the Yugas—not only because the time scale is off, but because we would need to
break well-established laws of physics. These are not just established laws of
physics, but of logic and observation which anyone can make when they spin a
top, or use an amateur telescope, or measure the tides.
Since Yukteswar
was wrong about the solar system moving closer and farther from the Seat of
Brahma (that which theoretically controls man’s virtue), then what is the
explanation for the rising and declining virtue in man? According to science,
it has everything to do with changing influences over time. In fact, man may
not be getting more but rather less intelligent as technology lessens the
pressure of survival. In fact the Laws of
Manu mentioned the Yugas as an answer to the question: Why is man becoming
less spiritual? Why was he becoming more material? The real answer may have
nothing to do with hidden, unseen rays coming from the center of the galaxy,
but more to do with the rise of technology, and agriculture replacing man’s
reliance upon his divine inner voice. The logical trappings of the material
world had busied him. Instead of relying upon intuition to know when to plant
his crop or hunt, he now used the almanacs and levies to control water flow.
There were more mouths to feed and less time to contemplate spiritual issues. Intuition
was a necessity, but with material abundance had become a luxury.
In conclusion, we
really need to ask ourselves as Kriyabans why it even matters if we are moving
through the cycles of the ages. Since we are allotted such a short period of
time on Earth, perhaps the answer is “No, it does not.” The concept of cyclical
ages does bring us some sense of certainty in a world of change as was the
original intention of the Laws of Manu.
However, a Kriyaban should not welcome nor relish certainty. He or she should
be rather disinterested in everything outside other than that which fulfills
his Sadhana; therefore, the genius of Lahiri’s interpretation of the Yugas. Only Kriya is Truth; the rest is false.
Trust nothing external to yourself, even if donning the Swami robe and claims
of avatarship.