Talk:Hindu calendar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Time assessment rating comment[edit]

Want to help write or improve articles about Time? Join WikiProject Time or visit the Time Portal for a list of articles that need improving.
—Yamara ✉ 18:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

This page only relates to the Hindu religious calendar. It would be good if there were also pages about the Indian secular calendars, especially Saka and Vikrama Samvat. - Posted by IP 195.93.21.5

I agree that the page is incomplete. However, if I am not mistaken, the Saka and Vikrama are only eras or methods of counting the years used by the Hindu solar and lunisolar calendars already described in the article. One of these days, either I or Jamadagni may add them (hint). — Joe Kress 17:46, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Usually the Shaka and Vikrama systems are used for year counting only with the lunisolar calendar. AFAIK the solar calendar (which I myself follow) uses only the counting from the beginning of the Kali Yuga, though our almanacs do mention (only once, at the beginning of the year) the current year number in the Shaka and Vikrama systems. The Shaka system has also been adopted by the Indian Government for the Indian National Calendar. I think it would be better to have a separate article for discussing these eras, since as Malaiya posted (see below), there is some history behind the different Samvats being used, especially the Shaka and Vikrama. So I think, Joe, that it would be better to simply update the Samvat article, and link to there from here, instead of bringing that here. Jamadagni 10:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think with 'Indian secular calendar' was meant the scheme described here, and used officially. As far as I can tell 'Vikrama Samvat' is somewhat similar [1]. This is a confusing topic - it should probably be put on a seperate page. squell 27 September 2005
Indian National Calendar is a seperate article now squell 22:31, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think squell is right, and IP 195.93.21.5 was under the misconception that "Shaka" and "Vikrama Samvat" mean some secular calendars that are used in India, possibly because the only secular Indian calendar, the Indian National Calendar uses the Shaka Samvat. And, methinks, if that IP 195.93.21.5 was searching for something secular, why was s/he looking for it under the explicitly religious word "Hindu"? Jamadagni 10:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Samvat is a common term using in the context of Indian history. Conversion from a samvat (there are several, and often with different computation methods) to common era can result in an error of one year (perhaps more). Thus a separate page on the term samvat is needed to address different samvats and variation in computation.

There is a significant history (and controversy) behind Vikram and Shaka Samvats, that needs to be added to the samvat page sometime. The Sikhs have adapted a new samvat recently, after considerable disagreement for a long time. - Malaiya

Well I flatter myself that I've done some serious cleaning-up here - edited articles this afternoon (in chronological order):

  1. Nepali calendar
  2. Vikrama Samvat (redir to Samvat)
  3. Vikram calendar (redir to Samvat)
  4. Bikram Sambat
  5. Samvat
  6. Hindu calendar
  7. Samvat (minor - capitalization)

I've

  1. given content to the Nepali calendar from Bikram Sambat - previously the former was redirected to the latter
  2. redirected Vikrama Samvat to Samvat instead of Vikram calendar
  3. added some text from Vikram calendar to Samvat and redirected there
  4. added disambiguation to Bikrama Sambat
  5. rewrote the Samvat article, and
  6. added a link to the Samvat article in the Hindu calendar article (and other small changes)

I hope Joe and the other mages here approve. - Jamadagni 11:54, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

epoch[edit]

This article says epoch at 3102BCE 23rd jan while Kali Yuga says 3102BCE 18th Feb. Which one is correct--nids(♂) 00:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both dates are correct, being the same day in two different calendars, the Julian and Gregorian. The difference is due to the Gregorian calendar dropping three leap days every 400 years. However, this article violates the Wikipedia Manual of Style which requires all dates before 1582 to be in the Julian calendar. I'm changing it. — Joe Kress 03:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Moved from User talk:Joe Kress)
can we keep both the dates. There can be a future policy wherein all dates before 1st century will have to be defined in proleptic gregorian calender. Moreover we have precedence too, like in case of shakespeare and george washington, we have defined both the dates. Also, most of the time in India, the date is reported in proleptic Gregorian calender as 23rd Jan. Thanks.nids(♂) 08:04, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK. If the epoch of the the Hindu calendar is usually given in the proleptic Gregorian calendar when Indian scholars discuss it, then that is similar to the Maya calendar where many Maya scholars insist on quoting the Maya epoch in the proleptic Gregorian calendar. However, this would be in contrast with Hindu calendar literature written by Western scholars who give the epoch only in the Julian calendar. The dual dates in William Shakespeare and George Washington do not apply to either calendar article because both the Julian and Gregorian calendars were in use during their lifetimes, hence have a special exemption in the Manual of Style. — Joe Kress 16:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is a Wikipedia article and must follow its Manual of Style. To be understandable to Indian readers, I am willing to include the Gregorian date, but to obey the Manual of Style, the Julian date must be first. I don't think it is necessary to explain what "proleptic" means here, indeed, I am willing to not even mention it. I think using "first" year only fosters confusion when the epoch is not at the start of year one, thus the somewhat unfamiliar but much more accurate "zeroth" year is better. — Joe Kress 17:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would have personally preferred gregorian first, but i accept your edits. thank you:)nids(♂) 18:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Movement of Ritus and Chaitra[edit]

Is this relation of Ritus to lunisolar months absolute? Will they change with relation to english year like sun's makar sankraman? Is it ever possible that chaitra will occur in August?

(These questions were added to the Hindu calendar article at the end of Month and year of the solar calendar and to the Ritu article by 59.95.65.14 on 15 October 2006 and then moved to this talk page by Joe Kress.)

In many parts of india, new year starts from Kartik (diwali being the last day of the year) see http://www.newyearfestival.com/gujarati-new-year.html http://www.baps.org/festivals/diwali/index2.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.40.104.158 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 6 April 2009

Hindu constellation[edit]

There is an article called Hindu constellation that covers much of the same ground as this one, but seems to concentrate more on the history. Perhaps editors with more knowledge might look at it see if merger or some other course of action is appropriate?Neelmack 11:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i want to see the 1980 calendar with hindi panchang —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.74.199 (talk) 16:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Variant explanations and interpretations of yugas[edit]

Noticed an explanation from a west based swamiji about yugas. For ex, it was saying that we are entering into Treta yuga now. I respect the fact that this swami was inspired by bible since childhood. However, these are totally in contrast to any widely accepted and prescribed hindu references. Hence I have removed those cult(no disrespect meant) interpretations from here. I request the followers of such groups to put all the works and interpretations of their swamis under the groups specific pages. This way, we can ensure the article on hinduism represents historically and widely accepted information derived from traditional references like puranas and sastras and modern works based on them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nksarma (talk • contribs) 22:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Try to tabulate the Hindu months in the provided languages if possible[edit]

Try to tabulate the Hindu months in the provided languages if possible. Frozenprakash (talk) 13:45, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Language[edit]

This article is supposed to be in English, but it's so chuck full of Hindu terms that it has zero readabilities for anyone who just understand English, for no such reader can be expected to learn dozens of Hindu terms and keep them in their head while reading further down the article.

Most of the Hindu terms should be explained once in detail when they first occur, then replaced by the English translation (or the closest possible approximated term in English) in the rest of the article. Some of the other language versions of this article (for example, the German version) are much more readable, by doing exactly that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.231.68.9 (talk) 17:55, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu Solar Calendars[edit]

The opening passage gives an impression that all the Hindu calendars are luni-solar or sidereal; only in the body part we come across references to Hindu solar calendars. Almost one - third of the Hindu calendars are solar - all the four South Indian, Odia, Bengali and Assamese. This needs to be clarified.

The Hindu concept of ayanamsa is not mentioned anywhere here. Of course there is a separate article, but a reference from here would have been better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gopalan evr (talk • contribs) 07:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a complex topic. The baseline Hindu calendar as defined in Surya Siddhantha is luni-solar. The lunar part is: Lunar year->lunar month->lunar fortnite->lunar day. The solar part is: Solar year->solar half-year->zodiac->solar season->solar day. Dakshina Kannada brahmins like me use this luni-solar calendar for religious purposes. Other people in India use sub-sets of this calendar for their religious purposes; there are many possible sub-sets which you perceive as "many Hindu calendars".
Expanding further, lunar and solar are only two parts of a nine-part Hindu time-keeping framework. Of the other parts, one deals with very small time intervals (seconds) and another part deals with very large time scales (what may be called epochs / eons). While these may fit well in a text book of Hindu time-keeping, they will not fit well in a Wiki page.
Kishorekumar 62 (talk) 07:41, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article title[edit]

Should the title of article be changed to the plural "Hindu calendars" ?Jonathansammy (talk) 17:31, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I know it's years later now - but yes, it should be. The lead itself points out that there's not a single "Hindu calendar", but rather many different ones. V2Blast (talk) 06:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chatur-Yugas[edit]

I assume that "Chatur-Yugas" and "Catur-Yugas" are the term spelled differently? And that the term describes the complete cycle of Yugas? If that's correct, I think the page should explicitly say that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.218.214.1 (talk) 20:39, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion[edit]

The Hindu calendar is also important to the practice of Hindu astrology and zodiac system, most of which it adopted from Greece, in centuries after the arrival of Alexander the Great.[1][10] The Indian national calendar or "Saka calendar" was redesigned in an effort that started in 1952 based on the traditional Hindu calendars, and it was adopted on March 22, 1957.[11]

needs correction! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCC1:DF50:2828:3FF0:B3C5:21E (talk) 18:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Correct what? Do you have a reliable source (see WP:RS)? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Prof. Whitney seems to hold the opinion, that the Hindus derived their astronomy and astrology almost bodily from the Greeks-and that what they did not borrow from the Greeks, they derived from other people, as the Arabians, Chaldeans and Chinese (see pp. 178, 348, 350, et al.). I think he does not give the Hindus the credit due to them, and awards to the Greeks more credit than they are justly entitled to... And yet, from the light I now have, I must think the Hindus original in regard to most of the elementary facts and principles of astronomy as found in their systems, and for the most part also in their cultivation of the science; and that the Greeks borrowed from them, or from an intermediate secondary source, to which these facts and principles had come from India...But with my present knowledge, I cannot concur in the opinion that the Hindus are, to any great extent, indebted to the Greeks for their astronomy, or that the latter have any well grounded claims to the honor of originality in regard to those elementary facts and principles of astronomical science which are common to their own and other ancient systems, and which are of such a nature as indicates for them a single origin, and a transmission from one system to another" - so writes Rev. Ebenezer Burgess in his translation of the Surya Siddhanta (Journal of the American Oriental Society , 1858 - 1860, Vol. 6 (1858 - 1860), pp.141-498). Kishorekumar 62 (talk) 18:15, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hindu calendar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:39, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tamil calendar vs Malayalam calendar[edit]

This article states that Tamil calendar is lunar while the Malayalam calendar is solar. But they are not different at all. The crucial test to distinguish between solar and luni- solar calendar is the absence of intercalary months in solar calendars. Since both Tamil and Malayalam calendars do not have intercalary months, both are solar calendars. - Gopalan evr (talk) 03:09, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:Bold, shifting Indic New Year's Vasanta's Mīna in Chaitra back, from the end, to begin the rāśi solar month table[edit]

Currently the rāśi solar month table here oddly starts with Grīṣma's Vṛṣabha in Jyeshtha (month) 7 whole weeks after the Western zodiac's ecliptic longitudes begin with the March equinox in the order of the tropical year,

… whereas the Vikrami lunar month table here naturally begins the sidereal year on Indic New Year's Vasṁt r̥tu's Mīna in Chaitra, which is only a week before the March northward equinox (i.e., vernal spring (season) in India in the boreal Northern Hemisphere.

That's why the tables'll match each other and make more sense after I move the whole Vasṁt r̥tu row to come before the whole Grīṣma r̥tu row, as per our Wikipedia:Be bold ethos. Thecurran (talk) 03:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lunar months[edit]

The lunar months table includes columns for Tamil and Malayalam. These two calendars do not have lunar months (only solar months) and hence I removed those columns. The Malayalam names were mesham, rishabam etc., and hence do not belong here. The Tamil names indeed are Chitirai, Vaikasi etc, which sound like lunar months, but these months begin with a sankramana and not with new moon or full moon. Hence they too do not belong here.

Also, Chaitra is the first month of the lunar year (in all calendars). Hence I moved Chaitra to the top of the table. Kishorekumar 62 (talk) 11:18, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Solar month[edit]

The table here is really a seasons table. The Hindu seasons are defined using rashis in Surya Siddhanta. The moon does not influence seasons; it influences tides but not seasons. Hence I removed the lunar months column. Kishorekumar 62 (talk) 11:18, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Calendar usage map[edit]

@Kishorekumar 62, what's the sourcing for your c:File:India_Calendars.png map, used here under "Amanta and Purnima systems"? Text that says something like "this is used in Andhra, Gujarat while that is used in UP, MP" is okay but to extrapolate that text to hard borders as on the map seems like WP:OR. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of grey areas where it's difficult to pin down a single system, not just at the borders but elsewhere as well. Hemantha (talk) 05:39, 8 January 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock[reply]

My primary sources are 1) this wikipedia article itself - statements such as "most Indian states that have a peninsular coastline", "Most Indian states north of the Vindhya mountains" and 2) this page from WaybackMachine (I doubt if this is a valid reference but I liked the clarity and extent of research in that page). I agree with you on your second point. The map represents the predominant system within a state; within each state, there may be some communities which use a different system. Yet, in my opinion, removing the map will end up giving too much importance to the exceptions. Kishorekumar 62 (talk) 08:05, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External link to Youtube channel[edit]

I have a Youtube channel that illustrates the astronomical basis of the Hindu calendar using simulations created using Stellarium (a planetarium software). I believe this Youtube channel would supplement the Hindu Calendar wikipage and would like to include it as an external link. WP:EL#ADV indicates this could be a conflict of interest and "When in doubt, you may go to the talk page and let another editor decide." That is what I am doing here: can I link my Youtube channel as an external link?Kishorekumar 62 (talk) 06:40, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lunar day[edit]

There should be a clarification early in the article that what is meant by a "lunar day" in this article is not what everyone else calls a "lunar day". "Lunar day" everywhere else is the length of the moon's day, which is approximately 29.5 days long. — al-Shimoni (talk) 16:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hindu_calendar&oldid=1194713946"