Tertullian's Rule of Faith

We read in Balakanda (Canto 18): “Six full seasons elapsed, that is twelve months since the end of the great Ashvamedha. Then on the ninth day of the month of Chaitra, under the lunar asterism of Punarvasu, when the  Sun was in Mesha, Mars was in Makara, Saturn in Tulâ, Jupiter  and the moon in Karka, and Venus was in Mîna, of Queen Kaushalyâ was born Rama, the Lord of the Universe, the adoration of  the Three Worlds, the joy of the Ikshvâku dynasty, and incarnation of half of Vishnu. The child bore many auspicious marks:  His  eyes were rose colored, his arms very long, and his lips deep red. His voice resounded like a kettle drum. Kaushalyâ too  looked glorious, like Aditi holding Puramdara.   Then Kaikeyî gave birth to a son, Bharata by name, incarnating  a quarter of Vishnu and with divine qualities too.  Cheerful  Bharata was born  under the star Pushya when the Sun  entered Mîna. To Sumitra were born twin sons, Lakshmana and Shatrughna, under the constellation Ashlesha when the Sun entered Karka.” The horoscope details pertaining to the birth of the princes reveal that ancient Hindus were quite aware of zodiacal changes and were very interested in stellar configurations in the context of the birth of children. Even a poet talks about the relative positions of lunar asterisms. However, the zodiacal signs mentioned here do not follow one after the other in the scheme of constellations. If Rama was born when the Sun was in Aries this must have been sometime in April. If Bharata was born when the Sun was in Pisces, it must have been in February or March. Finally, the Sun in Cancer would imply June or July for Lakshmana and Shatrughna. Thus, if these zodiacal details had been really so, the brothers could not all have been born in the same month. Yet we are told that at the end of the eleventh day all the babies were named, implying that they were all born practically on the same day. Likewise, Rama is said to have been born under the asterism of Punarvasu which is in Capricorn, the 7th nakshatra; Bharata under Pushya ;(Capricorn) which is the 8th nakshatras, and Sumitra's twins under Ashlesha (Aquarius) which is the 9th nakshatra in Hindu reckoning. Once again, this could only be possible if there was at least a day's difference between each of the three births. Yet, the astrological aspect of this passage has had an indelible impact on the Hindu cultural scene. Year after year, the day of birth of Shri Rama is celebrated with great ceremony on the month and asterism prescribed here. The same may be said of the traditional birthday of Christ. In the 2nd century of the Common Era the date of December 25 was first mentioned by Theophilus of Antioch as the date on which Christ was born, and even this document is not regarded as reliable by many scholars. It was only after the 5th century that Christmas came to be celebrated in any general way. 2, Perhaps this is as it should be, for religious reckoning and experience defy (one could say, transcend) scientific analysis, conceptual inconsistencies, and factual contradictions. In such contexts, one should adopt the oft-quoted Tertullian's Rule of Faith: Credo quia impossibile [I believe because it is impossible]. There is much meaning in this. When we approach a subject from the point of view of faith, we should consciously ignore logical rough edges. Human beings, though they have the ability for rational thought, have also been fortunately endowed with the capacity to be non-rational and inconsistent on occasions. Without this, life would be as drab as Euclidean theorems: enunciation, proof, and all. Without for this capacity, we cannot play with little children, nor return love for hate, much less engage in the imagination of poetry and the fantasy of art. Nor can we interpret things contextually: If one types but one letter wrong in an email or dial one number wrong on a telephone dial, the perfectly logical systems cannot recognize our target, but even if you make a mistake in addressing a friend, she will know that in the context you are meaning her. Thus, irrespective of the exactness of the birth-nakshatra, or even the factuality or otherwise of Rama, the name and symbol have become rich and meaningful in Indic culture, and that is what is relevant here. Trying to give scientific justifications for deep and meaningful religious frameworks would be doing disservice to the tradition besides propagating pseudo-sciece. V. V. Raman July 9, 2012