[SJC: Achyuta Gurukul] On Jyotish Art, and Faith

[Guest guest]

Aum Namo Bhagvate Hrishikeshayaa

Pranaams:

Nice to see you posting again Sarajit... hope you are settled in

Brunei.

As per my promise to compile something in this regard, here is what I

perceive:

1) Everyone is brought up under some sets of rules and belief, as

nicely put by Sarajit. These beliefs [ingrained since infant hood] goes

on to make up our psychological and social makeup for the rest of our

lives.

Of course; there are cases of conversion [regarding sets of rules or

beliefs] for some based upon their circumstances or choice. Whether

such conversions are positive/negative, right/wrong, good/bad, again

depends upon those judging it and therefore their *own* sets of rules

and beliefs* form the basis of judgment.

2) We could generalize sets of rules and/or belief as one's culture,

religion, social identification, etc. and this is how society diversify

itself in complex ways. Heritage, genetical differences, and lineage,

further enhances such diversification.

3) However, when diverse individuals come together in order to achieve

a particular goal or object [such as learning Jyotish, acquiring

academic qualifications, or simply international sports/entertainment

competitions], there are bound to be differences amongst participants

that may result in controversies.

4) From personal experience [based upon countless sets of rules and

belief systems; where I have lived *around* internationally], I have

reached a point where I keep all my perspectives *independent* of each

other and my ultimate focus on what my goal or ambition is.

5) With regards to above, I can hardly say that I identify with *any*

religion while at the same time I am NOT an atheist [nastik in

Sanskrit]. At the same time, I also do NOT despise anyone's set of

rules, belief systems, or religion [which in my opinion is again a

combination of set of rules and beliefs].

6) Therefore, upon encounter with deities in Jyotish, I could say that

I do believe in a particular expression intended *via or from* them.

And I do not particularly see such association as strictly *religious*,

leave aside some terminology such as "Hinduism", etc. [by the way the

word Hindu derived for addressing people who lived between HImalaya and

the bINDU to the south or tip near Kanyakumari. Therefore HI + NDU]. I

would like to elaborate on the point of deities etc. as under:

a) I can easily appreciate Sun and Saturn in their double

roles of Shiva and Brahma for the born and unborn souls [atma] and

when I observe why this particular definition is used in Jyotish, I

have no problems with it.

b) In this aspect, Moon as Parvati, also makes perfect sense to me, as

Moon does have a great influence on our minds, oceans, and endless list

of things including the period of menstrual cycle in women [28.xx

days]. Since this menstrual cycle is one of the reasons why women

conceive, I also do not have a problem with Moon being identified as

mother, similar to Sun the giver of light and therefore life, as

father.

c) Venus with all her beauty [and Venus does look brilliant and

dazzling] signifying a young lady, therefore also rides well with me.

And her association with wealth, etc. as in Lakshmi also seems to make

perfect sense as we can see similar [while not trying to be

philosophical] showering upon and due to her in our earthly realm.

d) Mars being the *other* terrestrial planet [Earth is also a

terrestrial planet] in our solar system and therefore associated with

siblings also makes sense in that aspect. And since Mars has taken many

hits from solar and extra solar debris [resulting in scars and valor]

does explain all the different names given to Mars as in deities.

e) Jupiter with his enormous size, patience, and influence [upon

solar system and everything in it - after Sun] also fits nicely in my

understanding of this scheme. Therefore Guru, the imparter of knowledge

signified by Jupiter and the deities associated with it [e.g. Vishnu]

also makes perfect sense. Vishnu the sustainer as well; of Vishwa

[sanskrit word, which in my opinion means a lot including our solar

system].

f) The nodes [Rahu and Ketu or North and South] do affect the Moon and

Sun, and as we are aware that Moon influences mind or manas [acid test

is when oceans have storms, ebb tide. Similarly humans also behave

differently in their emotions, especially seen in lunatic people having

heightened or lessened influence during Full or New Moon]. Therefore,

anything aspecting or influencing Moon and Sun is bound to give us

challenges in our present awareness.

As Mind or Manas relates to the conscious part of our *awareness*

whereas Soul or Atma relates to the ever conscious yet rather dormant

part of our *awareness* on Bhu Loka or Earth.

I could go on further and distinctly pinpoint the conscious [frontal

lobe], semi or subconscious [middle hemisphere of brain], and

unconscious [medulla oblongata region] parts of brain where the Manas

is *thought and believed* to reside. However, I think probably everyone

gets my point.

7) Coming back to our focus

on this topic, the above is HOW I have come to perceive everything in

my surrounding and if I can systematically, mathematically, and

scientifically analyze and observe the above in my everyday life and

with regards to all animate and inanimate objects around me, then I

have NO problems in using a common set of names or reference

associated with these.

In Sanskrit, names do tend to imply qualities and therefore the name of

each of the above carries a special meaning as well. If we want to term

these as Deities, God(s), etc.[conscious capitalization which is

improper in written English grammar] then I don't see any problem there

either. Whether or not there is adequate RESPECT for each of these

[above], is, in my point more important.

Ultimately, as I have tried to point out, everything boils down to the

set of rules, beliefs, culture, group, language, etc. and eventually

everyone is addressing the same even through their presumed

differences.

With regards to above, I therefore, restrain and refrain from getting

in controversies that highlight differences based upon terms [such as

religion, etc.]. As I do not see any need to enforce what I think or

believe upon anyone.

In posts/articles as such, I will simply try to *DESCRIBE* what I can

see around me [and that includes the solar system, stars, galaxies,

clusters, etc.]. And it is true that I am intrigued by Universe

[Narayani/Narayana].

On the other issue about creation, I have pondered a lot throughout my

life [even when I was not necessarily studying Jyotish] and have

eventually come to a conclusion that everything simply exists.

I could elaborate my perception of the above in the following way:

8) In our

awareness as humans [manushya or manu], we see birth [creation], life

[sustenance], and death [destruction] constantly going around us. I

would further infer that:

a) Creator/Brahma, sustainer/Vishnu, and destroyer/Shiva

are at constant work and this seems never ending.

b) We are also aware about the elements that are responsible for the

make up of everything around us. And in this aspect, the cycle of fire,

earth, air, water, and ether [or agni, prithvi, vayu, jala, and akash]

is a ongoing process/show that we can see and feel in more than one

way(s).

c) In some of my most desperate times, I have prayed that I get TOTALLY

DESTROYED [including all the elements that have given me this form and

most importantly even the ultimate destruction of my soul/atma].

d) However, it is obvious that such cannot happen [to me]. All that can

happen is, I can transform that which I possess [elements] or was given

to me [whichever way you like it] into something else. Like I could set

fire to myself and the body would transform into different elements

such as ash, vapor, etc.

e) Not that I am suicidal, I have just used the above illustration to

describe the surroundings and fact.

f) As to what would be the interim state of soul/atma in such a

scenario [as described above]? I am unable to answer at moment, as I

have not received liberation/moksha and I am not blessed to remember by

previous forms [read pre birth forms or past *lives*]. I think I will

settle with Shastyamsa [D-60] for that at moment.

9) Summarizing above, even I am interested in knowing how everything

came around and how souls/atma and elements were created. Perhaps, they

were always there and will be there.

Perhaps, our definition of beginning [birth] and end [death] just

concentrated on a short window of time about which we are *aware*. Or

perhaps we are JUST too inclined in identifying a beginning and end;

where there is none!

Everything apparently goes in cycles and therefore, perhaps, we are

trying to comprehend a huge cycle [in terms of time and relativity]

from our current limited awareness.

Whatever the case, in my current awareness, the "chicken or egg" issue

is resolved via a compromise that everything just exists and did exist

and will always exist and therefore there was no beginning and

eventually no end.

This in no way means I am being disrespectful to any belief or creator

or what have you. I simply do not see the need [at least and especially

for myself] and nor do I have the time [at the moment] due to my

responsibilities; to go any deeper in that aspect. Which is why my

compromise [as mentioned above].

10) While I did not intended to write so much in this mail, it has

become a long one, however, concluding the topic, I see mantras, and

other remedies equally scientific and mathematical [as would be obvious

by any who analyzes Sanskrit and EVEN other languages].

I can very well relate to the different chakras [Mooladhara/Base to

Saharsharara/Crown] and all the other ones, and also find adequate

relation between them and elements, spectrum of light, so on and so

forth.

Therefore, in case of remedies, mantras, etc., that enhances the

required by triggering the associated, also makes perfect sense to me.

In short, I have tried to present a view of how one could still excel

in Jyotish, IMMATERIAL of their set of rules and/or belief systems. As

Jyotish is nothing else but combined branches of different sciences

that evolved by observation, experience, and practice over a long

period of time.

In this aspect, I find it unnecessary to tag Jyotish to any particular

belief, culture, group [such as Hindu, Vedic, etc.] as it is obvious

that ALL CALENDARS; immaterial of any belief, culture, group, etc. are

based upon our position with regards to Sun and Moon [solar and Lunar

calendars]. Even Mayans and Incas from South America had observations

about the extra nakshatra [loosely translated constellation] that we

identify as Abhijit in Sanskrit, in their distant past [history].

This gives us the comprehension and awareness of time [by conscious

beings in different zones who used the same SET OF RULES] and therefore

Jyotish is rightly a science of time. Just that we are used to using

the term Jyotish and others may address it with a different reference.

Similarly, in my opinion, it is pointless to argue whether Incas,

Mayans, Aztecs, Babylonians, etc. learnt it from Indians or other way

round.

As far as the fruits of a particular awareness of knowledge are enjoyed

by everyone involved, then that in itself is more than rewarding. Who

gave the fruits and where they come from is just a play of words,

minds, etc. which in my opinion leads to ego/aham and non productive

waste of time.

Hope I was able to give a very unbiased overview and observations with

regards to Jyotish, Art, and Faith [or any other subject addresses] to

this thread. I also hope I have not offended anyone in the process and

same as Sarajit said, please do not drag me into any controversies

regarding this topic.

I will not be contributing anymore to this thread due to serious time

restrictions I am going to face in my work in the coming weeks.

With that...please convey my best regards to all your loved ones ever

and you all take care too.

Aum Namo Narayana

[Note to Sarajit Poddar: I hope you have settled in Brunei and I am

glad you escaped SARS scary Singapore. I have tried to contact you on

messenger and email, but perhaps there are server, etc. problems.

In any case, hope you are fine and please do get back in touch. Our

discussion of black holes and lokas within a black hole still remains

incomplete and I look forward to that

;-) In the meantime, have fun].

Kind regards and best wishes from

Ron Bach

venkateshwara_reddy wrote:

>

> Beautiful! First of all, I donot think that it is human

intelligence

> which has created the difference in faiths. If God didn¡Çt want to

> create such different faiths, why are they here? We can see in

nature,

> that the whole nature is full of diversities and each one of the

diverse

> members are equally necessary for the world to continue. There is a

> perfect order in the universe which the ancients called the Rta and

> nothing is out of accident or sheer chance.

They called it r`ta. They never said it as 'perfect order'

On notion of God in Christianity, Islam, Judaism:

The God(note capital G) is outside of Cosmos; He created Cosmos;

The notion of daivatva in Indian traditions is diametrically opposite

to the above notion, because creation of uncreated cosmos is not same

as cosmos created by God who is outside of the Created one.

Not only that, Christianity claimed that it is True religion. Let us

consider the word 'True religion'; here 'true' functions as

attributive adjective. What do we get when predicate this

adjective: 'Religion is True'

So far, Christianity, Islam, Judaism considered themselves as True

Religion and others as rival religions(false religion). In this

process, Judaism and Christianity saw Pagan cults in Rome as rival

religions; Islam saw Indian traditions as rival. Both Pagan cults and

Indian traditions never comprehended the phenomenon they confronted.

Today, every Indian knows that Indians do have religion, which is

tolerant. This leads to same old problem: Tolerant religion <==>

Religion is tolerant.

What is Religion? Of course, Christianity includes God; it does not

mean that having gods does not entail having religion.

Analogy: Black Cat, Gray Cat and White Cat have 4 legs and 2 eyes; We

never say that all animals that have 4 legs and 2 eyes are Cats.

Belief/faith/worship can be understood once if we learn of religion

that christianity is.

[Om Kleem Krishnaaya Jagannathaaya namah]

Send a blank mail

To : -

To :

 

[Guest guest]

> Of course; there are cases of conversion [regarding sets of rules

or

> beliefs] for some based upon their circumstances or choice. Whether

such

> conversions are positive/negative, right/wrong, good/bad, again

depends

> upon those judging it and therefore their *own* sets of rules and

 

Conversion from what? Never do I see the phenomenon called

conversion either in Indian traditions or in Roman cults. Yet people

offer pooja-s to graama deva-s, deva-s of other families.

 

 

> religion while at the same time I am NOT an atheist [nastik in

> Sanskrit]. At the same time, I also do NOT despise anyone's set of

> rules, belief systems, or religion [which in my opinion is again a

> combination of set of rules and beliefs].

 

Atheism: once a believer lost faith in certain belief system, he will

become atheist. In other words, it is a philosophical solution to

christological dilemma. It is not the case with naastikas.