Why vimshottari in 365.25

May 21, 2002

> I dont think there is any point in arguing about what should be the

> length of the year. Lets try to apply the 360-tithi year on

> different charts and look for the statistical evidence if it holds.

Dear Prasad,

I dont like to apply sunken statistical tools/deviation-

s/corelation co-efficients. One should rather look in divine way.

Daivagnya-s are aware of ton-s of exceptions Astrology does not fit

into the *finite axiomatic world* and Aristotle logic of duality.

You can see countless pandiTa-s in India, who do not know a cent of

english, nor kepler/newton's laws can predict accurately. Are they

using all these software? How about Omens? Apply the sunken

statistics in this regard.

Regards,

VR

May 21, 2002

Namaste,

> This is not the year you have been defending. You mentioned in

> earlier posts 360 tithi year, which is about 354 days.

I am not defending any year right now. I am only giving references to

multiple years in classics to show that there is no clear answer.

Personally, I have a preference, but I don't have a strong case for

any year and hence not defending anything right now.

> This year was apparently rounded off in a five year period with an

> extra month, not in a three year period as the tithi year.

> http://www1.shore.net/~india/ejvs/ejvs0304/ejvs0304.txt

>

> If you are going to argue for this 360 solar day year, I can't

argue

> against since the translator Sharma is of the opinion that this is

> the year which Parasara means. But I understood from an earlier

post

> that "varsha" means solar year (6 Ritus/12 signs = 1 Varsha).

This is only a misconception. Sanskrita has various words for year

that can be interchangably used. Varsha does not mean a solar year.

Parasara mentioned the word "varsha" to mean 360-day years in

Shadbalas.

Under Kala Bala of Shadbalas, Parasara covered 3 different calendars:

(1) Solar calendar: The ayana (6 month) bala is based on this

(2) Lunar calendar: The paksha (half month) bala is based on this

(3) Fixed calendar: The varsha, maasa, dina and hora balas are all

based on this. Here a year of 360 civil days, a month of 30 civil

days and a dina of 1 civil day are used.

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

May 21, 2002

Pranaam Sanjaya,

> Dear Narasimha

> jaya Jagannath

> You have not answered the point about the wait of Bheesma for the

change in

> the solar year. Do consider that as well.

> The proof will come only if you attempt to study Yuga.

> Best Wishes

> Sanjay Rath

First of all, Bhishma did not wait for a change in year. He waited

for a change in ayana (6-month division). For ayana bala (of

Shadbalas), Parasara clearly used the solar calendar. For paksha

bala, he clearly used the lunar calendar. For varsha (annual), maasa

(monthly), dina (daily) and hora (hourly) balas, he used the fixed

savana calendar. If at all there is an argument in favor of a

particular year based on Parasara's direct teachings, it is for the

savana year.

Bhishma's waiting for a change of ayana does not mean that solar

calendar should be used for years. It only shows that the solar

calendar should be used for ayanas (which we know anyway). Had he

waited for a change in paksha, would you have said that there is a

lesson in this in favor of lunar years?

Though 360-tithi years have no other factors supporting them (and

leave some unanswered questions), Bhishma and Pandavas clearly

thought they were the right years. Those arguing that Bhishma finally

lost should remember that so did Duryodhana and that Dharmaraja and

Arjuna (who stood for 360-tithi years) won with Krishna's support.

BTW, you haven't yet given the quote from Varahamihira. You claimed

that you follow Varahamihira and hence use solar years. I requested

you for a quote.

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

May 21, 2002

Your plainly extreme prejudice destroys your argument - whether it be right or not.

Regards

Gordon

May 21, 2002

> This year is used in China, so it might be older than

> you think.

This is not post-1500 BC creation as Indology idiots thought of.

How late is late?

> http://www.ichingwisdom.com/IChingWisdom/zodiac.html

>

> It's supposed to date from at least 1000 B.C.

Vedic is older than 1000 B.C. Change your Indology school, if u

really wanna know.There is plenty of records to know that bulk of

Veda-s were collected & compiled by Parashara's son Vaishampaayana

and his disciples about 5,000 years ago. New undersea

archeological finds along coastal India are taking

scientific proof only in that direction, it can not be

wished away by "I know the facts" garbage of Indology.

The Euro-linguistics monster has failed to eradicate

countless of these records existing all over India. Now and

then an idiot from this exclusive club visits India,

searching to grab these records - if s/he finds one that

fits the 18th century primitive European imagination, it is

preserved in Oxford or Harvard; otherwise, by every means it

is buried. And, thank God, every Pandit and now most of the

English educated in India know the game of this European

primitive tribe pretending scholarly.

Rgds,

VR

> http://www.asia.si.edu/exhibitions/horse.htm

May 21, 2002

> Food for thought: WHat is Natural Cycle?

Let me give few hints.

Any natural cycle has mirror image in some parameter.

Otherwise it is not natural. There are five such parameters:

anna or material (a), prANa (p), mana (m), vijnAna (v), and

Ananda (A). These are the pancha kosha-s of Upanishads or

pancha janAH of RigvEda. Creation began with (A) and ended

with (a). Our ancients said it dissolves in reverse process

- another cycle of these very parameters!

Examples:

ardha maasa - astami to astami - moon phase (a) parameter

maasa - shklanta or amanta - moon phase (a) parameter

varsha - solstice to solstice - season (a) parameter

samvatsara - mouth to chitra, chitra to pAda - (p) parameter

2 devayuga-s - satya-to-kali, kali-to-satya - (m) parameter

1000 devayuga-s - 14 ascending, 14 descending manvantara-s

(v) parameter.

These are my guesses. Need research. I have some faith that

it must have been addressed by our sages, somewhere in our

scriptures it might have been detailed. The only thing to

keep in mind is that natural cycle is not limited to

physical plane only. The 60+60(prabhava to kshaya + prabhava to

kshaya) year cycle may be wrt one of these 5 natural parameters,

probably not the first one.

Regards,

Shankara.

May 21, 2002

> Dear Narasimha

> jaya Jagannath

> You have not answered the point about the wait of Bheesma for the

Dear Sanjay,

In Shaanti parva after the war, Great Bheeshma waits 65 days on the

bed of arrows for uttara ayana to come in maaGha maasa. These days

uttara ayana begins on maargashira shasTi or sapthami. There was also

an adhika maasa after the war in maargashira maasa. Was it really

there, or was it inserted as an attempt to explain something

else? So, this gives about (65 + 18 war days)x71 years = 5893 years

(3891 BC) ago as the year of the war. I may be off in the day count

by 2-3 days, so, we may say in this approximation, the war year as

4000 BC. If you skip the adhika maasa issue, it drops to (35 + 18)x71

= 3763 years ago/1761 BC.

Can you comment in this regard

Best Regards,

Venkateswara Reddy

> change in

> the solar year. Do consider that as well.

> The proof will come only if you attempt to study Yuga.

> Best Wishes

> Sanjay Rath

>

> pvr108 [pvr@c...]

> Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:32 AM

> vedic astrology

> [vedic astrology] Re: Why vimshottari in 365.25

>

> Namaste,

>

> > Regarding Bhishma, I think one should not forget that he

> > sided with Kauravas against Vishnu's avatar and was killed

> > in that battle.

>

> Duryodhana, who insisted on taking solar years, too was killed in

the

> same battle. So, what does it prove?

>

> > So he was a sinner, and not infallible. And

> > then when he was dying he waited until the solar year shifted

> > to die. Maybe there is a hidden moral in that?

>

> OK, let us accept for a moment that Bhishma was a "sinner". What

> about Arjuna and Dharmaraja? Dharmaraja was dharma personified and

> was extremely righteous. He and Arjuna were aided by the "Vishnu's

> avatar" that you mention.

>

> I am not arguing that this conclusively proves that 360-tithi years

> are correct. I am only suggesting that the waters are muddied. :-)

>

> Those who say that they aren't should bear the burden of proof! Show

> me an unambiguous quote or proof in favor of solar years.

>

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> Narasimha

>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-@e...

>

> ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......

>

> Your use of is subject to

May 22, 2002

vedic astrology, "venkateshwara_reddy" <avenkat@m...>

wrote:

> > Since the Vedas mention the 13th month, I would say the opposite.

I

> > regard the Vedas somewhat higher, since the Mahabharata is a saga

> > and not meant to teach astrology.

> >

> > Interestingly the word in Finnish for mead is "siima", quite

> > similar to "soma". (There is also similar mythology about gods

vs.

>

> Ahah! You seems to belongs to the Indology tribe and applying

> silly "comparative linguistics". And these idiots claiming that

> SamskR`tam is the derivative of some Indo-European language. Does

> this stands to *scientific scrutiny*. Just fantastic indological

> imagination only. No scientific proof! And, where does

> misnomer 'Sanskrit' come from - which DhAtu, by what linguistic

path?

> apaBhramsha is not BhASA per pANini.

>

I was pointing out the similarities I recently discovered while

reading the Vedas. I find it very unlikely that there was no contact,

but I won't speculate on what kind of contact. Primarily because the

similar mythology and not similar language. "Indra" was also the

second-in-command of the gods (next to Agni), used ligthing against

his enemies and slew the worm Vritra. And mead was the drink of the

gods (made from apples). In Greece they also have similar stories.

And then I extrapoltaed this into the year debate, since the year on

this side was always solar.

>

> Members in this group may want to know this background: The

> god of the so-called Euro-linguistics, Maxmuller, got a

> smattering of sorts in Samskr`tam by reading the notes of a

> puny lawyer (not scholar of any sorts) called Bill Jones, an

I have not read or heard of either of one until now. But I know what

the "party line" in India is, that there was no invasion. And I know

that there is no archaeology supporting it. But I know also that

Iranians have also similar mythology, with Agni-worship and Asuras

(Ahuras) and Devas. And I know that Chinese have nothing of the kind.

So I have not closed my mind to any possibility.

May 22, 2002

vedic astrology, "venkateshwara_reddy" <avenkat@m...>

wrote:

> > This year is used in China, so it might be older than

> > you think.

>

> This is not post-1500 BC creation as Indology idiots thought of.

> How late is late?

>

> > http://www.ichingwisdom.com/IChingWisdom/zodiac.html

> >

> > It's supposed to date from at least 1000 B.C.

>

> Vedic is older than 1000 B.C.

So what? I did not say anything else. The original poster said that

using it as a year was recent, I said it has been used as a year at

least in China for a long time.

May 22, 2002

Vyam Vysadevaya Namah

-------------------------

Dear Viraj,

I've seen many predictions using both, and even more techniques supporting them,

however some people can explain anything using Vimshottari Dasa.

Your basis for the time of death isn't convincing to me, as the matching of

Vimshottari with the Gochara, can hardly be satisfactory to give a prediction

unless the Natal chart positions actually support it.. and not just lagna.

Besides with Vimshottari Dasa, the death will happen in a Maraka Dasa. Not the

Dasa of the 8th house, which is a secondary Maraka, but no the actual killer.

And then theres a question of the right variation, that suits the native best.

Our Gurudeva, Sanjay Rath gives predictions using Solar years, down to

PratyAntar Dasa's.. hence lets not go there.

Instead lets focus on the basis for using Solar vs Lunar years.

The DwadasaAditya is a very good place to start.

Best wishes, Visti.

-

virajpat

vedic astrology

Wednesday, May 22, 2002 1:02 AM

[vedic astrology] Re: Why vimshottari in 365.25

Dear Visti and list,The most natural answer to this would be to actually try the

theory of different years with actual events in a person's life and see how it

ties up. Perhaps you could suggest a chart with known time of death say and we

could try and see what makes more sense.I was looking at the death time of a

person who was running Venus dasa per 365.25 day year calculations when he

died. This is not neccesarily a cause of death, so I looked at gochara and saw

he had Saturn in 8th at the time. His Saturn shadbala was also highest in natal

chart, with natal saturn in karkata. He was due to start Saturn sub-dasa in 1

year's (365.25) time. So dasa calc did not support his death. Now if I use 360

day years, then dasa and gochara both indicate bad times for the native. That

is why I started having doubts abt the year length. What do you think?Viraj---

In vedic astrology, "Visti Larsen" <vishnu@l...> wrote:> Vyam Vysadevaya

Namah> ------------------> Dear List,> A

better argument would be to understand the results of the Dwadas-Aditya, and

why a transit through all of them should be considered as being 1 year.> > Of

the 33 Devas, the 8 Vasus consitute the facets of our being, the 11 Rudras

shows the destruction, whilst the Dwadasa Aditya are responsible for the entire

creation. For those counting; Prajapati and Indra are the last two devas.> > The

DwadasAditya are responsible for the creation of everything material and this is

also the reason why we see the Dwadasamsa(D-12) to see who created us!. This is

why some call it Suryamsa. The Dwadas-Aditya are hence responsible for all

events in life, whilst say Nakshetras, constitute prime facets of our being.> >

We must anticipate that the Rishi's understood this in their time, hence this

should also be our basis for discussion, and not what 'might' have been written

in a book.> > Am in great anticipation of feedback.> Best wishes, Visti.> >

- > cjjohans > vedic astrology >

Tuesday, May 21, 2002 9:42 PM> [vedic astrology] Re: Why

vimshottari in 365.25> > > vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...>

wrote:> > Namaste,> > > > > But the crux is what Parasara meant, since

he does not mention > > tithi > > > anywhere to my knowledge (but does

mention solar days at least in > > > Shadbhala), I would think he did not

mean that.> > > > In shadbalas, the varsha bala or annual strength

(strength of the > > year) is based on savana years (360-day years) and not

based on the > > solar years. This is very clear from the text and there is

luckily > no > > controversy so far.> > > This is not the year you

have been defending. You mentioned in > earlier posts 360 tithi year, which

is about 354 days. > > This year was apparently rounded off in a five year

period with an > extra month, not in a three year period as the tithi year.>

http://www1.shore.net/~india/ejvs/ejvs0304/ejvs0304.txt> > If you are going

to argue for this 360 solar day year, I can't argue > against since the

translator Sharma is of the opinion that this is > the year which Parasara

means. But I understood from an earlier post > that "varsha" means solar year

(6 Ritus/12 signs = 1 Varsha).> > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,> >

Narasimha> > > Sponsor > >

> > > > Archives:

vedic astrology> > Group info:

vedic astrology/info.html> > To UNSUBSCRIBE:

Blank mail to vedic astrology-@e...> > ....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......> > || Om Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri Krishnaarpanamastu

|| > > Terms of

Service.Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......

May 22, 2002

Dear Gordon and List members.

I aint prejudiced against anybody/anything. Most of the people

perceive this because their minds were already contaminated by

primitive european works on India called Indology.

No new writing aka 18th century primitive Europeans' Indology, can

hide these facts, as more and more from their own stock are speaking

up and writing/teaching on this (list members may read "An idiot's

guide to Hinduism" by Linda Anderson to get a snapshot on how the new

generation of Americans see Hinduism, its roots, history, Veda-s, and

practices; this book is available in many Barns&Noles bookstores; it

is being sold as hotcakes too). "Indology" will be unmasked by its

own children in USA, just as 15th century Church was undone. Our

secular indology minion brethren may very well be remembered as fine

jokers of the world!

As typical, the 18th century primitive European writers claim

Manusmr`ti to be of Chaalukya time, and you know when that was - just

yesterday - and the Indology slaves who never study the original

Samskr`ta text are dishing out this 18th century Euro-mythology all

the time! Let us not be fooled.

In Various matters we need to check what the Veda-s say. Due to

pedagogy and various paatakrama rules, Veda mantra-s have remained

the same. It is impossible to distort their words. That was the

genius of the Rishi-s. Westerners opine our sages did not know

writing, so they resorted to memory, therefore it is called 'shruti',

etc. all big rubbish. Person-to-person teaching and carrying down by

memory is the best failsafe gaurd against mutilations. Writing alone

would have distorted and wiped out the Veda-s long time ago,

certainly the British burnt every ancient book they got hold of that

went against their biblical theories. But the Veda-s were inside the

head of countless pandita-s they could not wipe out, so they tried

the next best by distorting Samskr`ta word and Veda mantra meanings.

(a new Samskritha dictionary "Vaachaspathyam" with carefully

distorted words)

Let me give an example:

-----------------------

"Krishna, one of the manifestations of God, has, in that book,

branded women as offsprings of sin (paap-yoni) (Geeta : 9 : 32)" -

This is a typical example of how MacCaulay slaves without knowing any

trace of Geeta pronounce its meaning to suit their grand design of

trashing Hinduism. The full shloka is as follows:

Maam hi paartha vyapaashrithya

Yeapi syuhu paapayonayaha

Sthreeyo vaishyaasthathha shoodraastheapi

Yaanthi paraam gatim | 9-32

Its meaning is:

Because, O! Arjuna! Women, vaishyas, and shudras as well as those

born as a result of paapa even later attain moksha by surrendering to

Me.

Where is this damnation by Shri Krishna of women in this shloka? All

these disgusting MacCaulay slaves know that they can write any trash

about Hinduism in English press and present to the equally uneducated

English Hindus as some grand scholarly work.

Another example:

----------------

Some posts from Indiancivilization dipicting Indra's ojasa as sperm

(is the clear implication) R`shi kaNva saw.

ojasa is no human sperm, as indology nuts claim. Such claim reflects

the mind of these primitives, who saw wild sexual orgy in the Veda-s,

just as pre-18th century Germans used to live, and most of west still

do. They even used to kill their "useless" elderly to get rid of

family burdens - read Zimmer for proof. This was then "discovered" in

the Veda-s, Hindu samskaara-s, traditions, etc. Until these

primitives' such discoveries, Indian scholars never saw KaNva's sperm

in Veda-s nor killing their parents as a social custom.

These MacCaulay-putras bastards also hide the fact that several

sentences of these "non-scriptures" were erased and distortions were

re-written by their mentors and hired Hindu slaves in Asiatic Society

of Bengal and Asiatic Society of London during the 18th century. Even

a new Samskritha dictionary "Vaachaspathyam", with careful

distortions of many Vedic words, was compiled to trash "Amara Kosha",

debase Vedas and smrithigranthas, and uproot Hinduism. Apte is

continuing this holy job now.

Anyway, it is another sorry subject. I am NOT here to argue with

anybody. Just presenting plain facts to the list members, before

their minds CONTAMINATED by ASURI views.

English libraries on India are decorated with such works. Serious,

sincere student of history and history writings can not miss these

factual constructs in such writings.

Real nonsense from indology minions whose preoccupation is names,

titles, and anything big and intimidating, not subject matter! I am

not fooled from their sacred approach. R`shi-s haven't left their

titles nor biography, and we aren't missing something as a result.

Why are these Aristotelian features so important for those who are

seekers of true knowledge? Stick to points sid hart

A NOTE to the Idiots, who claim that bhaarata sages of yore *were*

not aware of trans-Saturnian planets(Uranus, Neptune, PLuto):

The 7 layers of Brahma's mind is really the 7 chakra-s or pariDhi-s

the universe is made of - chandra mandala, bhoo mandala, aaditya

mandala, soma mandala, vahni mandala, paremesTi mandala, and

brahmaanda. Inside brahmaanda, there are many paramesTi mandala-s

(super galaxy clusters). In each paramesTi mandala, there are many

vahni mandala-s (galaxy clusters), and so on....

All these flow from Rigveda, asyavAmIya sooktam (Rik mandala

1, astaka 2, sooktam 164). It has 54 mantra-s. I will need few years

to understand these.

TIME has come to GROW UP.

Best Regards,

Venkateswara Reddy

> Dear Venkateswara Reddy

> Your plainly extreme prejudice destroys your argument - whether it

be right

> or not.

> Regards

> Gordon

May 22, 2002

Dear Visti,

You addressed Creation in your message. Let me add few points:

The universe is made of

-chandra mandala

-BhU mandala

-Aditya mandala

Astronomically the aaditya mandala (solar family as a whole) goes one

round in 24 million years.Shastra-s name aaditya mandala's aDhipati

as brahma (not creator Brahma).

-sOma mandala

The solar/Aditya mandala family, as it is spinning, is also going

around our galactic center - it is the milkyway - called sOma

mandala (no material connection to our moon - our galaxy is

white too - also, sa+uma = sOma) - making one round in just

over 10 of its ahoraatri cycles (about 250 million years).

Shastra-s name sOma mandala's aDhipati as viSNu (not mahA viSNu)

-vahni mandala

vahni mandala has our and neighborhood galaxies going around their

center. This is the galaxy cluster or super galaxy of modern

cosmology. Shiva (not para shiva) is the aDhipati here.

-paremesTi mandala

paramESTi mandala has such galaxy clusters goind around their center.

paramESTi prajApati is the adhipati here

-prajApati mandala

has many paramESTi mandala-s going around their center. There are 10

prajApati mandala-s in this universe, and 10 prajApati-s as aDhipati-

s: marIchi, atri, angirasa, pulastya, kratu, prachEtasa, vasiSTa,

BhR`gu, and nArada (Manu Smr`ti-36).

-Brahmaanda

These prajApati mandala-s go around the center of the universe

(hiraNyagarBha) and all make up the brahmAnda.

Our place is probably in marIchi prajApati mandala: marIchInAm

padamichChanti veDhasaH.

In nityapUja viDhi traditions, we remember like this

Aditya mandalAya namaH |

Aditya mandalADhipatayE brahmaNE nanaH |

sOma mandalAya namaH |

sOma mandalADhipatayE viSNavE namaH |

vahni mandalAya namaH |

vahni mandalADhipatayE shivAya namaH |

In special pUjA-s, paramESTi and prajApati mandala-s also

remembered likewise.

It follows that there are numerous shiva-s, viSNu-s, and brahma-s.

Many brahma-viSNu-shiva-s take birth and die within the creation cycle

Thus, we can see lots of Aditya/Soma/Vahni/ParamesTi mandala-s.

Which nakSatra-s are in which paramESTi mandala-s?

Sadly, the whole hinduism is sold thru PuraaNa-s. This present world

would have been in pretty good shape, if we had grasped shruti-

s/shaastra-s.

Recently, some Scientists(who got doctorate degrees in Ajnana) are

trying to oppose the Dept of Education, Govt of India move to

introduce Jyotisha in schools. Probably, it may take million years to

these idiotic scientists to know about Universe/Brahmaanda.

These Idiots are wasting TAX dollars on Junk sciences.

post-Aristotlian Schools will die in DUE course of TIME/kaala.

Best Regards,

Venkateswara Reddy

> Vyam Vysadevaya Namah

> ------------------

> Dear List,

> A better argument would be to understand the results of the Dwadas-

Aditya, and why a transit through all of them should be considered as

being 1 year.

>

> Of the 33 Devas, the 8 Vasus consitute the facets of our being, the

11 Rudras shows the destruction, whilst the Dwadasa Aditya are

responsible for the entire creation. For those counting; Prajapati

and Indra are the last two devas.

>

> The DwadasAditya are responsible for the creation of everything

material and this is also the reason why we see the Dwadasamsa(D-12)

to see who created us!. This is why some call it Suryamsa. The Dwadas-

Aditya are hence responsible for all events in life, whilst say

Nakshetras, constitute prime facets of our being.

>

> We must anticipate that the Rishi's understood this in their time,

hence this should also be our basis for discussion, and not

what 'might' have been written in a book.

>

> Am in great anticipation of feedback.

> Best wishes, Visti.

>

> -

> cjjohans

> vedic astrology

> Tuesday, May 21, 2002 9:42 PM

> [vedic astrology] Re: Why vimshottari in 365.25

>

> vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > Namaste,

> >

> > > But the crux is what Parasara meant, since he does not

mention

> > tithi

> > > anywhere to my knowledge (but does mention solar days at

least in

> > > Shadbhala), I would think he did not mean that.

> >

> > In shadbalas, the varsha bala or annual strength (strength of

the

> > year) is based on savana years (360-day years) and not based on

the

> > solar years. This is very clear from the text and there is

luckily

> no

> > controversy so far.

> >

> This is not the year you have been defending. You mentioned in

> earlier posts 360 tithi year, which is about 354 days.

>

> This year was apparently rounded off in a five year period with

an

> extra month, not in a three year period as the tithi year.

> http://www1.shore.net/~india/ejvs/ejvs0304/ejvs0304.txt

>

> If you are going to argue for this 360 solar day year, I can't

argue

> against since the translator Sharma is of the opinion that this

is

> the year which Parasara means. But I understood from an earlier

post

> that "varsha" means solar year (6 Ritus/12 signs = 1 Varsha).

>

> > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > Narasimha

May 23, 2002

Vyam Vysadevaya Namah

----------------

Dear Reddy,

Thanks for the comprehensive description of our universe.

However when talking about Vimshottari Dasa, we are trying to see how the

various devas have an influence in the lives of us beings on earth, and hence

from that we should decide on Solar vs Lunar years.

Now the Lunar years have 12/13 months and they are lorded by the Nakshetra, in

which the full moon commences in.

So what becomes the function of the Nakshetras vs Dwadasa Aditya?

Best wishes, Visti.

-

venkateshwara_reddy

vedic astrology

Thursday, May 23, 2002 1:31 AM

[vedic astrology] Re: Why vimshottari in 365.25

Dear Visti,You addressed Creation in your message. Let me add few points:The

universe is made of -chandra mandala-BhU mandala-Aditya mandalaAstronomically

the aaditya mandala (solar family as a whole) goes one round in 24 million

years.Shastra-s name aaditya mandala's aDhipati as brahma (not creator

Brahma).-sOma mandalaThe solar/Aditya mandala family, as it is spinning, is

also going around our galactic center - it is the milkyway - called sOma

mandala (no material connection to our moon - our galaxy is white too - also,

sa+uma = sOma) - making one round in just over 10 of its ahoraatri cycles

(about 250 million years). Shastra-s name sOma mandala's aDhipati as viSNu (not

mahA viSNu)-vahni mandalavahni mandala has our and neighborhood galaxies going

around their center. This is the galaxy cluster or super galaxy of modern

cosmology. Shiva (not para shiva) is the aDhipati here.-paremesTi

mandalaparamESTi mandala has such galaxy clusters goind around their center.

paramESTi prajApati is the adhipati here-prajApati mandala has many paramESTi

mandala-s going around their center. There are 10 prajApati mandala-s in this

universe, and 10 prajApati-s as aDhipati-s: marIchi, atri, angirasa, pulastya,

kratu, prachEtasa, vasiSTa, BhR`gu, and nArada (Manu Smr`ti-36).

-BrahmaandaThese prajApati mandala-s go around the center of the universe

(hiraNyagarBha) and all make up the brahmAnda. Our place is probably in marIchi

prajApati mandala: marIchInAm padamichChanti veDhasaH.In nityapUja viDhi

traditions, we remember like thisAditya mandalAya namaH |Aditya

mandalADhipatayE brahmaNE nanaH |sOma mandalAya namaH |sOma mandalADhipatayE

viSNavE namaH |vahni mandalAya namaH |vahni mandalADhipatayE shivAya namaH |In

special pUjA-s, paramESTi and prajApati mandala-s also remembered likewise.It

follows that there are numerous shiva-s, viSNu-s, and brahma-s. Many

brahma-viSNu-shiva-s take birth and die within the creation cycleThus, we can

see lots of Aditya/Soma/Vahni/ParamesTi mandala-s.Which nakSatra-s are in which

paramESTi mandala-s? Sadly, the whole hinduism is sold thru PuraaNa-s. This

present world would have been in pretty good shape, if we had grasped

shruti-s/shaastra-s.Recently, some Scientists(who got doctorate degrees in

Ajnana) are trying to oppose the Dept of Education, Govt of India move to

introduce Jyotisha in schools. Probably, it may take million years to these

idiotic scientists to know about Universe/Brahmaanda.These Idiots are wasting

TAX dollars on Junk sciences.post-Aristotlian Schools will die in DUE course of

TIME/kaala.Best Regards,Venkateswara Reddy> Vyam Vysadevaya Namah>

------------------> Dear List,> A better

argument would be to understand the results of the Dwadas-Aditya, and why a

transit through all of them should be considered as being 1 year.> > Of the 33

Devas, the 8 Vasus consitute the facets of our being, the 11 Rudras shows the

destruction, whilst the Dwadasa Aditya are responsible for the entire creation.

For those counting; Prajapati and Indra are the last two devas.> > The

DwadasAditya are responsible for the creation of everything material and this

is also the reason why we see the Dwadasamsa(D-12) to see who created us!. This

is why some call it Suryamsa. The Dwadas-Aditya are hence responsible for all