En: Neptune and Uranus

[Guest guest]

-

 

Wednesday, January 15, 2003 4:11 PM

Neptune and Uranus

Astro Vedica:" At this point, it is probably appropriate to point out that Vedic

astrology does not consider the outer planets Uranus, Neptune or Pluto. This

does not mean that they were unknown to the Vedic sages. In the Mahabharata, a

reference is made to a planet called Sweta and another planet called Mahapata,

which are Neptune and Uranus, respectively. After all, the Vedic sages were

definitely aware of the magnetic nodes, which don't have physical form, what to

speak of those outer gas giants. Keep in mind that the knowledge available to

the Vedic sages was not simply empiric; the source of their knowledge was

introspection. Their lives were guided by the Supersoul to whom they were

receptive because of their purity. It seems apparent, however, that the sages

didn't deem the influence of those planets to be substantial enough to warrant

inclusion in the astrological scheme of things. Some things can only be

understood through the disciplic succession because they aren't readily

perceived by empiric means. We don't know exactly why the sages didn't include

the outer planets in their astrological scheme; we don't know what their

reasoning was. Were we to speculate on possible logical explanations, it could

simply be that those planets are too far away to be influential. There is an

invisible barrier around the solar system, which is referred to in the Vedic

literature as the Loka-loka mountains. It is basically demarcated by the orbit

of Saturn. The planets with Loka-loka are deemed to be illuminating and the

ones outside of it not so. Maybe this has something to do with their exclusion

from the scheme of Vedic astrology.In the case of Pluto, it could even be that

this planet is simply too small to have any effect. Modern astronomers inform

us that Pluto is only a few hundred kilometers across, merely the size of many

asteroids. There is even agitation within the astronomical community to strip

from Pluto its status as a planet, primarily for this reason. And it is so far

away! As such, is it likely to influence human affairs as a planet? The point

is that when we go outside the framework of knowledge given to us by the sages

we are subject to error because of the imperfect nature of empiric processes,

such as our very sense perception. The sages have given us a very functional

system of astrology, so why tinker with it? "

http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/delucia/To from this group, send an

email to:Your use of is

subject to the

Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.Scan engine: VirusScan

/ Atualizado em 11/01/2003 / Versão: 1.3.13Proteja o seu e-mail Terra:

http://www.emailprotegido.terra.com.br/

[Guest guest]

JAYA JAGANNATHA!

 

Dear Dharmapada,

 

Hare Krishna.

 

" At this point, it is probably appropriate to point out that Vedic astrology

does not consider the outer planets Uranus, Neptune or Pluto. This does not

mean that they were unknown to the Vedic sages. In the Mahabharata, a reference

is made to a planet called Sweta and another planet called Mahapata, which are

Neptune and Uranus, respectively. After all, the Vedic sages were definitely

aware of the magnetic nodes, which don't have physical form, what to speak of

those outer gas giants. Keep in mind that the knowledge available to the Vedic

sages was not simply empiric; the source of their knowledge was introspection.

Their lives were guided by the Supersoul to whom they were receptive because of

their purity.

Could you please specify sections of Mahabharata mentioning these planets and on

what basis are we linkikng them to Neptune and Uranus? Iám not challenging,

rather Iám interested to offer good arguments to others.

It seems apparent, however, that the sages didn't deem the influence of those

planets to be substantial enough to warrant inclusion in the astrological

scheme of things. Some things can only be understood through the disciplic

succession because they aren't readily perceived by empiric means. We don't

know exactly why the sages didn't include the outer planets in their

astrological scheme; we don't know what their reasoning was. Were we to

speculate on possible logical explanations, it could simply be that those

planets are too far away to be influential. There is an invisible barrier

around the solar system, which is referred to in the Vedic literature as the

Loka-loka mountains. It is basically demarcated by the orbit of Saturn. The

planets with Loka-loka are deemed to be illuminating and the ones outside of it

not so. Maybe this has something to do with their exclusion from the scheme of

Vedic astrology.

In the 5th skancha of Srimad-Bhagavatam both the Saptagrahas and the seven

dvipas of the Bhu-mandala are mentioned. Do you find any correlation between

the orbits of the planets and the islands of the Bhu-mandala? You linked

Saturn's orbit to the outer island called pushkara-dvipa (pushkara is a lotus,

which reprresents the lotus in which Brahma was born. On this island Brahma is

worshipped as the representative of Bhagavan. Brahmai is linked to Saturn by

Parasara). What about the rest of the planets?

 

Yours,

 

Gauranga Das Vedic Astrologer gauranga (AT) brihaspati (DOT) net Jyotish Remedies:

WWW.BRIHASPATI.NET Phone:+36-309-140-839