Sayana/Nirayana Controversy

[Guest guest]

Dear jyotirved and Krishen Kaul,

I have read several of your previous mails on this forum. What you

should straightly say is that you follow the sayana system and you ask

us to follow the same. I am not interested, as I well understand that

any system that finds its base in Yuga system is a Nirayana system.

Suryasidhantha (by Maya) calculations uses the Yuga rationale and thus

propose a Nirayana System. We need a fixed (constant) framework to

note the movements in sky and except the Nirayana system none gives

it. In that sense it is much advanced and systematic than Sayana

system, which bases itself on a moving framework and which has got 2

points of equal importance vis Vernal and Autumnal Equinox.

I know that the Vedas says mostly about the Sayana system and only

rearly gives indications about the existence of a Nirayana system in

those days. But the Vedic or Non-Vedic foundation (or origin) of the

Nirayana system is not enough to keep me away from a system that is

more scientific and systematic. (Even if Nirayana system is Vedic,

Non-Vedic or Tantric I will follow that system as its beauty captures

my attention). Just think, even the word Nakshatra (used in Vedas)

refer to the fixed areas in sky. In Vedas you cannot see a single use

of the word Nakshatra to refer to other constellations/stars other

than the fixed stellar divisions. This is ample proof for the fact

that Nirayana Predictive astrology existed in Vedic period. Don't just

simply argue that only Sayana astrology is mentioned in Vedas. [before

trying to make fun of the word 'Vedic' used in the name of this forum,

please consider such arguments]

Even though little out of context one thing I would like to mention

is that the best person you can argue with in such matters is

Chandrahari, who has done an elaborate study of the subject. Dear

Krishnan Kaul if you are the person who wrote the article 'Predictive

astrology is not Vedic at all' in the 1999 ephemeris, your intentions

are pretty clear. I heard that you escaped an argument with

Chandrahari even when he was ready to supply the relevant material

(The incident is well discussed with details in Hari's book Hindu

Zodiac). Let me quote 2 or 3 para 'Hindu Zodiac', which could be

considered as a reply to Kaul. After discussing the mathematical

foundations of Nirayana System in detail, he says-

"What made Kaul to drift from Citrapaksa to the Sayana Rasichakra is

the lack of any physical rationale behind the Citrapaksa Rasichakra

and the allusions that we see in the Vedic and Puranic literature of a

Zodiac pivoted on the cardinal points. As we have seen already no

scientific mind can accept the irrational proposition of an arbitrary

choice of the initial point such as the point opposite Citra or that

of Ravathi to define the rasi naksatra substratum employed in

astrology. Equally disastrous is the sayana conception of a regressing

zero point or a Rasichakra having rasis and naksatras undergoing

perpetual modification of their limits due to the precession of the

equinoxes. Notwithstanding certain silly comments made by Kaul on the

supposed fixity of the sidereal zodiac, I am to uphold that the

sidereal zodiac I have presented - the Muladhara Rahu-Sikhi Cakra - is

eternally fixed and even if it is proven that Mula is having a proper

motion of one second or two second over a millennium, it is of no

consequence here in view of the occult and physical principles over

which the fiducial star is based (as already outlined in the preceding

section of the book Hindu Zodiac). In contrast to the Tantric zodiac,

the sayana seasonal or calendar zodiac has no locus standee in

astrology in view of the two equinoxes and two solstices, which

equally qualify as the zero point."

"Since time immemorial the zodiac has been sidereal as is evident

from the 12 Rasis and 27 Nakshatras having fixed limits and shapes.

Equinoxes and Solstices traversing the symbolic stellar background

inspired the Vedic seers to record them in mythological descriptions.

They have no permanent association with the solar ingress into Mesha,

Tula, Karkataka, and Makara. Confusion prevailing is the result of

Sidhantic texts that assumed zero ayanamsa or coincidence of the

sidereal and tropical zodiacs at their respective epochs".

"It is absurd to speak of the naksatras beginning with vernal

equinox whether it is Asvini or Krittika>>>>If Krittika was the

appellation given to the naksatra of vernal equinox, how can be

identify the naksatra?"

If nakshatra division starts with the vernal equinox how can we say

that the vernal equinox *traverse* through Nakshatras and Rasis? The

plenty evidence in favor of the movement of vernal equinox through

Nakshatras, point to the existence of well developed and systematic

Nirayana (sidereal) system in Vedic period. Otherwise how can it be

said that once the vernal equinox was in Mrigasira and then in

Krittika? If stellar divisions start with vernal equinox and if the

counting is started from Krittika or Aswani, the Vernal equinox will

be always in that Nakshatra only!! Dear Kaul how can you propose such

an absurd system? You are making fun of the intelligence of the Vedic

Seers!! There is no possibility that apart from the Nirayana system

the Sayana system proposed by the Vedic seers is the same as the one

proposed by you. [Please consider this point as well, before trying to

make fun of the word 'Vedic' used in the name of this forum]

Another point is that, it is impossible for you to convince me or

many in this forum, because we are getting accurate results using the

Nirayana system while predicting. "Jyothisha phalamadesa,

Phalardhamarambhanam bhavathi loke". Astrologers should predict

accurately. None will work on a system, if it is fruitless. i.e. if he

is unable to get correct results by using that system. The whole

effort of astrology is in this direction. I should state that Nirayana

system is capable of giving accurate results, which we know from our

daily experience. As I know that both Sayana and Nirayana predictive

system existed in Vedic period, I will not say that by using Sayana

system you can not get the same. Any point in a circle can serve the

purpose of a zero point and an intelligent person can develop a system

based on any of those points. Such system may give accurate results

for a short period. But if one wants to have a system that gives

accurate results for long, i.e. even generation after generations, he

should depend on a point that has got some special importance. Only

the Nirayana Zero point and the Vernal/Autumnal equinoxes of the

Sayana system qualify for this. And that is why only these two systems

existed in Vedic period. As the Nirayana system gives only one point

of unique importance and gives us a fixed framework to assess the

movements upon, it should be better for predicting destiny than the

sayana system. Of course (as proved by evidences from Vedic

literature) Sayana system is better to be used for the purpose of

Agriculture calendar, Climate studies and fixing of Yaga timings and

festivals that are related to agriculture and climatic changes.

Therefore truly we appreciate and praise the Sayana system as well.

But you should realize that most of the astrological classics (used to

analyze destiny and deals with predictive astrology) are written

keeping Nirayana system in mind. There are ample proofs for this in

astrological classics. (Of course there might be some books like

Manasagari or the like which by giving jenma phala for abhijit star

and the like indicate that they followed Sayana system, or rather

confused about what system to follow).

As far as this forum is concerned most of us use JHora software

developed by PVR, which gives us complete freedom in selecting either

Sayana or Nirayana calculations. I don't think that the originators or

moderators of this forum are against Sayana System. Any body is free

to follow the method they find good, acceptable, and gives correct

results. It is you people who are *against* the Nirayana system.

Therefore it is your trouble, and we are not at all worried. We

respect those who follow the Sayana system and Nirayana system

equally. (I am stating this not on behalf of this forum, but on behalf

of the thousands who follow the Nirayana system). Still I think that

most of the scholars participating in discussion of this forum are the

followers of Nirayana system.

With warm regards,

Sreenadh