A controversial article on vedic astrology...[2 cents]

July 8, 2006

Dear Prafulla,

Each of us (Devil's advocates -- welcome to that exclusive club!) are

really not adding two cents but simply 'scent' or perfume of chandan

to a nascent discipline known as jyotish!

Without controversies, the alternative is 'perfection'! Last time I

checked, we live in a reality that can go 'poof!' tomorrow for any of

us individually or for the rest of the world or a region! THAT is the

reality, whether we like it or not! The cause or catalyst that brings

that about does not matter!

So is there a role for Jyotish, still?

When marooned on an island with no hope, it is a sin to give up for

we were sent to this reality to live as long as we can, as best as we

can and S/HE and not one of the actors/actresses can make that

CURTAIN CALL!

Untill the curtain falls, we must keep on acting and entertaining

others -- some of the intrepid ones amongst us may want to change the

SCRIPT but for the remaining 99.9% (anecdotal stats!) of us, JYOTISH

is the SCRIPT!

It is amazing how many are willing to show up for the audition

without the SCRIPT or any clue about it!

RR

, Prafulla Gang <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Ranjan ji

>

> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any subject. and it

is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not warrant

correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still proceed.

>

> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research papers

etc), still does not answer the basic question - the ayanamsa (or

planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

>

> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather devil's

advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest (if at

all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting from

wrong chart.

>

> regards / Prafulla Gang

>

> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>

> >

> > jyotish_vani

> > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> >

> > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

astrology...[2

> > cents]

> >

> > The just do not call it two cents!

> > Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> >

> > So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential Value'?

> > Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> >

> > ANON

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> >>

> >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

another, and

> > another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>

>

July 8, 2006

Dear Rishi,

Are you not using the term 'astrologers' a bit loosely?

Divinators is a better term since you have not examined if they were

using astrology!

Healers is a better term and more accurate than physicians or doctors!

Big difference!

Though not to the one that was suffering and got HEALED!

And that is "ABSOLUTELY" ESSENTIAL to SHARE too!!

Love

RR

, "rishi_2000in"

<rishi_2000in wrote:

>

> Cents or seconds, currency or time, they keep changing.

> Stephen Hawking was bullish, I believe some years/time ago that

soon

> there will be a Theory of Everything.

> Today, He suggests, that there may not be a Theory of Everything

and

> lives with it comfortably.

> Thousands of astrologers spread all over India give reasonably

> accurate predictions either without bothering about ayanamsha or

> taking different ayanamshas.

> Changing situations change potentials and values, even that of time.

> Calendars,distances all change their units too.

> So, Jyotish can grow and thrive with different ayanamshas.

> regards

>

> rishi

>

> , "crystal pages"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > The just do not call it two cents!

> > Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> >

> > So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

Value'?

> > Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> >

> > ANON

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

another,

> and

> > another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

I should nothave said, "astrologers" but "jyotishis".

For they call themselves "jyotishis".

-- In , "crystal pages"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Dear Rishi,

>

> Are you not using the term 'astrologers' a bit loosely?

>

> Divinators is a better term since you have not examined if they

were

> using astrology!

>

> Healers is a better term and more accurate than physicians or

doctors!

>

> Big difference!

>

> Though not to the one that was suffering and got HEALED!

>

> And that is "ABSOLUTELY" ESSENTIAL to SHARE too!!

>

> Love

>

> RR

>

> , "rishi_2000in"

> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> >

> > Cents or seconds, currency or time, they keep changing.

> > Stephen Hawking was bullish, I believe some years/time ago that

> soon

> > there will be a Theory of Everything.

> > Today, He suggests, that there may not be a Theory of Everything

> and

> > lives with it comfortably.

> > Thousands of astrologers spread all over India give reasonably

> > accurate predictions either without bothering about ayanamsha or

> > taking different ayanamshas.

> > Changing situations change potentials and values, even that of

time.

> > Calendars,distances all change their units too.

> > So, Jyotish can grow and thrive with different ayanamshas.

> > regards

> >

> > rishi

> >

> > , "crystal pages"

> > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > >

> > > The just do not call it two cents!

> > > Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > >

> > > So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

> Value'?

> > > Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> > >

> > > ANON

> > >

> > > , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> another,

> > and

> > > another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

For starters about this annual rate of precision:

Usha Shashi's blue book "Hindu Astrological Calculations" that

everyone on this seriously interested and strongly opinionated

erudite forum must have read but may have forgotten temporarily,

obviously! It is not a constant, because we are talking about a

wobble and anyone who remembers a top, a lattu remembers I am sure

that it does not wobble uniformly but has a certain poit where it

halts or hesitates!

There is also some NASA JPL evidence given by a Japanese

astrophysicist who I was once steered towards. If I find it readily

in my archives, I will share.

RR

, Prafulla Gang <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Rishi ji

>

> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human mind,

often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge (or his

blind vision).

>

> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words - what

is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

>

> regards / Prafulla Gang

>

> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>

> >

> > rishi_2000in

> > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> >

> > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

astrology...[2

> > cents]

> >

> > Prafullaji,

> > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

Parasara or

> > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those treatises

> > sometime over the past centuries.

> > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have come

> > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which has

been

> > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits that the

> > words are his own.

> > In this book the author gives a different method of calculating

> > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > regards

> > rishi

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> >>

> >> Dear Ranjan ji

> >>

> >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any subject. and

it

> > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not warrant

> > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

proceed.

> >>

> >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research papers

> > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the ayanamsa (or

> > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> >>

> >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather devil's

> > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest (if at

> > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting from

> > wrong chart.

> >>

> >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>

> >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

> > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>

> >>>

> >>> jyotish_vani@

> >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> >>>

> >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > astrology...[2

> >>> cents]

> >>>

> >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> >>>

> >>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

Value'?

> >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> >>>

> >>> ANON

> >>>

> >>> , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> >>> wrote:

> >>>>

> >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another, and

> >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>

> >>

>

July 8, 2006

Actor to another performer:

As long as we let the 'curtain fall" and possibly the applause

determine our self-worth, determine our *role* we remain mere puppets!

Not in life, nor in what we consider is jyotish/astrology/divination

do we have to be relegated to the same attitude!

What is the point of learning to drive, if you are afraid of cars and

reaching somewhere faster? You may as well walk -- or just use the

movement provided by a rocking chair! You are moving but not going

anywhere!!

RR

, Prafulla Gang <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Ranjan ji

>

> Simple and difficult question!!! Perhaps sole criteria is maturity

of soul.

>

> Yes, we all human beings are acting till the curtain falls..and at

some stage, we want to assess / reassess the parameters of such an

act - without knowing much about it ( though we may not like to

accept it).

>

> regards / Prafulla Gang

>

> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>

> >

> > jyotish_vani

> > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:32:30 -0000

> >

> > Re: A controversial article on vedic astrology...[2

cents]

> >

> > Dear Prafulla,

> >

> > Each of us (Devil's advocates -- welcome to that exclusive club!)

are

> > really not adding two cents but simply 'scent' or perfume of

chandan

> > to a nascent discipline known as jyotish!

> >

> > Without controversies, the alternative is 'perfection'! Last time

I

> > checked, we live in a reality that can go 'poof!' tomorrow for

any of

> > us individually or for the rest of the world or a region! THAT is

the

> > reality, whether we like it or not! The cause or catalyst that

brings

> > that about does not matter!

> >

> > So is there a role for Jyotish, still?

> >

> > When marooned on an island with no hope, it is a sin to give up

for

> > we were sent to this reality to live as long as we can, as best

as we

> > can and S/HE and not one of the actors/actresses can make that

> > CURTAIN CALL!

> >

> > Untill the curtain falls, we must keep on acting and entertaining

> > others -- some of the intrepid ones amongst us may want to change

the

> > SCRIPT but for the remaining 99.9% (anecdotal stats!) of us,

JYOTISH

> > is the SCRIPT!

> >

> > It is amazing how many are willing to show up for the audition

> > without the SCRIPT or any clue about it!

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> >>

> >> Dear Ranjan ji

> >>

> >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any subject. and

it

> > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not warrant

> > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

proceed.

> >>

> >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research papers

> > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the ayanamsa (or

> > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> >>

> >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather devil's

> > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest (if at

> > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting from

> > wrong chart.

> >>

> >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>

> >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

> > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>

> >>>

> >>> jyotish_vani@

> >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> >>>

> >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > astrology...[2

> >>> cents]

> >>>

> >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> >>>

> >>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

Value'?

> >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> >>>

> >>> ANON

> >>>

> >>> , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> >>> wrote:

> >>>>

> >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another, and

> >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>

> >>

>

July 8, 2006

Prafullaji,

This reference is from a book called " Sodaharanbhashateekopeta" of

the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of century.

It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

"shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala hota

hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota hai.

Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se jitne

maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been asking

JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a successful

practice seem nonplussed about this.

regards

rishi

, Prafulla Gang <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Rishi ji

>

> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human mind,

often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge (or his

blind vision).

>

> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words - what

is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

>

> regards / Prafulla Gang

>

> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>

> >

> > rishi_2000in

> > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> >

> > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

astrology...[2

> > cents]

> >

> > Prafullaji,

> > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

Parasara or

> > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those treatises

> > sometime over the past centuries.

> > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have come

> > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which has

been

> > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits that the

> > words are his own.

> > In this book the author gives a different method of calculating

> > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > regards

> > rishi

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> >>

> >> Dear Ranjan ji

> >>

> >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any subject. and

it

> > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not warrant

> > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

proceed.

> >>

> >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research papers

> > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the ayanamsa (or

> > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> >>

> >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather devil's

> > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest (if at

> > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting from

> > wrong chart.

> >>

> >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>

> >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

> > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>

> >>>

> >>> jyotish_vani@

> >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> >>>

> >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > astrology...[2

> >>> cents]

> >>>

> >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> >>>

> >>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

Value'?

> >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> >>>

> >>> ANON

> >>>

> >>> , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> >>> wrote:

> >>>>

> >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another, and

> >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>

> >>

>

July 8, 2006

Rishiji,

Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to give me

the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

Thanks

RR

, "rishi_2000in"

<rishi_2000in wrote:

>

> Prafullaji,

> This reference is from a book called " Sodaharanbhashateekopeta" of

> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of century.

> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

>

> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala hota

> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota hai.

> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se

jitne

> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

>

> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been asking

> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a successful

> practice seem nonplussed about this.

> regards

>

> rishi

>

> , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Rishi ji

> >

> > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

mind,

> often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge (or

his

> blind vision).

> >

> > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

what

> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> >

> > regards / Prafulla Gang

> >

> > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >

> > >

> > > rishi_2000in@

> > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > >

> > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> astrology...[2

> > > cents]

> > >

> > > Prafullaji,

> > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> Parasara or

> > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

treatises

> > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have come

> > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which

has

> been

> > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits that

the

> > > words are his own.

> > > In this book the author gives a different method of calculating

> > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > regards

> > > rishi

> > >

> > > , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> > > wrote:

> > >>

> > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > >>

> > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any subject.

and

> it

> > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not warrant

> > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

> proceed.

> > >>

> > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

papers

> > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the ayanamsa

(or

> > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > >>

> > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather devil's

> > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest (if

at

> > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting

from

> > > wrong chart.

> > >>

> > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > >>

> > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

another,

> > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >>

> > >>>

> > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > >>>

> > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > astrology...[2

> > >>> cents]

> > >>>

> > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > >>>

> > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

> Value'?

> > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> > >>>

> > >>> ANON

> > >>>

> > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> <jyotish@>

> > >>> wrote:

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > another, and

> > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >>>>

> > >>

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Dear Prafulla,

FEAR is an irrational, visceral reaction and I believe

(instinctively/viscerally) that we inherit our fears (some if not

all) from earlier experiences (childhood or perhaps going back even

further!).

Most of us are born with these 'fear memories', a few of us are born

with other memories as well -- of what we managed to learn earlier,

though not always clearly. Perhaps these memories are linked with

emotions, trickled through lifetimes and now we follow these past

links with passion that we do not understand or can explain really!

As I have written earlier, and I believe it is in the files area --

my two cents about the sidereal zodiac and tropical zodiac! Ayanamsha

only is meaningful and plays a role in only one of these -- the one

we jyotishis are blessed with! There is no tropical ayanamsha! There

is no tropical zodiac too, celestially speaking! It is a framework

that is very earthbound and palpable! As are seasons! When summer you

feel warm, when winter you are cold, when autumn ... you get the

point!

I am going out for a drive ...

RR

, Prafulla Gang <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Ranjan ji

>

> We may choose to define our acts as - knowing, not knowing,

pretending to know, fears, no fears, pretending to be afraid of..and

so on..but do we write script? Yes, we can and we do..and our next

script release - again depends upon the previous acts / scripts...

>

> You have explored tropical astrology (not merely tropical

ayanamsa)..and what do you suggest - if the chart is read per vedic

astrology norms, but with tropical ayanamsa.

>

> regards / Prafulla Gang

>

> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>

> >

> > jyotish_vani

> > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 04:01:46 -0000

> >

> > Re: A controversial article on vedic astrology...[2

cents]

> >

> > Actor to another performer:

> >

> > As long as we let the 'curtain fall" and possibly the applause

> > determine our self-worth, determine our *role* we remain mere

puppets!

> >

> > Not in life, nor in what we consider is

jyotish/astrology/divination

> > do we have to be relegated to the same attitude!

> >

> > What is the point of learning to drive, if you are afraid of cars

and

> > reaching somewhere faster? You may as well walk -- or just use the

> > movement provided by a rocking chair! You are moving but not going

> > anywhere!!

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> >>

> >> Dear Ranjan ji

> >>

> >> Simple and difficult question!!! Perhaps sole criteria is

maturity

> > of soul.

> >>

> >> Yes, we all human beings are acting till the curtain falls..and

at

> > some stage, we want to assess / reassess the parameters of such an

> > act - without knowing much about it ( though we may not like to

> > accept it).

> >>

> >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>

> >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

> > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>

> >>>

> >>> jyotish_vani@

> >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:32:30 -0000

> >>>

> >>> Re: A controversial article on vedic astrology...

[2

> > cents]

> >>>

> >>> Dear Prafulla,

> >>>

> >>> Each of us (Devil's advocates -- welcome to that exclusive

club!)

> > are

> >>> really not adding two cents but simply 'scent' or perfume of

> > chandan

> >>> to a nascent discipline known as jyotish!

> >>>

> >>> Without controversies, the alternative is 'perfection'! Last

time

> > I

> >>> checked, we live in a reality that can go 'poof!' tomorrow for

> > any of

> >>> us individually or for the rest of the world or a region! THAT

is

> > the

> >>> reality, whether we like it or not! The cause or catalyst that

> > brings

> >>> that about does not matter!

> >>>

> >>> So is there a role for Jyotish, still?

> >>>

> >>> When marooned on an island with no hope, it is a sin to give up

> > for

> >>> we were sent to this reality to live as long as we can, as best

> > as we

> >>> can and S/HE and not one of the actors/actresses can make that

> >>> CURTAIN CALL!

> >>>

> >>> Untill the curtain falls, we must keep on acting and

entertaining

> >>> others -- some of the intrepid ones amongst us may want to

change

> > the

> >>> SCRIPT but for the remaining 99.9% (anecdotal stats!) of us,

> > JYOTISH

> >>> is the SCRIPT!

> >>>

> >>> It is amazing how many are willing to show up for the audition

> >>> without the SCRIPT or any clue about it!

> >>>

> >>> RR

> >>>

> >>> , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> >>> wrote:

> >>>>

> >>>> Dear Ranjan ji

> >>>>

> >>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any subject.

and

> > it

> >>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not warrant

> >>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

> > proceed.

> >>>>

> >>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

papers

> >>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the ayanamsa

(or

> >>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> >>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> >>>>

> >>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather devil's

> >>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> >>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest (if

at

> >>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting

from

> >>> wrong chart.

> >>>>

> >>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>>>

> >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

another,

> >>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>

> >>>>>

> >>>>> jyotish_vani@

> >>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> >>> astrology...[2

> >>>>> cents]

> >>>>>

> >>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

> >>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> >>>>>

> >>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

> > Value'?

> >>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> >>>>>

> >>>>> ANON

> >>>>>

> >>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> >>>>> wrote:

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> >>> another, and

> >>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>

> >>

>

> __________

> Inbox.com Photos - Share your photos with your friends and family!

> Visit http://www.inbox.com/photosharing to find out more!

>

July 8, 2006

Respected Gurujan,

Ayanansha calculations;

[ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by 60 one

gets the ayanansha.

[ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok 7 !

[ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder at two

places.

step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step 1.

step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

The result is the ayanansha for that year.

With naman to all gurujan

Varun Trivedi

, "crystal pages"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Rishiji,

>

> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to give me

> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

>

> Thanks

>

> RR

>

> , "rishi_2000in"

> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> >

> > Prafullaji,

> > This reference is from a book called " Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

of

> > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

century.

> > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

> >

> > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

hota

> > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota

hai.

> > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se

> jitne

> > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> >

> > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

> > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

asking

> > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a successful

> > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > regards

> >

> > rishi

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Rishi ji

> > >

> > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

> mind,

> > often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge (or

> his

> > blind vision).

> > >

> > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

> what

> > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > >

> > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > >

> > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

another,

> > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > >

> > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > astrology...[2

> > > > cents]

> > > >

> > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> > Parasara or

> > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> treatises

> > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

come

> > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which

> has

> > been

> > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

that

> the

> > > > words are his own.

> > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

calculating

> > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > regards

> > > > rishi

> > > >

> > > > , Prafulla Gang

> <jyotish@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > >>

> > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > >>

> > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

subject.

> and

> > it

> > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

warrant

> > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

> > proceed.

> > > >>

> > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

> papers

> > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

ayanamsa

> (or

> > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > >>

> > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

devil's

> > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

(if

> at

> > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting

> from

> > > > wrong chart.

> > > >>

> > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > >>

> > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> another,

> > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >>

> > > >>>

> > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > >>>

> > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > astrology...[2

> > > >>> cents]

> > > >>>

> > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > >>>

> > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

> > Value'?

> > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> > > >>>

> > > >>> ANON

> > > >>>

> > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> > > >>> wrote:

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > > another, and

> > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >>>>

> > > >>

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Dear Varun ji

All fine. The question is - if Parashar or any other sage - mentioned about it and if not, which one they followed?

regards / Prafulla Gang

Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another, and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>

> varun_trvd (AT) (DOT) co.in

> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 05:31:35 -0000

>

> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic astrology...[2

> cents]

>

> Respected Gurujan,

>

> Ayanansha calculations;

>

> [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

>

> Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by 60 one

> gets the ayanansha.

>

> [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

>

> ---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok 7 !

>

> [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

>

> step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder at two

> places.

> step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step 1.

> step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

>

> The result is the ayanansha for that year.

>

> With naman to all gurujan

>

> Varun Trivedi

>

> , "crystal pages"

> <jyotish_vani wrote:

>>

>> Rishiji,

>>

>> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to give me

>> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

>>

>> Thanks

>>

>> RR

>>

>> , "rishi_2000in"

>> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

>>>

>>> Prafullaji,

>>> This reference is from a book called " Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> of

>>> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

>>> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> century.

>>> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

>>> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

>>>

>>> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> hota

>>> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota

> hai.

>>> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se

>> jitne

>>> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

>>>

>>> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

>>> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> asking

>>> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a successful

>>> practice seem nonplussed about this.

>>> regards

>>>

>>> rishi

>>>

>>> , Prafulla Gang

> <jyotish@>

>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Dear Rishi ji

>>>>

>>>> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

>>> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

>> mind,

>>> often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge (or

>> his

>>> blind vision).

>>>>

>>>> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

>> what

>>> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

>>>>

>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

>>>>

>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> another,

>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> rishi_2000in@

>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

>>>>>

>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

>>> astrology...[2

>>>>> cents]

>>>>>

>>>>> Prafullaji,

>>>>> So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

>>> Parasara or

>>>>> Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

>> treatises

>>>>> sometime over the past centuries.

>>>>> Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

> come

>>>>> across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which

>> has

>>> been

>>>>> printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> that

>> the

>>>>> words are his own.

>>>>> In this book the author gives a different method of

> calculating

>>>>> ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

>>>>> regards

>>>>> rishi

>>>>>

>>>>> , Prafulla Gang

>> <jyotish@>

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Dear Ranjan ji

>>>>>>

>>>>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> subject.

>> and

>>> it

>>>>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> warrant

>>>>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

>>> proceed.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

>> papers

>>>>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> ayanamsa

>> (or

>>>>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

>>>>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> devil's

>>>>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

>>>>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

> (if

>> at

>>>>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting

>> from

>>>>> wrong chart.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

>> another,

>>>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> jyotish_vani@

>>>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

>>>>> astrology...[2

>>>>>>> cents]

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

>>>>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

>>> Value'?

>>>>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> ANON

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> , Prafulla Gang

>>> <jyotish@>

>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

>>>>> another, and

>>>>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>

July 8, 2006

Why is this so?

Why must we buy into this??

RR

, "varun_trvd"

<varun_trvd wrote:

>

> Respected Gurujan,

>

> Ayanansha calculations;

>

> [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

>

> Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by 60 one

> gets the ayanansha.

>

> [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

>

> ---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok 7 !

>

> [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

>

> step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder at

two

> places.

> step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step 1.

> step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

>

> The result is the ayanansha for that year.

>

> With naman to all gurujan

>

> Varun Trivedi

>

> , "crystal pages"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > Rishiji,

> >

> > Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to give

me

> > the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , "rishi_2000in"

> > <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Prafullaji,

> > > This reference is from a book called "

Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> of

> > > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> century.

> > > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

> > >

> > > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> hota

> > > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota

> hai.

> > > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se

> > jitne

> > > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > >

> > > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

> > > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> asking

> > > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

successful

> > > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > regards

> > >

> > > rishi

> > >

> > > , Prafulla Gang

> <jyotish@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Rishi ji

> > > >

> > > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

> > mind,

> > > often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge

(or

> > his

> > > blind vision).

> > > >

> > > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

> > what

> > > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > > >

> > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > >

> > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> another,

> > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > >

> > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > astrology...[2

> > > > > cents]

> > > > >

> > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> > > Parasara or

> > > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> > treatises

> > > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

> come

> > > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

which

> > has

> > > been

> > > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> that

> > the

> > > > > words are his own.

> > > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

> calculating

> > > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > > regards

> > > > > rishi

> > > > >

> > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > >>

> > > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> subject.

> > and

> > > it

> > > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> warrant

> > > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

still

> > > proceed.

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

> > papers

> > > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> ayanamsa

> > (or

> > > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > >>

> > > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> devil's

> > > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out

of

> > > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

> (if

> > at

> > > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

predicting

> > from

> > > > > wrong chart.

> > > > >>

> > > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another,

> > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >>

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > >>> cents]

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or

even 'Potential

> > > Value'?

> > > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> ANON

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > <jyotish@>

> > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > > > another, and

> > > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

In all fairness Prafulla, I do not believe Parashara or his

contemporaries or precedents or followers really needed ayanamshas!

Ayanamsha is a recent phenomenon I think.

Though sidereal zodiac we follow is up in the sky and the visible

zodiac, it is kind of strange if not weird that we need to tune into

the seasonal zodiac and then back-calculate that which is visible and

up there!

Too bad Brahma did not put a bright star at aries zero up there or we

would not be hawing and hemming about ayanamsha for centuries!

Maybe it is God's way to remind us that East and West must live

together as brothers and sisters. Most siblings fight and through

fighting they make each other stronger!

If you can really survive your sibling and all those life-threatening

feuds with that vicious brother of yours (usually!), who can really

hurt you, because if someone really tries to, your sibling would be

the first one to come to your aid!

It is true!

RR

, Prafulla Gang <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Varun ji

>

> All fine. The question is - if Parashar or any other sage -

mentioned about it and if not, which one they followed?

>

> regards / Prafulla Gang

>

> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>

> >

> > varun_trvd

> > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 05:31:35 -0000

> >

> > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

astrology...[2

> > cents]

> >

> > Respected Gurujan,

> >

> > Ayanansha calculations;

> >

> > [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

> >

> > Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by 60 one

> > gets the ayanansha.

> >

> > [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

> >

> > ---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok 7 !

> >

> > [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

> >

> > step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder at

two

> > places.

> > step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> > step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step 1.

> > step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

> >

> > The result is the ayanansha for that year.

> >

> > With naman to all gurujan

> >

> > Varun Trivedi

> >

> > , "crystal pages"

> > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >>

> >> Rishiji,

> >>

> >> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to give

me

> >> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> >>

> >> Thanks

> >>

> >> RR

> >>

> >> , "rishi_2000in"

> >> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> >>>

> >>> Prafullaji,

> >>> This reference is from a book called " Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > of

> >>> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> >>> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > century.

> >>> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> >>> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

> >>>

> >>> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> > hota

> >>> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota

> > hai.

> >>> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se

> >> jitne

> >>> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> >>>

> >>> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

> >>> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > asking

> >>> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a successful

> >>> practice seem nonplussed about this.

> >>> regards

> >>>

> >>> rishi

> >>>

> >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> >>> wrote:

> >>>>

> >>>> Dear Rishi ji

> >>>>

> >>>> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> >>> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

> >> mind,

> >>> often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge (or

> >> his

> >>> blind vision).

> >>>>

> >>>> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

> >> what

> >>> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> >>>>

> >>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>>>

> >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another,

> >>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>

> >>>>>

> >>>>> rishi_2000in@

> >>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> >>> astrology...[2

> >>>>> cents]

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Prafullaji,

> >>>>> So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> >>> Parasara or

> >>>>> Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> >> treatises

> >>>>> sometime over the past centuries.

> >>>>> Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

> > come

> >>>>> across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which

> >> has

> >>> been

> >>>>> printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> > that

> >> the

> >>>>> words are his own.

> >>>>> In this book the author gives a different method of

> > calculating

> >>>>> ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> >>>>> regards

> >>>>> rishi

> >>>>>

> >>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> >> <jyotish@>

> >>>>> wrote:

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Dear Ranjan ji

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > subject.

> >> and

> >>> it

> >>>>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> > warrant

> >>>>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

> >>> proceed.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

> >> papers

> >>>>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > ayanamsa

> >> (or

> >>>>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> >>>>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> > devil's

> >>>>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> >>>>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

> > (if

> >> at

> >>>>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting

> >> from

> >>>>> wrong chart.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> >> another,

> >>>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> jyotish_vani@

> >>>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> >>>>> astrology...[2

> >>>>>>> cents]

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

> >>>>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

> >>> Value'?

> >>>>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> ANON

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> >>> <jyotish@>

> >>>>>>> wrote:

> >>>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> >>>>> another, and

> >>>>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>>>>>

> >>>>>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>

>

July 8, 2006

RRji,

My earlier reply got deleted as the net connection faltered.

First language or not, your hindi is better than atleast mine. I

have not tried out the ayanamsha but when I calculate, I get a value

of 23 degree 40 mins for the mansagari way of calculation for 26 Jan

1947 as against Lahiri of 23 deg 6 mins.

My point, however, is that most of the jyotish books either take

ayanamsha for granted or dismiss it summarily just as Mansagari has

done or just as Trivediji points out in grahalaghave paddhati.

I have seen that most of the practising jyotishis also do the same

thing.

Yet,they achieve a reasonable success rate.

Jyotish, therefore, has been thriving despite the fact that

logically its very basis is moving!

Ah...a dubious way of explaining away, not working. Must be Mars

reaching the deep debility point in transit!!

May be the hazy picture will get a slightly more clear vision

someday.So do tolerate.

But do not accept the ayanamsha just because it is said so.

regards

rishi

, "crystal pages"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Why is this so?

> Why must we buy into this??

>

> RR

>

> , "varun_trvd"

> <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> >

> > Respected Gurujan,

> >

> > Ayanansha calculations;

> >

> > [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

> >

> > Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by 60

one

> > gets the ayanansha.

> >

> > [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

> >

> > ---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok 7 !

> >

> > [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

> >

> > step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder at

> two

> > places.

> > step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> > step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step 1.

> > step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

> >

> > The result is the ayanansha for that year.

> >

> > With naman to all gurujan

> >

> > Varun Trivedi

> >

> > , "crystal pages"

> > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Rishiji,

> > >

> > > Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to

give

> me

> > > the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > >

> > > RR

> > >

> > > , "rishi_2000in"

> > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > This reference is from a book called "

> Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > of

> > > > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > > > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > century.

> > > > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

sanskrit.

> > > >

> > > > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> > hota

> > > > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha

hota

> > hai.

> > > > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada

se

> > > jitne

> > > > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > > >

> > > > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from

shaka

> > > > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > asking

> > > > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> successful

> > > > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > > regards

> > > >

> > > > rishi

> > > >

> > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Rishi ji

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > > > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak

human

> > > mind,

> > > > often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge

> (or

> > > his

> > > > blind vision).

> > > > >

> > > > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

words -

> > > what

> > > > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > > > >

> > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > >

> > > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another,

> > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > cents]

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed

to

> > > > Parasara or

> > > > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> > > treatises

> > > > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I

have

> > come

> > > > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

> which

> > > has

> > > > been

> > > > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> > that

> > > the

> > > > > > words are his own.

> > > > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

> > calculating

> > > > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > > > regards

> > > > > > rishi

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > subject.

> > > and

> > > > it

> > > > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> > warrant

> > > > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

> still

> > > > proceed.

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings

(research

> > > papers

> > > > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > ayanamsa

> > > (or

> > > > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

including

> > > > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> > devil's

> > > > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly

out

> of

> > > > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe /

digest

> > (if

> > > at

> > > > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

> predicting

> > > from

> > > > > > wrong chart.

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

and

> > > another,

> > > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > >>> cents]

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or

> even 'Potential

> > > > Value'?

> > > > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific

type ;-)

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> ANON

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

and

> > > > > > another, and

> > > > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Precession is an established scientific fact, Sir. The current rate

is also there to see.

Just because in the chain of history we have lost some links does

not mean Parasara etal did not use ayanamsha.

, "crystal pages"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> In all fairness Prafulla, I do not believe Parashara or his

> contemporaries or precedents or followers really needed ayanamshas!

> Ayanamsha is a recent phenomenon I think.

>

> Though sidereal zodiac we follow is up in the sky and the visible

> zodiac, it is kind of strange if not weird that we need to tune

into

> the seasonal zodiac and then back-calculate that which is visible

and

> up there!

>

> Too bad Brahma did not put a bright star at aries zero up there or

we

> would not be hawing and hemming about ayanamsha for centuries!

>

> Maybe it is God's way to remind us that East and West must live

> together as brothers and sisters. Most siblings fight and through

> fighting they make each other stronger!

>

> If you can really survive your sibling and all those life-

threatening

> feuds with that vicious brother of yours (usually!), who can

really

> hurt you, because if someone really tries to, your sibling would

be

> the first one to come to your aid!

>

> It is true!

>

> RR

>

> , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Varun ji

> >

> > All fine. The question is - if Parashar or any other sage -

> mentioned about it and if not, which one they followed?

> >

> > regards / Prafulla Gang

> >

> > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

another,

> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >

> > >

> > > varun_trvd@

> > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 05:31:35 -0000

> > >

> > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> astrology...[2

> > > cents]

> > >

> > > Respected Gurujan,

> > >

> > > Ayanansha calculations;

> > >

> > > [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

> > >

> > > Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by 60

one

> > > gets the ayanansha.

> > >

> > > [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

> > >

> > > ---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok 7 !

> > >

> > > [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

> > >

> > > step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder

at

> two

> > > places.

> > > step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> > > step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step 1.

> > > step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

> > >

> > > The result is the ayanansha for that year.

> > >

> > > With naman to all gurujan

> > >

> > > Varun Trivedi

> > >

> > > , "crystal pages"

> > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > >>

> > >> Rishiji,

> > >>

> > >> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to

give

> me

> > >> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > >>

> > >> Thanks

> > >>

> > >> RR

> > >>

> > >> , "rishi_2000in"

> > >> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > >>>

> > >>> Prafullaji,

> > >>> This reference is from a book called "

Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > > of

> > >>> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > >>> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > > century.

> > >>> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > >>> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

sanskrit.

> > >>>

> > >>> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> > > hota

> > >>> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha

hota

> > > hai.

> > >>> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada

se

> > >> jitne

> > >>> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > >>>

> > >>> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from

shaka

> > >>> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > > asking

> > >>> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

successful

> > >>> practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > >>> regards

> > >>>

> > >>> rishi

> > >>>

> > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > <jyotish@>

> > >>> wrote:

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Dear Rishi ji

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > >>> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak

human

> > >> mind,

> > >>> often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge

(or

> > >> his

> > >>> blind vision).

> > >>>>

> > >>>> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

words -

> > >> what

> > >>> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > >>>>

> > >>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > another,

> > >>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >>>>

> > >>>>>

> > >>>>> rishi_2000in@

> > >>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > >>>>>

> > >>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > >>> astrology...[2

> > >>>>> cents]

> > >>>>>

> > >>>>> Prafullaji,

> > >>>>> So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> > >>> Parasara or

> > >>>>> Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> > >> treatises

> > >>>>> sometime over the past centuries.

> > >>>>> Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

> > > come

> > >>>>> across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

which

> > >> has

> > >>> been

> > >>>>> printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> > > that

> > >> the

> > >>>>> words are his own.

> > >>>>> In this book the author gives a different method of

> > > calculating

> > >>>>> ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > >>>>> regards

> > >>>>> rishi

> > >>>>>

> > >>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > >> <jyotish@>

> > >>>>> wrote:

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> Dear Ranjan ji

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > > subject.

> > >> and

> > >>> it

> > >>>>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> > > warrant

> > >>>>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

still

> > >>> proceed.

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

> > >> papers

> > >>>>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > > ayanamsa

> > >> (or

> > >>>>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

including

> > >>>>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> > > devil's

> > >>>>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out

of

> > >>>>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

> > > (if

> > >> at

> > >>>>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

predicting

> > >> from

> > >>>>> wrong chart.

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > >> another,

> > >>>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> jyotish_vani@

> > >>>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > >>>>> astrology...[2

> > >>>>>>> cents]

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > >>>>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or

even 'Potential

> > >>> Value'?

> > >>>>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-

)

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> ANON

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > >>> <jyotish@>

> > >>>>>>> wrote:

> > >>>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > >>>>> another, and

> > >>>>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >>>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>

> > >>>

> > >>

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Res. Rohini ji,

The saka samvat 1869 started on march 23, 1947. On that day the

grahlaghav ayanansha was 23d45m0s and the makarand ayanansha was

21d43m12s

You could deduct the proportionate monthly progression from this

value to arrive at the value on Jan 26, 1947.

With naman to all gurujan.

Varun Trivedi

, "crystal pages"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Rishiji,

>

> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to give me

> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

>

> Thanks

>

> RR

>

> , "rishi_2000in"

> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> >

> > Prafullaji,

> > This reference is from a book called " Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

of

> > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

century.

> > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

> >

> > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

hota

> > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota

hai.

> > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se

> jitne

> > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> >

> > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

> > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

asking

> > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a successful

> > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > regards

> >

> > rishi

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Rishi ji

> > >

> > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

> mind,

> > often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge (or

> his

> > blind vision).

> > >

> > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

> what

> > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > >

> > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > >

> > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

another,

> > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > >

> > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > astrology...[2

> > > > cents]

> > > >

> > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> > Parasara or

> > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> treatises

> > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

come

> > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which

> has

> > been

> > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

that

> the

> > > > words are his own.

> > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

calculating

> > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > regards

> > > > rishi

> > > >

> > > > , Prafulla Gang

> <jyotish@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > >>

> > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > >>

> > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

subject.

> and

> > it

> > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

warrant

> > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

> > proceed.

> > > >>

> > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

> papers

> > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

ayanamsa

> (or

> > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > >>

> > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

devil's

> > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

(if

> at

> > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting

> from

> > > > wrong chart.

> > > >>

> > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > >>

> > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> another,

> > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >>

> > > >>>

> > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > >>>

> > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > astrology...[2

> > > >>> cents]

> > > >>>

> > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > >>>

> > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

> > Value'?

> > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> > > >>>

> > > >>> ANON

> > > >>>

> > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> > > >>> wrote:

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > > another, and

> > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >>>>

> > > >>

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Dear brother Rishi,

I would not fall out of my chair if we modern followers of Parashara

were to find out that despite our phenomenal

worldly/material/engineering type cerebral progress and discoveries,

contemporaries of Parashara had a direct way of calculating

astrological bits and bytes!

This 'drik' (drishta) ganit kind of tugs at my heart. What is it?

Does anyone here know and can shed light upon? Why is it called drik,

and not adrishta ganit, like what we utilize now? More like sparshya

ganit (summer when it is hot, winter when it is cold)?

Math has always been a big challenge for me personally and I am

envious of all these math types that are interested in jyotish.

Surely, they and not people like me, math-challenged as I am, must be

providing answers to such question :-)

Until then -- I would rather be in limbo than in a hammock or arm-

chair ;-)

RR

, "rishi_2000in"

<rishi_2000in wrote:

>

> Precession is an established scientific fact, Sir. The current rate

> is also there to see.

> Just because in the chain of history we have lost some links does

> not mean Parasara etal did not use ayanamsha.

>

> , "crystal pages"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > In all fairness Prafulla, I do not believe Parashara or his

> > contemporaries or precedents or followers really needed

ayanamshas!

> > Ayanamsha is a recent phenomenon I think.

> >

> > Though sidereal zodiac we follow is up in the sky and the visible

> > zodiac, it is kind of strange if not weird that we need to tune

> into

> > the seasonal zodiac and then back-calculate that which is visible

> and

> > up there!

> >

> > Too bad Brahma did not put a bright star at aries zero up there

or

> we

> > would not be hawing and hemming about ayanamsha for centuries!

> >

> > Maybe it is God's way to remind us that East and West must live

> > together as brothers and sisters. Most siblings fight and through

> > fighting they make each other stronger!

> >

> > If you can really survive your sibling and all those life-

> threatening

> > feuds with that vicious brother of yours (usually!), who can

> really

> > hurt you, because if someone really tries to, your sibling would

> be

> > the first one to come to your aid!

> >

> > It is true!

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Varun ji

> > >

> > > All fine. The question is - if Parashar or any other sage -

> > mentioned about it and if not, which one they followed?

> > >

> > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > >

> > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> another,

> > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > varun_trvd@

> > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 05:31:35 -0000

> > > >

> > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > astrology...[2

> > > > cents]

> > > >

> > > > Respected Gurujan,

> > > >

> > > > Ayanansha calculations;

> > > >

> > > > [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

> > > >

> > > > Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by

60

> one

> > > > gets the ayanansha.

> > > >

> > > > [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

> > > >

> > > > ---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok

7 !

> > > >

> > > > [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

> > > >

> > > > step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder

> at

> > two

> > > > places.

> > > > step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> > > > step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step

1.

> > > > step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

> > > >

> > > > The result is the ayanansha for that year.

> > > >

> > > > With naman to all gurujan

> > > >

> > > > Varun Trivedi

> > > >

> > > > , "crystal pages"

> > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > > >>

> > > >> Rishiji,

> > > >>

> > > >> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to

> give

> > me

> > > >> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > > >>

> > > >> Thanks

> > > >>

> > > >> RR

> > > >>

> > > >> , "rishi_2000in"

> > > >> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > > >>>

> > > >>> Prafullaji,

> > > >>> This reference is from a book called "

> Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > > > of

> > > >>> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > > >>> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > > > century.

> > > >>> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > >>> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

> sanskrit.

> > > >>>

> > > >>> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> > > > hota

> > > >>> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha

> hota

> > > > hai.

> > > >>> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla

pratipada

> se

> > > >> jitne

> > > >>> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > > >>>

> > > >>> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from

> shaka

> > > >>> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > > > asking

> > > >>> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> successful

> > > >>> practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > >>> regards

> > > >>>

> > > >>> rishi

> > > >>>

> > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > > <jyotish@>

> > > >>> wrote:

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>> Dear Rishi ji

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > > >>> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak

> human

> > > >> mind,

> > > >>> often finds reason to back or question its faith /

knowledge

> (or

> > > >> his

> > > >>> blind vision).

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

> words -

> > > >> what

> > > >>> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > > another,

> > > >>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>>>

> > > >>>>> rishi_2000in@

> > > >>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > >>>>>

> > > >>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > >>> astrology...[2

> > > >>>>> cents]

> > > >>>>>

> > > >>>>> Prafullaji,

> > > >>>>> So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> > > >>> Parasara or

> > > >>>>> Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> > > >> treatises

> > > >>>>> sometime over the past centuries.

> > > >>>>> Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

> > > > come

> > > >>>>> across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

> which

> > > >> has

> > > >>> been

> > > >>>>> printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> > > > that

> > > >> the

> > > >>>>> words are his own.

> > > >>>>> In this book the author gives a different method of

> > > > calculating

> > > >>>>> ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > >>>>> regards

> > > >>>>> rishi

> > > >>>>>

> > > >>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > >> <jyotish@>

> > > >>>>> wrote:

> > > >>>>>>

> > > >>>>>> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > >>>>>>

> > > >>>>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > > > subject.

> > > >> and

> > > >>> it

> > > >>>>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> > > > warrant

> > > >>>>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

> still

> > > >>> proceed.

> > > >>>>>>

> > > >>>>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings

(research

> > > >> papers

> > > >>>>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > > > ayanamsa

> > > >> (or

> > > >>>>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

> including

> > > >>>>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > >>>>>>

> > > >>>>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> > > > devil's

> > > >>>>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly

out

> of

> > > >>>>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

> > > > (if

> > > >> at

> > > >>>>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

> predicting

> > > >> from

> > > >>>>> wrong chart.

> > > >>>>>>

> > > >>>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > >>>>>>

> > > >>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > >> another,

> > > >>>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>> jyotish_vani@

> > > >>>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > >>>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > >>>>> astrology...[2

> > > >>>>>>> cents]

> > > >>>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > >>>>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > >>>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or

> even 'Potential

> > > >>> Value'?

> > > >>>>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific

type ;-

> )

> > > >>>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>> ANON

> > > >>>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > >>> <jyotish@>

> > > >>>>>>> wrote:

> > > >>>>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

and

> > > >>>>> another, and

> > > >>>>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >>>>>>>>

> > > >>>>>>

> > > >>>>

> > > >>>

> > > >>

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Dear Prafulla ji,

How could Parashar have mentioned either of them? Parashar is of

before 300 AD where as Makarand wrote his treatise in 1478 AD and

Ganesh wrote grahlaghav in 1520 AD.

No body knows which ayanansh { if at all } was used by the 18

jyotish stalwarts of Parashar era i.e. 100 - 300 AD.

With Naman to all Gurujan,

Varun Trivedi

, Prafulla Gang <jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Varun ji

>

> All fine. The question is - if Parashar or any other sage -

mentioned about it and if not, which one they followed?

>

> regards / Prafulla Gang

>

> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

>

> >

> > varun_trvd

> > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 05:31:35 -0000

> >

> > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

astrology...[2

> > cents]

> >

> > Respected Gurujan,

> >

> > Ayanansha calculations;

> >

> > [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

> >

> > Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by 60

one

> > gets the ayanansha.

> >

> > [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

> >

> > ---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok 7 !

> >

> > [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

> >

> > step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder at

two

> > places.

> > step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> > step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step 1.

> > step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

> >

> > The result is the ayanansha for that year.

> >

> > With naman to all gurujan

> >

> > Varun Trivedi

> >

> > , "crystal pages"

> > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >>

> >> Rishiji,

> >>

> >> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to give

me

> >> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> >>

> >> Thanks

> >>

> >> RR

> >>

> >> , "rishi_2000in"

> >> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> >>>

> >>> Prafullaji,

> >>> This reference is from a book called "

Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > of

> >>> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> >>> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > century.

> >>> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> >>> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

> >>>

> >>> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> > hota

> >>> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota

> > hai.

> >>> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se

> >> jitne

> >>> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> >>>

> >>> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

> >>> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > asking

> >>> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

successful

> >>> practice seem nonplussed about this.

> >>> regards

> >>>

> >>> rishi

> >>>

> >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> >>> wrote:

> >>>>

> >>>> Dear Rishi ji

> >>>>

> >>>> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> >>> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

> >> mind,

> >>> often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge

(or

> >> his

> >>> blind vision).

> >>>>

> >>>> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

> >> what

> >>> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> >>>>

> >>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>>>

> >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another,

> >>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>

> >>>>>

> >>>>> rishi_2000in@

> >>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> >>> astrology...[2

> >>>>> cents]

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Prafullaji,

> >>>>> So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> >>> Parasara or

> >>>>> Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> >> treatises

> >>>>> sometime over the past centuries.

> >>>>> Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

> > come

> >>>>> across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which

> >> has

> >>> been

> >>>>> printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> > that

> >> the

> >>>>> words are his own.

> >>>>> In this book the author gives a different method of

> > calculating

> >>>>> ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> >>>>> regards

> >>>>> rishi

> >>>>>

> >>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> >> <jyotish@>

> >>>>> wrote:

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Dear Ranjan ji

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > subject.

> >> and

> >>> it

> >>>>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> > warrant

> >>>>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

> >>> proceed.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

> >> papers

> >>>>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > ayanamsa

> >> (or

> >>>>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> >>>>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> > devil's

> >>>>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out of

> >>>>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

> > (if

> >> at

> >>>>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting

> >> from

> >>>>> wrong chart.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> >> another,

> >>>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> jyotish_vani@

> >>>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> >>>>> astrology...[2

> >>>>>>> cents]

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

> >>>>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

> >>> Value'?

> >>>>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> ANON

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> >>> <jyotish@>

> >>>>>>> wrote:

> >>>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> >>>>> another, and

> >>>>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >>>>>>>>

> >>>>>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>

>

July 8, 2006

-Exactly, in all fairness the calculations should be obvious and not

too complicated.

Please do continue to give us a bit of the 20/20 clarity!

regards

rishi

-- In , "crystal pages"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Dear brother Rishi,

>

> I would not fall out of my chair if we modern followers of

Parashara

> were to find out that despite our phenomenal

> worldly/material/engineering type cerebral progress and

discoveries,

> contemporaries of Parashara had a direct way of calculating

> astrological bits and bytes!

>

> This 'drik' (drishta) ganit kind of tugs at my heart. What is it?

> Does anyone here know and can shed light upon? Why is it called

drik,

> and not adrishta ganit, like what we utilize now? More like

sparshya

> ganit (summer when it is hot, winter when it is cold)?

>

> Math has always been a big challenge for me personally and I am

> envious of all these math types that are interested in jyotish.

> Surely, they and not people like me, math-challenged as I am, must

be

> providing answers to such question :-)

>

> Until then -- I would rather be in limbo than in a hammock or arm-

> chair ;-)

>

> RR

>

> , "rishi_2000in"

> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> >

> > Precession is an established scientific fact, Sir. The current

rate

> > is also there to see.

> > Just because in the chain of history we have lost some links

does

> > not mean Parasara etal did not use ayanamsha.

> >

> > , "crystal pages"

> > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > >

> > > In all fairness Prafulla, I do not believe Parashara or his

> > > contemporaries or precedents or followers really needed

> ayanamshas!

> > > Ayanamsha is a recent phenomenon I think.

> > >

> > > Though sidereal zodiac we follow is up in the sky and the

visible

> > > zodiac, it is kind of strange if not weird that we need to

tune

> > into

> > > the seasonal zodiac and then back-calculate that which is

visible

> > and

> > > up there!

> > >

> > > Too bad Brahma did not put a bright star at aries zero up

there

> or

> > we

> > > would not be hawing and hemming about ayanamsha for centuries!

> > >

> > > Maybe it is God's way to remind us that East and West must

live

> > > together as brothers and sisters. Most siblings fight and

through

> > > fighting they make each other stronger!

> > >

> > > If you can really survive your sibling and all those life-

> > threatening

> > > feuds with that vicious brother of yours (usually!), who can

> > really

> > > hurt you, because if someone really tries to, your sibling

would

> > be

> > > the first one to come to your aid!

> > >

> > > It is true!

> > >

> > > RR

> > >

> > > , Prafulla Gang

<jyotish@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Varun ji

> > > >

> > > > All fine. The question is - if Parashar or any other sage -

> > > mentioned about it and if not, which one they followed?

> > > >

> > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > >

> > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another,

> > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > varun_trvd@

> > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 05:31:35 -0000

> > > > >

> > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > astrology...[2

> > > > > cents]

> > > > >

> > > > > Respected Gurujan,

> > > > >

> > > > > Ayanansha calculations;

> > > > >

> > > > > [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

> > > > >

> > > > > Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder

by

> 60

> > one

> > > > > gets the ayanansha.

> > > > >

> > > > > [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

> > > > >

> > > > > ----

grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok

> 7 !

> > > > >

> > > > > [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

> > > > >

> > > > > step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the

remainder

> > at

> > > two

> > > > > places.

> > > > > step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> > > > > step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of

step

> 1.

> > > > > step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

> > > > >

> > > > > The result is the ayanansha for that year.

> > > > >

> > > > > With naman to all gurujan

> > > > >

> > > > > Varun Trivedi

> > > > >

> > > > > , "crystal pages"

> > > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Rishiji,

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you

to

> > give

> > > me

> > > > >> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Thanks

> > > > >>

> > > > >> RR

> > > > >>

> > > > >> , "rishi_2000in"

> > > > >> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> Prafullaji,

> > > > >>> This reference is from a book called "

> > Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > > > > of

> > > > >>> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP

Hills.

> > > > >>> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn

of

> > > > > century.

> > > > >>> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > > >>> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

> > sanskrit.

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah

kala

> > > > > hota

> > > > >>> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so

ayanamsha

> > hota

> > > > > hai.

> > > > >>> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla

> pratipada

> > se

> > > > >> jitne

> > > > >>> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract

from

> > shaka

> > > > >>> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have

been

> > > > > asking

> > > > >>> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> > successful

> > > > >>> practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > > >>> regards

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> rishi

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>> Dear Rishi ji

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available

for

> > > > >>> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak

> > human

> > > > >> mind,

> > > > >>> often finds reason to back or question its faith /

> knowledge

> > (or

> > > > >> his

> > > > >>> blind vision).

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

> > words -

> > > > >> what

> > > > >>> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec /

p.a)

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > > > another,

> > > > >>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>>>

> > > > >>>>> rishi_2000in@

> > > > >>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > >>>>>

> > > > >>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > >>> astrology...[2

> > > > >>>>> cents]

> > > > >>>>>

> > > > >>>>> Prafullaji,

> > > > >>>>> So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed

to

> > > > >>> Parasara or

> > > > >>>>> Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in

those

> > > > >> treatises

> > > > >>>>> sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > >>>>> Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I

have

> > > > > come

> > > > >>>>> across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

> > which

> > > > >> has

> > > > >>> been

> > > > >>>>> printed in the nineteenth century and the author

admits

> > > > > that

> > > > >> the

> > > > >>>>> words are his own.

> > > > >>>>> In this book the author gives a different method of

> > > > > calculating

> > > > >>>>> ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > >>>>> regards

> > > > >>>>> rishi

> > > > >>>>>

> > > > >>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > > >> <jyotish@>

> > > > >>>>> wrote:

> > > > >>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > >>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > > > > subject.

> > > > >> and

> > > > >>> it

> > > > >>>>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does

not

> > > > > warrant

> > > > >>>>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

> > still

> > > > >>> proceed.

> > > > >>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings

> (research

> > > > >> papers

> > > > >>>>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > > > > ayanamsa

> > > > >> (or

> > > > >>>>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

> > including

> > > > >>>>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > >>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am

rather

> > > > > devil's

> > > > >>>>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly

> out

> > of

> > > > >>>>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe /

digest

> > > > > (if

> > > > >> at

> > > > >>>>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

> > predicting

> > > > >> from

> > > > >>>>> wrong chart.

> > > > >>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > >>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

and

> > > > >> another,

> > > > >>>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > >>>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on

vedic

> > > > >>>>> astrology...[2

> > > > >>>>>>> cents]

> > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > >>>>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or

> > even 'Potential

> > > > >>> Value'?

> > > > >>>>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific

> type ;-

> > )

> > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>> ANON

> > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>> , Prafulla

Gang

> > > > >>> <jyotish@>

> > > > >>>>>>> wrote:

> > > > >>>>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make

another,

> and

> > > > >>>>> another, and

> > > > >>>>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >>>>>>>>

> > > > >>>>>>

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Varun OR Varunji (depending on whether you are younger or older)

You present this as some sort of as an axiom, a universal truth!

I am a sceptic when it comes to hand-waved statements like these!

The very fact that you are telling and willing to share, again, is

telling me that you may have something important to share, but please

share fully and not as some cannonical truth! Or you will not be

believed yet again! How often can you withstand this kind or

rejection for something that you feel is important to share? That is

if I am tuning in correctly and you do have something important to

share!

Kaliyugis are sceptic by nature, because the earlier wonderful yugas

Sata, Dwapara, Treta did not last! Those were phases and the current

reality is kaliyuga (unless you believe in what Yukteshwara Giriji

stated. This does sound like dwapara with all these technical gizmos

and gadgets!

But let me not spook you fine folks.

RR

, "varun_trvd"

<varun_trvd wrote:

>

> Res. Rohini ji,

>

> The saka samvat 1869 started on march 23, 1947. On that day the

> grahlaghav ayanansha was 23d45m0s and the makarand ayanansha was

> 21d43m12s

> You could deduct the proportionate monthly progression from this

> value to arrive at the value on Jan 26, 1947.

>

> With naman to all gurujan.

>

> Varun Trivedi

>

> , "crystal pages"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > Rishiji,

> >

> > Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to give

me

> > the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , "rishi_2000in"

> > <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Prafullaji,

> > > This reference is from a book called "

Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> of

> > > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> century.

> > > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

> > >

> > > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> hota

> > > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota

> hai.

> > > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada se

> > jitne

> > > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > >

> > > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from shaka

> > > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> asking

> > > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

successful

> > > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > regards

> > >

> > > rishi

> > >

> > > , Prafulla Gang

> <jyotish@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Rishi ji

> > > >

> > > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

> > mind,

> > > often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge

(or

> > his

> > > blind vision).

> > > >

> > > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

> > what

> > > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > > >

> > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > >

> > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> another,

> > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > >

> > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > astrology...[2

> > > > > cents]

> > > > >

> > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> > > Parasara or

> > > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> > treatises

> > > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

> come

> > > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

which

> > has

> > > been

> > > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> that

> > the

> > > > > words are his own.

> > > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

> calculating

> > > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > > regards

> > > > > rishi

> > > > >

> > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > >>

> > > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> subject.

> > and

> > > it

> > > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> warrant

> > > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

still

> > > proceed.

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

> > papers

> > > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> ayanamsa

> > (or

> > > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > >>

> > > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> devil's

> > > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out

of

> > > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

> (if

> > at

> > > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

predicting

> > from

> > > > > wrong chart.

> > > > >>

> > > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another,

> > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >>

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > >>> cents]

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or

even 'Potential

> > > Value'?

> > > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> ANON

> > > > >>>

> > > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > <jyotish@>

> > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > > > another, and

> > > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >>>>

> > > > >>

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

I did confess years ago that I am math-challenged, bhaiyaa :-(

All I can share is that, as I have done privately with you and

others, I am amazed at the number of times when different ayanamshas

(not too far away from Raman and Lahiri for instance) have both shown

different but concordant indicators pointing towards the same bottom

line!

This is eerie and really bothered me for a long time, still does.

That is when my western siblings came in handy! If they can get a

demonstrably accurate reading using a coordinate that is 23 degrees

different, why should I be griping about a difference of 87 minutes?

It is not ideal, but I am not the one who ever called it a science!

Ask those who jump up and down claiming that IT is!!

RR

, "rishi_2000in"

<rishi_2000in wrote:

>

> -Exactly, in all fairness the calculations should be obvious and

not

> too complicated.

> Please do continue to give us a bit of the 20/20 clarity!

> regards

>

> rishi

>

> -- In , "crystal pages"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear brother Rishi,

> >

> > I would not fall out of my chair if we modern followers of

> Parashara

> > were to find out that despite our phenomenal

> > worldly/material/engineering type cerebral progress and

> discoveries,

> > contemporaries of Parashara had a direct way of calculating

> > astrological bits and bytes!

> >

> > This 'drik' (drishta) ganit kind of tugs at my heart. What is it?

> > Does anyone here know and can shed light upon? Why is it called

> drik,

> > and not adrishta ganit, like what we utilize now? More like

> sparshya

> > ganit (summer when it is hot, winter when it is cold)?

> >

> > Math has always been a big challenge for me personally and I am

> > envious of all these math types that are interested in jyotish.

> > Surely, they and not people like me, math-challenged as I am,

must

> be

> > providing answers to such question :-)

> >

> > Until then -- I would rather be in limbo than in a hammock or arm-

> > chair ;-)

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , "rishi_2000in"

> > <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Precession is an established scientific fact, Sir. The current

> rate

> > > is also there to see.

> > > Just because in the chain of history we have lost some links

> does

> > > not mean Parasara etal did not use ayanamsha.

> > >

> > > , "crystal pages"

> > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > In all fairness Prafulla, I do not believe Parashara or his

> > > > contemporaries or precedents or followers really needed

> > ayanamshas!

> > > > Ayanamsha is a recent phenomenon I think.

> > > >

> > > > Though sidereal zodiac we follow is up in the sky and the

> visible

> > > > zodiac, it is kind of strange if not weird that we need to

> tune

> > > into

> > > > the seasonal zodiac and then back-calculate that which is

> visible

> > > and

> > > > up there!

> > > >

> > > > Too bad Brahma did not put a bright star at aries zero up

> there

> > or

> > > we

> > > > would not be hawing and hemming about ayanamsha for centuries!

> > > >

> > > > Maybe it is God's way to remind us that East and West must

> live

> > > > together as brothers and sisters. Most siblings fight and

> through

> > > > fighting they make each other stronger!

> > > >

> > > > If you can really survive your sibling and all those life-

> > > threatening

> > > > feuds with that vicious brother of yours (usually!), who can

> > > really

> > > > hurt you, because if someone really tries to, your sibling

> would

> > > be

> > > > the first one to come to your aid!

> > > >

> > > > It is true!

> > > >

> > > > RR

> > > >

> > > > , Prafulla Gang

> <jyotish@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Varun ji

> > > > >

> > > > > All fine. The question is - if Parashar or any other sage -

> > > > mentioned about it and if not, which one they followed?

> > > > >

> > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > >

> > > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > another,

> > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > varun_trvd@

> > > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 05:31:35 -0000

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > cents]

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Respected Gurujan,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Ayanansha calculations;

> > > > > >

> > > > > > [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder

> by

> > 60

> > > one

> > > > > > gets the ayanansha.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ----

> grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok

> > 7 !

> > > > > >

> > > > > > [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

> > > > > >

> > > > > > step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the

> remainder

> > > at

> > > > two

> > > > > > places.

> > > > > > step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> > > > > > step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of

> step

> > 1.

> > > > > > step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The result is the ayanansha for that year.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > With naman to all gurujan

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Varun Trivedi

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , "crystal pages"

> > > > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Rishiji,

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you

> to

> > > give

> > > > me

> > > > > >> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Thanks

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> RR

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> , "rishi_2000in"

> > > > > >> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> Prafullaji,

> > > > > >>> This reference is from a book called "

> > > Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > > > > > of

> > > > > >>> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP

> Hills.

> > > > > >>> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn

> of

> > > > > > century.

> > > > > >>> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > > > >>> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

> > > sanskrit.

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah

> kala

> > > > > > hota

> > > > > >>> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so

> ayanamsha

> > > hota

> > > > > > hai.

> > > > > >>> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla

> > pratipada

> > > se

> > > > > >> jitne

> > > > > >>> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract

> from

> > > shaka

> > > > > >>> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have

> been

> > > > > > asking

> > > > > >>> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> > > successful

> > > > > >>> practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > > > >>> regards

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> rishi

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>> Dear Rishi ji

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available

> for

> > > > > >>> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature.

Weak

> > > human

> > > > > >> mind,

> > > > > >>> often finds reason to back or question its faith /

> > knowledge

> > > (or

> > > > > >> his

> > > > > >>> blind vision).

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

> > > words -

> > > > > >> what

> > > > > >>> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec /

> p.a)

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

and

> > > > > > another,

> > > > > >>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>>>

> > > > > >>>>> rishi_2000in@

> > > > > >>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > > >>>>>

> > > > > >>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > > >>> astrology...[2

> > > > > >>>>> cents]

> > > > > >>>>>

> > > > > >>>>> Prafullaji,

> > > > > >>>>> So far we do not even know that the "words"

attributed

> to

> > > > > >>> Parasara or

> > > > > >>>>> Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in

> those

> > > > > >> treatises

> > > > > >>>>> sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > > >>>>> Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I

> have

> > > > > > come

> > > > > >>>>> across so far ( my readings , I must admit very

basic)

> > > which

> > > > > >> has

> > > > > >>> been

> > > > > >>>>> printed in the nineteenth century and the author

> admits

> > > > > > that

> > > > > >> the

> > > > > >>>>> words are his own.

> > > > > >>>>> In this book the author gives a different method of

> > > > > > calculating

> > > > > >>>>> ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > > >>>>> regards

> > > > > >>>>> rishi

> > > > > >>>>>

> > > > > >>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > > > >> <jyotish@>

> > > > > >>>>> wrote:

> > > > > >>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > > >>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > > > > > subject.

> > > > > >> and

> > > > > >>> it

> > > > > >>>>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does

> not

> > > > > > warrant

> > > > > >>>>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we

can

> > > still

> > > > > >>> proceed.

> > > > > >>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings

> > (research

> > > > > >> papers

> > > > > >>>>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > > > > > ayanamsa

> > > > > >> (or

> > > > > >>>>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

> > > including

> > > > > >>>>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > > >>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am

> rather

> > > > > > devil's

> > > > > >>>>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and

partly

> > out

> > > of

> > > > > >>>>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe /

> digest

> > > > > > (if

> > > > > >> at

> > > > > >>>>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

> > > predicting

> > > > > >> from

> > > > > >>>>> wrong chart.

> > > > > >>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > >>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

> and

> > > > > >> another,

> > > > > >>>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > > >>>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on

> vedic

> > > > > >>>>> astrology...[2

> > > > > >>>>>>> cents]

> > > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > > >>>>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or

> > > even 'Potential

> > > > > >>> Value'?

> > > > > >>>>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific

> > type ;-

> > > )

> > > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>> ANON

> > > > > >>>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>> , Prafulla

> Gang

> > > > > >>> <jyotish@>

> > > > > >>>>>>> wrote:

> > > > > >>>>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make

> another,

> > and

> > > > > >>>>> another, and

> > > > > >>>>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >>>>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>>>

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Res Rohini ji,

I did not present any axiom.I worked out the ayanansh for the

beginning of the saka samvat for 1947 based on the Makarand and Grah

laghav rule I had stated in my earlier message.

I had shared the rule quoting the shloka from Grah Laghav. I assume

you had read that message.

As regards, whether you believe me or not, it is upto you.

With naman to all gurujan.

Varun Trivedi

, "crystal pages"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Varun OR Varunji (depending on whether you are younger or older)

>

> You present this as some sort of as an axiom, a universal truth!

>

> I am a sceptic when it comes to hand-waved statements like these!

>

> The very fact that you are telling and willing to share, again, is

> telling me that you may have something important to share, but

please

> share fully and not as some cannonical truth! Or you will not be

> believed yet again! How often can you withstand this kind or

> rejection for something that you feel is important to share? That

is

> if I am tuning in correctly and you do have something important to

> share!

>

> Kaliyugis are sceptic by nature, because the earlier wonderful

yugas

> Sata, Dwapara, Treta did not last! Those were phases and the

current

> reality is kaliyuga (unless you believe in what Yukteshwara Giriji

> stated. This does sound like dwapara with all these technical

gizmos

> and gadgets!

>

> But let me not spook you fine folks.

>

> RR

>

> , "varun_trvd"

> <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> >

> > Res. Rohini ji,

> >

> > The saka samvat 1869 started on march 23, 1947. On that day the

> > grahlaghav ayanansha was 23d45m0s and the makarand ayanansha was

> > 21d43m12s

> > You could deduct the proportionate monthly progression from this

> > value to arrive at the value on Jan 26, 1947.

> >

> > With naman to all gurujan.

> >

> > Varun Trivedi

> >

> > , "crystal pages"

> > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Rishiji,

> > >

> > > Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to

give

> me

> > > the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > >

> > > RR

> > >

> > > , "rishi_2000in"

> > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > This reference is from a book called "

> Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > of

> > > > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > > > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > century.

> > > > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

sanskrit.

> > > >

> > > > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> > hota

> > > > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha

hota

> > hai.

> > > > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada

se

> > > jitne

> > > > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > > >

> > > > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from

shaka

> > > > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > asking

> > > > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> successful

> > > > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > > regards

> > > >

> > > > rishi

> > > >

> > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > <jyotish@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Rishi ji

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > > > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak

human

> > > mind,

> > > > often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge

> (or

> > > his

> > > > blind vision).

> > > > >

> > > > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

words -

> > > what

> > > > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > > > >

> > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > >

> > > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > another,

> > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > cents]

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed

to

> > > > Parasara or

> > > > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> > > treatises

> > > > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I

have

> > come

> > > > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

> which

> > > has

> > > > been

> > > > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> > that

> > > the

> > > > > > words are his own.

> > > > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

> > calculating

> > > > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > > > regards

> > > > > > rishi

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > subject.

> > > and

> > > > it

> > > > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> > warrant

> > > > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

> still

> > > > proceed.

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings

(research

> > > papers

> > > > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > ayanamsa

> > > (or

> > > > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

including

> > > > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> > devil's

> > > > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly

out

> of

> > > > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe /

digest

> > (if

> > > at

> > > > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

> predicting

> > > from

> > > > > > wrong chart.

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

and

> > > another,

> > > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > >>> cents]

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or

> even 'Potential

> > > > Value'?

> > > > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific

type ;-)

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> ANON

> > > > > >>>

> > > > > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

and

> > > > > > another, and

> > > > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >>>>

> > > > > >>

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Mr VT,

All I pray and hope is that whatever they were using was hopefully

less variable than what we are!

Becuase if they were using ayanamshas that were differing by 23

degrees then that makes one wonder about everything they have

written, all the yogas and fundamentals and everything except KALA

SARPA YOGA which is not bound within ayanamshas for the most part and

gajakeshari yoga of course when exact in orb!

RR

, "varun_trvd"

<varun_trvd wrote:

>

> Dear Prafulla ji,

>

> How could Parashar have mentioned either of them? Parashar is of

> before 300 AD where as Makarand wrote his treatise in 1478 AD and

> Ganesh wrote grahlaghav in 1520 AD.

>

> No body knows which ayanansh { if at all } was used by the 18

> jyotish stalwarts of Parashar era i.e. 100 - 300 AD.

>

> With Naman to all Gurujan,

>

> Varun Trivedi

>

> , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Varun ji

> >

> > All fine. The question is - if Parashar or any other sage -

> mentioned about it and if not, which one they followed?

> >

> > regards / Prafulla Gang

> >

> > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and another,

> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> >

> > >

> > > varun_trvd@

> > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 05:31:35 -0000

> > >

> > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> astrology...[2

> > > cents]

> > >

> > > Respected Gurujan,

> > >

> > > Ayanansha calculations;

> > >

> > > [ 1 ] Grahlaghav paddhati:

> > >

> > > Deduct 444 from the Saka Samvat and devide the remainder by 60

> one

> > > gets the ayanansha.

> > >

> > > [ shake vedabdhivedonah 444 shashtirbhakto ayanashakah ]

> > >

> > > ---- grahlaghav,ravichandra.shlok 7 !

> > >

> > > [ 2 ] Makarand paddhati :

> > >

> > > step 1 : Deduct 421 from the Saka Samvat. Place the remainder

at

> two

> > > places.

> > > step 2 : Devide the remainder { result of step 1 } by 10.

> > > step 3 : deduct the result of step 2 from the result of step 1.

> > > step 4 : devide the result of step 3 by 60.

> > >

> > > The result is the ayanansha for that year.

> > >

> > > With naman to all gurujan

> > >

> > > Varun Trivedi

> > >

> > > , "crystal pages"

> > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > >>

> > >> Rishiji,

> > >>

> > >> Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to

give

> me

> > >> the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > >>

> > >> Thanks

> > >>

> > >> RR

> > >>

> > >> , "rishi_2000in"

> > >> <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > >>>

> > >>> Prafullaji,

> > >>> This reference is from a book called "

> Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > > of

> > >>> the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > >>> First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > > century.

> > >>> It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > >>> I will give the hindi translation for am not good in sanskrit.

> > >>>

> > >>> "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah kala

> > > hota

> > >>> hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha hota

> > > hai.

> > >>> Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla pratipada

se

> > >> jitne

> > >>> maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > >>>

> > >>> It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from

shaka

> > >>> etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > > asking

> > >>> JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> successful

> > >>> practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > >>> regards

> > >>>

> > >>> rishi

> > >>>

> > >>> , Prafulla Gang

> > > <jyotish@>

> > >>> wrote:

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Dear Rishi ji

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Yes, there are very little authenticity data available for

> > >>> the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak human

> > >> mind,

> > >>> often finds reason to back or question its faith / knowledge

> (or

> > >> his

> > >>> blind vision).

> > >>>>

> > >>>> So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other words -

> > >> what

> > >>> is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > >>>>

> > >>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > another,

> > >>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >>>>

> > >>>>>

> > >>>>> rishi_2000in@

> > >>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > >>>>>

> > >>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > >>> astrology...[2

> > >>>>> cents]

> > >>>>>

> > >>>>> Prafullaji,

> > >>>>> So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed to

> > >>> Parasara or

> > >>>>> Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in those

> > >> treatises

> > >>>>> sometime over the past centuries.

> > >>>>> Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I have

> > > come

> > >>>>> across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic) which

> > >> has

> > >>> been

> > >>>>> printed in the nineteenth century and the author admits

> > > that

> > >> the

> > >>>>> words are his own.

> > >>>>> In this book the author gives a different method of

> > > calculating

> > >>>>> ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > >>>>> regards

> > >>>>> rishi

> > >>>>>

> > >>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > >> <jyotish@>

> > >>>>> wrote:

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> Dear Ranjan ji

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > > subject.

> > >> and

> > >>> it

> > >>>>> is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does not

> > > warrant

> > >>>>> correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can still

> > >>> proceed.

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings (research

> > >> papers

> > >>>>> etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > > ayanamsa

> > >> (or

> > >>>>> planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages including

> > >>>>> Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am rather

> > > devil's

> > >>>>> advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly out

of

> > >>>>> ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe / digest

> > > (if

> > >> at

> > >>>>> all !!) that, all these years - we were reading / predicting

> > >> from

> > >>>>> wrong chart.

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > >> another,

> > >>>>> and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> jyotish_vani@

> > >>>>>>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > >>>>> astrology...[2

> > >>>>>>> cents]

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > >>>>>>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> So why not call it just "current value" or even 'Potential

> > >>> Value'?

> > >>>>>>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific type ;-)

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> ANON

> > >>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>> , Prafulla Gang

> > >>> <jyotish@>

> > >>>>>>> wrote:

> > >>>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > >>>>> another, and

> > >>>>>>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > >>>>>>>>

> > >>>>>>

> > >>>>

> > >>>

> > >>

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Varunji,

This calculation gives an annual rate of precession to 60 minutes

which does not tally with the physically observed rate of 50.23

seconds/year.

So that leaves food for thought.

regards

rishi

-- In , "varun_trvd"

<varun_trvd wrote:

>

> Res Rohini ji,

>

> I did not present any axiom.I worked out the ayanansh for the

> beginning of the saka samvat for 1947 based on the Makarand and

Grah

> laghav rule I had stated in my earlier message.

> I had shared the rule quoting the shloka from Grah Laghav. I

assume

> you had read that message.

> As regards, whether you believe me or not, it is upto you.

>

> With naman to all gurujan.

>

> Varun Trivedi

>

> , "crystal pages"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > Varun OR Varunji (depending on whether you are younger or older)

> >

> > You present this as some sort of as an axiom, a universal truth!

> >

> > I am a sceptic when it comes to hand-waved statements like these!

> >

> > The very fact that you are telling and willing to share, again,

is

> > telling me that you may have something important to share, but

> please

> > share fully and not as some cannonical truth! Or you will not be

> > believed yet again! How often can you withstand this kind or

> > rejection for something that you feel is important to share?

That

> is

> > if I am tuning in correctly and you do have something important

to

> > share!

> >

> > Kaliyugis are sceptic by nature, because the earlier wonderful

> yugas

> > Sata, Dwapara, Treta did not last! Those were phases and the

> current

> > reality is kaliyuga (unless you believe in what Yukteshwara

Giriji

> > stated. This does sound like dwapara with all these technical

> gizmos

> > and gadgets!

> >

> > But let me not spook you fine folks.

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , "varun_trvd"

> > <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Res. Rohini ji,

> > >

> > > The saka samvat 1869 started on march 23, 1947. On that day

the

> > > grahlaghav ayanansha was 23d45m0s and the makarand ayanansha

was

> > > 21d43m12s

> > > You could deduct the proportionate monthly progression from

this

> > > value to arrive at the value on Jan 26, 1947.

> > >

> > > With naman to all gurujan.

> > >

> > > Varun Trivedi

> > >

> > > , "crystal pages"

> > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Rishiji,

> > > >

> > > > Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to

> give

> > me

> > > > the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > >

> > > > RR

> > > >

> > > > , "rishi_2000in"

> > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > This reference is from a book called "

> > Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > > of

> > > > > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > > > > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > > century.

> > > > > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > > > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

> sanskrit.

> > > > >

> > > > > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah

kala

> > > hota

> > > > > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha

> hota

> > > hai.

> > > > > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla

pratipada

> se

> > > > jitne

> > > > > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > > > >

> > > > > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from

> shaka

> > > > > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > > asking

> > > > > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> > successful

> > > > > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > > > regards

> > > > >

> > > > > rishi

> > > > >

> > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Rishi ji

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available

for

> > > > > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak

> human

> > > > mind,

> > > > > often finds reason to back or question its faith /

knowledge

> > (or

> > > > his

> > > > > blind vision).

> > > > > >

> > > > > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

> words -

> > > > what

> > > > > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec /

p.a)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > another,

> > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > > cents]

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed

> to

> > > > > Parasara or

> > > > > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in

those

> > > > treatises

> > > > > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I

> have

> > > come

> > > > > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

> > which

> > > > has

> > > > > been

> > > > > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author

admits

> > > that

> > > > the

> > > > > > > words are his own.

> > > > > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

> > > calculating

> > > > > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > > > > regards

> > > > > > > rishi

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > > subject.

> > > > and

> > > > > it

> > > > > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does

not

> > > warrant

> > > > > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

> > still

> > > > > proceed.

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings

> (research

> > > > papers

> > > > > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > > ayanamsa

> > > > (or

> > > > > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

> including

> > > > > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am

rather

> > > devil's

> > > > > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly

> out

> > of

> > > > > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe /

> digest

> > > (if

> > > > at

> > > > > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

> > predicting

> > > > from

> > > > > > > wrong chart.

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

> and

> > > > another,

> > > > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on

vedic

> > > > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > >>> cents]

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or

> > even 'Potential

> > > > > Value'?

> > > > > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific

> type ;-)

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> ANON

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> , Prafulla

Gang

> > > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > > > >>>>

> > > > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make

another,

> and

> > > > > > > another, and

> > > > > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > > >>>>

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Since you have not felt it necessary to demonstrate through examples

your radically different ayanamsha, or respond to the example

horoscope posted earlier on this forum for you to demonstrate, I am

not sure what you expect people to do? These are paranoid times, in

case you had been reading the newspaper or listening to news and

watching it on tv.

When you finally feel confident enough to share your results

sincerely, I am sure a few of us will be here to listen to what you

have to say and show.

Of course I do not speak for anyone other than myself.

RR

, "varun_trvd"

<varun_trvd wrote:

>

> Res Rohini ji,

>

> I did not present any axiom.I worked out the ayanansh for the

> beginning of the saka samvat for 1947 based on the Makarand and

Grah

> laghav rule I had stated in my earlier message.

> I had shared the rule quoting the shloka from Grah Laghav. I assume

> you had read that message.

> As regards, whether you believe me or not, it is upto you.

>

> With naman to all gurujan.

>

> Varun Trivedi

>

> , "crystal pages"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > Varun OR Varunji (depending on whether you are younger or older)

> >

> > You present this as some sort of as an axiom, a universal truth!

> >

> > I am a sceptic when it comes to hand-waved statements like these!

> >

> > The very fact that you are telling and willing to share, again,

is

> > telling me that you may have something important to share, but

> please

> > share fully and not as some cannonical truth! Or you will not be

> > believed yet again! How often can you withstand this kind or

> > rejection for something that you feel is important to share? That

> is

> > if I am tuning in correctly and you do have something important

to

> > share!

> >

> > Kaliyugis are sceptic by nature, because the earlier wonderful

> yugas

> > Sata, Dwapara, Treta did not last! Those were phases and the

> current

> > reality is kaliyuga (unless you believe in what Yukteshwara

Giriji

> > stated. This does sound like dwapara with all these technical

> gizmos

> > and gadgets!

> >

> > But let me not spook you fine folks.

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , "varun_trvd"

> > <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Res. Rohini ji,

> > >

> > > The saka samvat 1869 started on march 23, 1947. On that day the

> > > grahlaghav ayanansha was 23d45m0s and the makarand ayanansha

was

> > > 21d43m12s

> > > You could deduct the proportionate monthly progression from

this

> > > value to arrive at the value on Jan 26, 1947.

> > >

> > > With naman to all gurujan.

> > >

> > > Varun Trivedi

> > >

> > > , "crystal pages"

> > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Rishiji,

> > > >

> > > > Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to

> give

> > me

> > > > the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > >

> > > > RR

> > > >

> > > > , "rishi_2000in"

> > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > This reference is from a book called "

> > Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > > of

> > > > > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP Hills.

> > > > > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn of

> > > century.

> > > > > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > > > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

> sanskrit.

> > > > >

> > > > > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah

kala

> > > hota

> > > > > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so ayanamsha

> hota

> > > hai.

> > > > > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla

pratipada

> se

> > > > jitne

> > > > > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > > > >

> > > > > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract from

> shaka

> > > > > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have been

> > > asking

> > > > > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> > successful

> > > > > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > > > regards

> > > > >

> > > > > rishi

> > > > >

> > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Rishi ji

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available

for

> > > > > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak

> human

> > > > mind,

> > > > > often finds reason to back or question its faith /

knowledge

> > (or

> > > > his

> > > > > blind vision).

> > > > > >

> > > > > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

> words -

> > > > what

> > > > > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec / p.a)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another, and

> > > another,

> > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > > cents]

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > > > So far we do not even know that the "words" attributed

> to

> > > > > Parasara or

> > > > > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in

those

> > > > treatises

> > > > > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book, I

> have

> > > come

> > > > > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very basic)

> > which

> > > > has

> > > > > been

> > > > > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author

admits

> > > that

> > > > the

> > > > > > > words are his own.

> > > > > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

> > > calculating

> > > > > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > > > > regards

> > > > > > > rishi

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > > subject.

> > > > and

> > > > > it

> > > > > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does

not

> > > warrant

> > > > > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we can

> > still

> > > > > proceed.

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings

> (research

> > > > papers

> > > > > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > > ayanamsa

> > > > (or

> > > > > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

> including

> > > > > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am

rather

> > > devil's

> > > > > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and partly

> out

> > of

> > > > > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe /

> digest

> > > (if

> > > > at

> > > > > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

> > predicting

> > > > from

> > > > > > > wrong chart.

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

> and

> > > > another,

> > > > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on vedic

> > > > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > >>> cents]

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short time ...

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or

> > even 'Potential

> > > > > Value'?

> > > > > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific

> type ;-)

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> ANON

> > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > >>> , Prafulla

Gang

> > > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > > > >>>>

> > > > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

> and

> > > > > > > another, and

> > > > > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > > >>>>

> > > > > > >>

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

July 8, 2006

Res Rohini ji,

It is a case of misplaced identity. I am Varun Trivedi. You seem to

be confusing me with Mr. Tarun Chopra who has propounded a new

Ayanansh and some time back you had placed a horoscope for his

analysis.

An interesting mix up.

With naman to all gurujan.

Varun Trivedi

, "crystal pages"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Since you have not felt it necessary to demonstrate through

examples

> your radically different ayanamsha, or respond to the example

> horoscope posted earlier on this forum for you to demonstrate, I

am

> not sure what you expect people to do? These are paranoid times,

in

> case you had been reading the newspaper or listening to news and

> watching it on tv.

>

> When you finally feel confident enough to share your results

> sincerely, I am sure a few of us will be here to listen to what

you

> have to say and show.

>

> Of course I do not speak for anyone other than myself.

>

> RR

>

> , "varun_trvd"

> <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> >

> > Res Rohini ji,

> >

> > I did not present any axiom.I worked out the ayanansh for the

> > beginning of the saka samvat for 1947 based on the Makarand and

> Grah

> > laghav rule I had stated in my earlier message.

> > I had shared the rule quoting the shloka from Grah Laghav. I

assume

> > you had read that message.

> > As regards, whether you believe me or not, it is upto you.

> >

> > With naman to all gurujan.

> >

> > Varun Trivedi

> >

> > , "crystal pages"

> > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Varun OR Varunji (depending on whether you are younger or

older)

> > >

> > > You present this as some sort of as an axiom, a universal

truth!

> > >

> > > I am a sceptic when it comes to hand-waved statements like

these!

> > >

> > > The very fact that you are telling and willing to share,

again,

> is

> > > telling me that you may have something important to share, but

> > please

> > > share fully and not as some cannonical truth! Or you will not

be

> > > believed yet again! How often can you withstand this kind or

> > > rejection for something that you feel is important to share?

That

> > is

> > > if I am tuning in correctly and you do have something

important

> to

> > > share!

> > >

> > > Kaliyugis are sceptic by nature, because the earlier wonderful

> > yugas

> > > Sata, Dwapara, Treta did not last! Those were phases and the

> > current

> > > reality is kaliyuga (unless you believe in what Yukteshwara

> Giriji

> > > stated. This does sound like dwapara with all these technical

> > gizmos

> > > and gadgets!

> > >

> > > But let me not spook you fine folks.

> > >

> > > RR

> > >

> > > , "varun_trvd"

> > > <varun_trvd@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Res. Rohini ji,

> > > >

> > > > The saka samvat 1869 started on march 23, 1947. On that day

the

> > > > grahlaghav ayanansha was 23d45m0s and the makarand ayanansha

> was

> > > > 21d43m12s

> > > > You could deduct the proportionate monthly progression from

> this

> > > > value to arrive at the value on Jan 26, 1947.

> > > >

> > > > With naman to all gurujan.

> > > >

> > > > Varun Trivedi

> > > >

> > > > , "crystal pages"

> > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Rishiji,

> > > > >

> > > > > Since hindi is not my first language, may I request you to

> > give

> > > me

> > > > > the manasagari ayanamsha value for 26 January 1947?

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks

> > > > >

> > > > > RR

> > > > >

> > > > > , "rishi_2000in"

> > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > > This reference is from a book called "

> > > Sodaharanbhashateekopeta"

> > > > of

> > > > > > the Mansagari Paddhati more in use in and around UP

Hills.

> > > > > > First Printed around 1913, and written around the turn

of

> > > > century.

> > > > > > It sums up ayanamsha very succintly!

> > > > > > I will give the hindi translation for am not good in

> > sanskrit.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > "shalivahana shaka mein 445 ghata dein jo sheshrahe wah

> kala

> > > > hota

> > > > > > hai, usme saath ka bhaga dein jo labdhi mile so

ayanamsha

> > hota

> > > > hai.

> > > > > > Tatkalik ayanamsha karne ke nimitta chaitra shukla

> pratipada

> > se

> > > > > jitne

> > > > > > maas gat ho utne gunita paanch paladi kar deve."

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It is interesting that no one discusses why subtract

from

> > shaka

> > > > > > etc.and no logic is extended.In my curiousity, I have

been

> > > > asking

> > > > > > JKyotishis about their ayanamshas and most who have a

> > > successful

> > > > > > practice seem nonplussed about this.

> > > > > > regards

> > > > > >

> > > > > > rishi

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , Prafulla Gang

> > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Yes, there are very little authenticity data available

> for

> > > > > > the "source" of ancient books / texts / literature. Weak

> > human

> > > > > mind,

> > > > > > often finds reason to back or question its faith /

> knowledge

> > > (or

> > > > > his

> > > > > > blind vision).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > So what becomes the value of ayanamsa today? In other

> > words -

> > > > > what

> > > > > > is begining point of this ayanamsa correction (55 sec /

p.a)

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make another,

and

> > > > another,

> > > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > rishi_2000in@

> > > > > > > > Sat, 08 Jul 2006 03:28:49 -0000

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Re: RE: A controversial article on

vedic

> > > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > > > cents]

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Prafullaji,

> > > > > > > > So far we do not even know that the "words"

attributed

> > to

> > > > > > Parasara or

> > > > > > > > Varahmihira are actually theirs or have slipped in

> those

> > > > > treatises

> > > > > > > > sometime over the past centuries.

> > > > > > > > Interestingly, there is only one astrological book,

I

> > have

> > > > come

> > > > > > > > across so far ( my readings , I must admit very

basic)

> > > which

> > > > > has

> > > > > > been

> > > > > > > > printed in the nineteenth century and the author

> admits

> > > > that

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > > words are his own.

> > > > > > > > In this book the author gives a different method of

> > > > calculating

> > > > > > > > ayanamsa and takes it roughly as 55 seconds/year.

> > > > > > > > regards

> > > > > > > > rishi

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > , Prafulla

Gang

> > > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >>

> > > > > > > >> Dear Ranjan ji

> > > > > > > >>

> > > > > > > >> There are many controversies in jyotish like in any

> > > > subject.

> > > > > and

> > > > > > it

> > > > > > > > is real heart breaking to feel that, prediction does

> not

> > > > warrant

> > > > > > > > correct chart...and even if the chart is wrong, we

can

> > > still

> > > > > > proceed.

> > > > > > > >>

> > > > > > > >> Most of ayanamsa definition and their reasonings

> > (research

> > > > > papers

> > > > > > > > etc), still does not answer the basic question - the

> > > > ayanamsa

> > > > > (or

> > > > > > > > planetary calculation basis) used by ancient sages

> > including

> > > > > > > > Parashar, Varah Mihir etc.

> > > > > > > >>

> > > > > > > >> BTW, I did not add "2 cents" in the thread. I am

> rather

> > > > devil's

> > > > > > > > advocate - partly out of my inquisitiveness and

partly

> > out

> > > of

> > > > > > > > ignorance. Ironically, it is difficult to believe /

> > digest

> > > > (if

> > > > > at

> > > > > > > > all !!) that, all these years - we were reading /

> > > predicting

> > > > > from

> > > > > > > > wrong chart.

> > > > > > > >>

> > > > > > > >> regards / Prafulla Gang

> > > > > > > >>

> > > > > > > >> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make

another,

> > and

> > > > > another,

> > > > > > > > and another. Keep doing this until you break

through.

> > > > > > > >>

> > > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > > >>> jyotish_vani@

> > > > > > > >>> Sat, 08 Jul 2006 02:33:08 -0000

> > > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > > >>> Re: RE: A controversial article on

vedic

> > > > > > > > astrology...[2

> > > > > > > >>> cents]

> > > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > > >>> The just do not call it two cents!

> > > > > > > >>> Value of currency changes over a very short

time ...

> > > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > > >>> So why not call it just "current value" or

> > > even 'Potential

> > > > > > Value'?

> > > > > > > >>> Particularly if you are the accountant/scientific

> > type ;-)

> > > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > > >>> ANON

> > > > > > > >>>

> > > > > > > >>> , Prafulla

> Gang

> > > > > > <jyotish@>

> > > > > > > >>> wrote:

> > > > > > > >>>>

> > > > > > > >>>> Make a decision! If that doesn't work, make

another,

> > and

> > > > > > > > another, and

> > > > > > > >>> another. Keep doing this until you break through.

> > > > > > > >>>>

> > > > > > > >>

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

A controversial article on vedic astrology...[2 cents]

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups