Ayanamsha confusion- clarify BIG STOP SIGN AHEAD

[Guest guest]

Okay Francois,

 

What is the value of ayanamsha that YOU would want the world after you

to use?

 

Please give us the value for 1 January 1900 and YOUR value of the

annual precession and let us go from there!

 

By the way there is a new value that is floating around that pegs

current ayanamsha almost smack between the tropical and sidereal,

something like 11 or 12 degrees between T and S!

 

Since you are exploring jyotish lists these days, I am sure you would

run into it sooner or later and then these one or two or few degrees

of differences would cease to be significant and hopefully you will

focus on the bigger picture such as an ayanamsha that is 12 degrees

away from the norm ;-)

 

RR

 

vedic astrology, "Francois CARRIERE"

<alchocoden wrote:

>

> Hello Mr Rao,

>

> The main problem has to do with what was use in past. Lahiri, now,

we know

> is a value that was taken as a reference in the 1940's until the

recognition

> of 1953; before, until the 1900's, Revati was understood to be near

29°50

> Pisces (so Spica was around 3° Libra) and was one reference (Yukteswar,

> Birth year - 499 * 54", for instance). BUT Surya Siddhanta define

positions

> in *polar positions*: then, either right ascension (at a specific

moment) or

> culmination give the same results (I tested it many times). That is

MY MAIN

> POINT with "polar longitude" of Spica, which should taken by Krushna

> Jugalkalini, but He has a different point of view (precession rate, for

> sure).

>

> Doctor Raman once stated that polar longitude (Spica around 0°48

Libra) may

> be a solution (cf. Frawley's jyotish correspondance course). The main

> problem is that *we don't have precise horoscopes with degrees*

either in

> western (I tried with Masha'Allah, with degrees in two directions:

one may

> suits positions to what he believes) or in the eastern world. As

Robert Hand

> once said, Ayanamsha is a problem *we have to solve for ourselve*.

So you

> are right is some way ("the desired level of accuracy"). It would be

> fantastic, if jyotishi understood this simple truth and stopped

imposing a

> specific ayanamsha (theirs) to every one as *the* only true one. We

have to

> understand that some techniques have developped with specific

ayanamsha and

> won't work with other (Krushna's ashtakavarga system's heritage is

one).

> Professor K.N.Rao showed varga to work more efficiently with Lahiri

(and I

> wished he would have not, because of my "ayanamhsa"!), so let us use

it if

> so. In Heavens, there are only stars, and they don't care about us!

Let us

> use them with respect, in with respect of the work of our fellows

jyotishi

> and guru(s) who pass on to use the divine science, that of Light of

Life.

>

> --

> With my best regards,

> François

>

> V.M. Rao wrote:

> > it seems to me that the best thing to do is to find

> > out what works in practice in our predictions. if

> > lahiri gives the desired level of accuracy, why not

> > stick to that. one must remember that birth time, lat

> > @ long of place of birth are all approximate. while

> > accuracy is important, it will ultimately be intuition

> > which will help accurate predictions.this is not to

> > deny the importance of accuracy but making a fetish of

> > it could mean rejecting the good when we do not know

> > what is the best and consensus eludes us. the

> > researchers in astrology can ofcourse continue their

> > search.

> >

> > v m rao

> > --- Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote:

> >

> >> Dear Francois,

> >>

> >> I am not sure why you ask me this question, for

> >> starters :-)

> >>

> >> Secondly, I am not really sure what you are asking

> >> me? About what

> >> Lahiri thought or wanted or what Krushna (who?) and

> >> Hipparchos and

> >> Ebenezer (the only Ebenezer I have heard of is

> >> Ebenezer Scrooge -- I

> >> think that is one of the western/christian fables

> >> but not sure :-(

> >>

> >> I have never really had a problem with ayanamsha,

> >> and I speak very

> >> honestly and directly about that. Believe it or not.

> >>

> >> Maybe I am coming across as being insensitive to

> >> those who do have a

> >> challenge staring at them in the ayanamsha area or

> >> similar entry portals.

> >>

> >> My apologies if I am sounding insensitive or

> >> clueless as to your angst

> >> as far as jyotish is concerned in your personal

> >> reality. I truly

> >> apologize for that.

> >>

> >> There is a wonderful book titled BIOLOGY OF BELIEF

> >> by BRUCE LIPTON. It

> >> is not about astrology but really openminded

> >> astrology students would

> >> find it of personal interest!

> >>

> >> In the meantime, and in light of my earlier

> >> plea/(more than a message)

> >> let us all focus individually on our challenges and

> >> resolve those

> >> rather than think that our next 'AHA' is the final

> >> answer for everyone

> >> else!

> >>

> >> RR

> >>

> >> vedic astrology, "Francois

> >> CARRIERE"

> >> <alchocoden@> wrote:

> >>>

> >>> Hello Mr Ranjan,

> >>>

> >>> There is a question that HAUNT me. we both use an

> >> ayanamsha that is

> >> less

> >>> than 30' near. Why, after the translation by

> >> Ebenezer Burgess of the

> >> Surya

> >>> Siddhanta, with the correction of Spica at 180°48

> >> (although he believed

> >>> wrong) and explaining erlier polar longitudes,

> >> indian jyotishi did

> >> not take

> >>> tis value? Krushna swears by a near value... Did

> >> Lahiri wanted

> >> celebrity? A

> >>> whole page of the Swiss Ephemeris is devoted to

> >> Hipparchos who

> >> defined a

> >>> polar "latitide" of Spica (when by midheaven

> >> position a star has the

> >> same

> >>> value). It was so obvious... Why, why, why!???...

> >> Even near Fagan

> >> SVP has

> >>> the middle of Rohini in culmination!!!... S***!...

> >>>

> >>> --

> >>> Best regards

> >>> François

> >>>

> >>> Rohiniranjan wrote:

> >>>> Sridhar ji,

> >>>>

> >>>> Surely you could not be missing the point I was

> >> trying to make?

> >>>>

> >>>> Yes, recently UGC may have given its blessings

> >> to 'start' astrology

> >>>> faculty/curriculum in colleges/universities

> >> recognized by it, but that

> >>>> comes in year 2000+! WHY did it take so long,

> >> when Lala Lajpat Rai had

> >>>> the gumption to make that happen in that GREAT

> >> Institution that he

> >>>> started many many decades ago on pretty much a

> >> shoe-string budget and

> >>>> literally a PRAYER as the saying goes? As a VERY

> >> PROUD of my

> >>>> EDUCATIONAL HERITAGE and ex-alumnus of Kashi

> >> Hindu Vishwavidyalaya

> >>>> (Banaras Hindu University or B.H.U. as it is

> >> known to anglophiles and

> >>>> moderns!!) despite its problems and politics in

> >> the recent decades

> >>>> which pains me personally inside -- why did it

> >> take so long for the

> >>>> UGC (is there a hindi term for UGC? Assuming of

> >> course that Hindi is

> >>>> still the Rashtra Bhasha of India!

> >>>>

> >>>> Listen, I am not trying to make trouble or take

> >> India Government to

> >>>> task (as if I could from such a distance!). All

> >> I am saying is that

> >>>> the fact remains that Jyotish remains a pie in

> >> the sky for most

> >>>> Indians even and something still steeped in

> >> magic and amulets and

> >>>> mantras and something that they would continue

> >> to pay homage to when

> >>>> they are caught between the rock and the hard

> >> place, both created by

> >>>> them over a long period of time, over lifetimes

> >> even!

> >>>>

> >>>> Much lip-service has been paid to jyotish over

> >> centuries or at least

> >>>> decades. When will we JYOTISHIS get serious

> >> about it? ONCE we do, as a

> >>>> collective and STRONG group, all the UGCs and

> >> vice-chancellors will

> >>>> follow. To that end, three institutions must

> >> receive our gratitude.

> >>>> Firstly B.V. Raman and his ICAS, next KN Rao and

> >> his Bharatiya Vidya

> >>>> Bhavan and finally Sanjay Rath and his SVJC

> >> Organization, in the order

> >>>> of chronology strictly and nothing else in my

> >> view.

> >>>>

> >>>> Let us all stick to facts and neither try

> >> preaching to the converted

> >>>> in these seemingly large but really small slices

> >> of global population

> >>>> and more importantly, let us all try and find

> >> commonalities and not

> >>>> differences amongst us or it will take all of us

> >> down, sooner than you

> >>>> think!

> >>>>

> >>>> RR

> >>>>

> >>>> <end of sermon -- the soapbox is now available

> >> for the next speaker!>

> >>>>

> >>>> vedic astrology, sridhar

> >> k <kopparsa@>

> >>>> wrote:

> >>>>>

> >>>>> The decision to use the Lahiri Ayanamsa, was

> >> taken by a committe of

> >>>> Eminent Astrologers, appointed by the Govt of

> >> India, not by the Govt

> >>>> as such.

> >>>>> Recently, the UGC (University Grants

> >> commission) has given

> >>>> permission to teach ASTROLOGY in Colleges,

> >> recognized by it.

> >>>>>

> >>>>>

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@> wrote:

> >>>>> Francois,

> >>>>>

> >>>>> My two cents on this matter!

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Though often claimed that 'most' Indian

> >> astrologers use Lahiri, the

> >>>>> only way to determine that would be to poll the

> >> astrologers that

> >>>>> practice Jyotish in India or worldwide. No such

> >> poll has ever been

> >>>>> taken or published. Even such a poll has not

> >> been taken over internet

> >>>>> with its mixed population of jyotishis

> >> (beginner, intermediate,

> >>>>> advanced).

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Hence I do not believe we should make such a

> >> comment based on the

> >>>>> small sample we may have personally observed.

> >> Particularly if the

> >>>>> sample constitutes people from one school or

> >> closely related schools.

> >>>>> They would obviously tend to use similar

> >> ayanamshas, won't they? :-)

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Secondly, Govt of India may have given its

> >> blessing to Lahiri

> >>>>> ayanamsha to cut down the noise created by 33+

> >> values of ayanamsha in

> >>

> > === message truncated ===

> >

> >

> > DR. V M Rao

> > 22, 7th A Main

> > CHBS First Layout

> > Vijayanagar

> > Bangalore-560040 India

> > tel: 09341269290

> > e-mail: vidyanand23

> >

> >

> >

> > _________

> > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new

> > Security Centre. http://uk.security.

>

[Guest guest]

Rohiniranjan wrote:

> Okay Francois,

>

> What is the value of ayanamsha that YOU would want the world after you

> to use?

 

One that works (but then, I have to understand jyothis) ;-)

 

> Please give us the value for 1 January 1900 and YOUR value of the

> annual precession and let us go from there!

 

Actually I use 21:34:15.868 for 1900 with some scientific precession rate.

(22:58:03.422 in 2000.0)

 

> By the way there is a new value that is floating around that pegs

> current ayanamsha almost smack between the tropical and sidereal,

> something like 11 or 12 degrees between T and S!

 

Yikes!...

 

> Since you are exploring jyotish lists these days, I am sure you would

> run into it sooner or later and then these one or two or few degrees

> of differences would cease to be significant and hopefully you will

> focus on the bigger picture such as an ayanamsha that is 12 degrees

> away from the norm ;-)

 

Not sure. I am rather a traditionalist and try to stick to one ;-)

 

François

 

> RR

>

> vedic astrology, "Francois CARRIERE"

> <alchocoden wrote:

>>

>> Hello Mr Rao,

>>

>> The main problem has to do with what was use in past. Lahiri, now,

> we know

>> is a value that was taken as a reference in the 1940's until the

>> recognition of 1953; before, until the 1900's, Revati was understood

>> to be near 29°50 Pisces (so Spica was around 3° Libra) and was one

>> reference (Yukteswar, Birth year - 499 * 54", for instance). BUT

>> Surya Siddhanta define positions in *polar positions*: then, either

>> right ascension (at a specific moment) or culmination give the same

>> results (I tested it many times). That is

> MY MAIN

>> POINT with "polar longitude" of Spica, which should taken by Krushna

>> Jugalkalini, but He has a different point of view (precession rate,

>> for sure).

>>

>> Doctor Raman once stated that polar longitude (Spica around 0°48

>> Libra) may be a solution (cf. Frawley's jyotish correspondance

>> course). The main problem is that *we don't have precise horoscopes

>> with degrees*

> either in

>> western (I tried with Masha'Allah, with degrees in two directions:

> one may

>> suits positions to what he believes) or in the eastern world. As

>> Robert Hand once said, Ayanamsha is a problem *we have to solve for

>> ourselve*.

> So you

>> are right is some way ("the desired level of accuracy"). It would be

>> fantastic, if jyotishi understood this simple truth and stopped

>> imposing a specific ayanamsha (theirs) to every one as *the* only

>> true one. We have to understand that some techniques have developped

>> with specific ayanamsha and won't work with other (Krushna's

>> ashtakavarga system's heritage is one). Professor K.N.Rao showed

>> varga to work more efficiently with Lahiri (and I wished he would

>> have not, because of my "ayanamhsa"!), so let us use it if so. In

>> Heavens, there are only stars, and they don't care about us! Let us

>> use them with respect, in with respect of the work of our fellows

>> jyotishi and guru(s) who pass on to use the divine science, that of

>> Light of Life.

>>

>> --

>> With my best regards,

>> François

>>

>> V.M. Rao wrote:

>>> it seems to me that the best thing to do is to find

>>> out what works in practice in our predictions. if

>>> lahiri gives the desired level of accuracy, why not

>>> stick to that. one must remember that birth time, lat

>>> @ long of place of birth are all approximate. while

>>> accuracy is important, it will ultimately be intuition

>>> which will help accurate predictions.this is not to

>>> deny the importance of accuracy but making a fetish of

>>> it could mean rejecting the good when we do not know

>>> what is the best and consensus eludes us. the

>>> researchers in astrology can ofcourse continue their

>>> search.

>>>

>>> v m rao

>>> --- Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote:

>>>

>>>> Dear Francois,

>>>>

>>>> I am not sure why you ask me this question, for

>>>> starters :-)

>>>>

>>>> Secondly, I am not really sure what you are asking

>>>> me? About what

>>>> Lahiri thought or wanted or what Krushna (who?) and

>>>> Hipparchos and

>>>> Ebenezer (the only Ebenezer I have heard of is

>>>> Ebenezer Scrooge -- I

>>>> think that is one of the western/christian fables

>>>> but not sure :-(

>>>>

>>>> I have never really had a problem with ayanamsha,

>>>> and I speak very

>>>> honestly and directly about that. Believe it or not.

>>>>

>>>> Maybe I am coming across as being insensitive to

>>>> those who do have a

>>>> challenge staring at them in the ayanamsha area or

>>>> similar entry portals.

>>>>

>>>> My apologies if I am sounding insensitive or

>>>> clueless as to your angst

>>>> as far as jyotish is concerned in your personal

>>>> reality. I truly

>>>> apologize for that.

>>>>

>>>> There is a wonderful book titled BIOLOGY OF BELIEF

>>>> by BRUCE LIPTON. It

>>>> is not about astrology but really openminded

>>>> astrology students would

>>>> find it of personal interest!

>>>>

>>>> In the meantime, and in light of my earlier

>>>> plea/(more than a message)

>>>> let us all focus individually on our challenges and

>>>> resolve those

>>>> rather than think that our next 'AHA' is the final

>>>> answer for everyone

>>>> else!

>>>>

>>>> RR

>>>>

>>>> vedic astrology, "Francois

>>>> CARRIERE"

>>>> <alchocoden@> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> Hello Mr Ranjan,

>>>>>

>>>>> There is a question that HAUNT me. we both use an

>>>> ayanamsha that is

>>>> less

>>>>> than 30' near. Why, after the translation by

>>>> Ebenezer Burgess of the

>>>> Surya

>>>>> Siddhanta, with the correction of Spica at 180°48

>>>> (although he believed

>>>>> wrong) and explaining erlier polar longitudes,

>>>> indian jyotishi did

>>>> not take

>>>>> tis value? Krushna swears by a near value... Did

>>>> Lahiri wanted

>>>> celebrity? A

>>>>> whole page of the Swiss Ephemeris is devoted to

>>>> Hipparchos who

>>>> defined a

>>>>> polar "latitide" of Spica (when by midheaven

>>>> position a star has the

>>>> same

>>>>> value). It was so obvious... Why, why, why!???...

>>>> Even near Fagan

>>>> SVP has

>>>>> the middle of Rohini in culmination!!!... S***!...

>>>>>

>>>>> --

>>>>> Best regards

>>>>> François

>>>>>

>>>>> Rohiniranjan wrote:

>>>>>> Sridhar ji,

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Surely you could not be missing the point I was

>>>> trying to make?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Yes, recently UGC may have given its blessings

>>>> to 'start' astrology

>>>>>> faculty/curriculum in colleges/universities

>>>> recognized by it, but that

>>>>>> comes in year 2000+! WHY did it take so long,

>>>> when Lala Lajpat Rai had

>>>>>> the gumption to make that happen in that GREAT

>>>> Institution that he

>>>>>> started many many decades ago on pretty much a

>>>> shoe-string budget and

>>>>>> literally a PRAYER as the saying goes? As a VERY

>>>> PROUD of my

>>>>>> EDUCATIONAL HERITAGE and ex-alumnus of Kashi

>>>> Hindu Vishwavidyalaya

>>>>>> (Banaras Hindu University or B.H.U. as it is

>>>> known to anglophiles and

>>>>>> moderns!!) despite its problems and politics in

>>>> the recent decades

>>>>>> which pains me personally inside -- why did it

>>>> take so long for the

>>>>>> UGC (is there a hindi term for UGC? Assuming of

>>>> course that Hindi is

>>>>>> still the Rashtra Bhasha of India!

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Listen, I am not trying to make trouble or take

>>>> India Government to

>>>>>> task (as if I could from such a distance!). All

>>>> I am saying is that

>>>>>> the fact remains that Jyotish remains a pie in

>>>> the sky for most

>>>>>> Indians even and something still steeped in

>>>> magic and amulets and

>>>>>> mantras and something that they would continue

>>>> to pay homage to when

>>>>>> they are caught between the rock and the hard

>>>> place, both created by

>>>>>> them over a long period of time, over lifetimes

>>>> even!

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Much lip-service has been paid to jyotish over

>>>> centuries or at least

>>>>>> decades. When will we JYOTISHIS get serious

>>>> about it? ONCE we do, as a

>>>>>> collective and STRONG group, all the UGCs and

>>>> vice-chancellors will

>>>>>> follow. To that end, three institutions must

>>>> receive our gratitude.

>>>>>> Firstly B.V. Raman and his ICAS, next KN Rao and

>>>> his Bharatiya Vidya

>>>>>> Bhavan and finally Sanjay Rath and his SVJC

>>>> Organization, in the order

>>>>>> of chronology strictly and nothing else in my

>>>> view.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Let us all stick to facts and neither try

>>>> preaching to the converted

>>>>>> in these seemingly large but really small slices

>>>> of global population

>>>>>> and more importantly, let us all try and find

>>>> commonalities and not

>>>>>> differences amongst us or it will take all of us

>>>> down, sooner than you

>>>>>> think!

>>>>>>

>>>>>> RR

>>>>>>

>>>>>> <end of sermon -- the soapbox is now available

>>>> for the next speaker!>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> vedic astrology, sridhar

>>>> k <kopparsa@>

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The decision to use the Lahiri Ayanamsa, was

>>>> taken by a committe of

>>>>>> Eminent Astrologers, appointed by the Govt of

>>>> India, not by the Govt

>>>>>> as such.

>>>>>>> Recently, the UGC (University Grants

>>>> commission) has given

>>>>>> permission to teach ASTROLOGY in Colleges,

>>>> recognized by it.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@> wrote:

>>>>>>> Francois,

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> My two cents on this matter!

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Though often claimed that 'most' Indian

>>>> astrologers use Lahiri, the

>>>>>>> only way to determine that would be to poll the

>>>> astrologers that

>>>>>>> practice Jyotish in India or worldwide. No such

>>>> poll has ever been

>>>>>>> taken or published. Even such a poll has not

>>>> been taken over internet

>>>>>>> with its mixed population of jyotishis

>>>> (beginner, intermediate,

>>>>>>> advanced).

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Hence I do not believe we should make such a

>>>> comment based on the

>>>>>>> small sample we may have personally observed.

>>>> Particularly if the

>>>>>>> sample constitutes people from one school or

>>>> closely related schools.

>>>>>>> They would obviously tend to use similar

>>>> ayanamshas, won't they? :-)

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Secondly, Govt of India may have given its

>>>> blessing to Lahiri

>>>>>>> ayanamsha to cut down the noise created by 33+

>>>> values of ayanamsha in

>>>>

>>> === message truncated ===

>>>

>>>

>>> DR. V M Rao

>>> 22, 7th A Main

>>> CHBS First Layout

>>> Vijayanagar

>>> Bangalore-560040 India

>>> tel: 09341269290

>>> e-mail: vidyanand23

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> _________

>>> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new

>>> Security Centre. http://uk.security.

[Guest guest]

Francois,

 

Thanks for taking the time to read and respond to each request. I am

curious, why do you call it a scientific precession rate? Please give

details, source etc., if you can.

 

Thanks

 

RR

 

vedic astrology, "Francois CARRIERE"

<alchocoden wrote:

>

> Rohiniranjan wrote:

> > Okay Francois,

> >

> > What is the value of ayanamsha that YOU would want the world after you

> > to use?

>

> One that works (but then, I have to understand jyothis) ;-)

>

> > Please give us the value for 1 January 1900 and YOUR value of the

> > annual precession and let us go from there!

>

> Actually I use 21:34:15.868 for 1900 with some scientific precession

rate.

> (22:58:03.422 in 2000.0)

>

> > By the way there is a new value that is floating around that pegs

> > current ayanamsha almost smack between the tropical and sidereal,

> > something like 11 or 12 degrees between T and S!

>

> Yikes!...

>

> > Since you are exploring jyotish lists these days, I am sure you would

> > run into it sooner or later and then these one or two or few degrees

> > of differences would cease to be significant and hopefully you will

> > focus on the bigger picture such as an ayanamsha that is 12 degrees

> > away from the norm ;-)

>

> Not sure. I am rather a traditionalist and try to stick to one ;-)

>

> François

>

> > RR

> >

> > vedic astrology, "Francois CARRIERE"

> > <alchocoden@> wrote:

> >>

> >> Hello Mr Rao,

> >>

> >> The main problem has to do with what was use in past. Lahiri, now,

> > we know

> >> is a value that was taken as a reference in the 1940's until the

> >> recognition of 1953; before, until the 1900's, Revati was understood

> >> to be near 29°50 Pisces (so Spica was around 3° Libra) and was one

> >> reference (Yukteswar, Birth year - 499 * 54", for instance). BUT

> >> Surya Siddhanta define positions in *polar positions*: then, either

> >> right ascension (at a specific moment) or culmination give the same

> >> results (I tested it many times). That is

> > MY MAIN

> >> POINT with "polar longitude" of Spica, which should taken by Krushna

> >> Jugalkalini, but He has a different point of view (precession rate,

> >> for sure).

> >>

> >> Doctor Raman once stated that polar longitude (Spica around 0°48

> >> Libra) may be a solution (cf. Frawley's jyotish correspondance

> >> course). The main problem is that *we don't have precise horoscopes

> >> with degrees*

> > either in

> >> western (I tried with Masha'Allah, with degrees in two directions:

> > one may

> >> suits positions to what he believes) or in the eastern world. As

> >> Robert Hand once said, Ayanamsha is a problem *we have to solve for

> >> ourselve*.

> > So you

> >> are right is some way ("the desired level of accuracy"). It would be

> >> fantastic, if jyotishi understood this simple truth and stopped

> >> imposing a specific ayanamsha (theirs) to every one as *the* only

> >> true one. We have to understand that some techniques have developped

> >> with specific ayanamsha and won't work with other (Krushna's

> >> ashtakavarga system's heritage is one). Professor K.N.Rao showed

> >> varga to work more efficiently with Lahiri (and I wished he would

> >> have not, because of my "ayanamhsa"!), so let us use it if so. In

> >> Heavens, there are only stars, and they don't care about us! Let us

> >> use them with respect, in with respect of the work of our fellows

> >> jyotishi and guru(s) who pass on to use the divine science, that of

> >> Light of Life.

> >>

> >> --

> >> With my best regards,

> >> François

> >>

> >> V.M. Rao wrote:

> >>> it seems to me that the best thing to do is to find

> >>> out what works in practice in our predictions. if

> >>> lahiri gives the desired level of accuracy, why not

> >>> stick to that. one must remember that birth time, lat

> >>> @ long of place of birth are all approximate. while

> >>> accuracy is important, it will ultimately be intuition

> >>> which will help accurate predictions.this is not to

> >>> deny the importance of accuracy but making a fetish of

> >>> it could mean rejecting the good when we do not know

> >>> what is the best and consensus eludes us. the

> >>> researchers in astrology can ofcourse continue their

> >>> search.

> >>>

> >>> v m rao

> >>> --- Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@> wrote:

> >>>

> >>>> Dear Francois,

> >>>>

> >>>> I am not sure why you ask me this question, for

> >>>> starters :-)

> >>>>

> >>>> Secondly, I am not really sure what you are asking

> >>>> me? About what

> >>>> Lahiri thought or wanted or what Krushna (who?) and

> >>>> Hipparchos and

> >>>> Ebenezer (the only Ebenezer I have heard of is

> >>>> Ebenezer Scrooge -- I

> >>>> think that is one of the western/christian fables

> >>>> but not sure :-(

> >>>>

> >>>> I have never really had a problem with ayanamsha,

> >>>> and I speak very

> >>>> honestly and directly about that. Believe it or not.

> >>>>

> >>>> Maybe I am coming across as being insensitive to

> >>>> those who do have a

> >>>> challenge staring at them in the ayanamsha area or

> >>>> similar entry portals.

> >>>>

> >>>> My apologies if I am sounding insensitive or

> >>>> clueless as to your angst

> >>>> as far as jyotish is concerned in your personal

> >>>> reality. I truly

> >>>> apologize for that.

> >>>>

> >>>> There is a wonderful book titled BIOLOGY OF BELIEF

> >>>> by BRUCE LIPTON. It

> >>>> is not about astrology but really openminded

> >>>> astrology students would

> >>>> find it of personal interest!

> >>>>

> >>>> In the meantime, and in light of my earlier

> >>>> plea/(more than a message)

> >>>> let us all focus individually on our challenges and

> >>>> resolve those

> >>>> rather than think that our next 'AHA' is the final

> >>>> answer for everyone

> >>>> else!

> >>>>

> >>>> RR

> >>>>

> >>>> vedic astrology, "Francois

> >>>> CARRIERE"

> >>>> <alchocoden@> wrote:

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Hello Mr Ranjan,

> >>>>>

> >>>>> There is a question that HAUNT me. we both use an

> >>>> ayanamsha that is

> >>>> less

> >>>>> than 30' near. Why, after the translation by

> >>>> Ebenezer Burgess of the

> >>>> Surya

> >>>>> Siddhanta, with the correction of Spica at 180°48

> >>>> (although he believed

> >>>>> wrong) and explaining erlier polar longitudes,

> >>>> indian jyotishi did

> >>>> not take

> >>>>> tis value? Krushna swears by a near value... Did

> >>>> Lahiri wanted

> >>>> celebrity? A

> >>>>> whole page of the Swiss Ephemeris is devoted to

> >>>> Hipparchos who

> >>>> defined a

> >>>>> polar "latitide" of Spica (when by midheaven

> >>>> position a star has the

> >>>> same

> >>>>> value). It was so obvious... Why, why, why!???...

> >>>> Even near Fagan

> >>>> SVP has

> >>>>> the middle of Rohini in culmination!!!... S***!...

> >>>>>

> >>>>> --

> >>>>> Best regards

> >>>>> François

> >>>>>

> >>>>> Rohiniranjan wrote:

> >>>>>> Sridhar ji,

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Surely you could not be missing the point I was

> >>>> trying to make?

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Yes, recently UGC may have given its blessings

> >>>> to 'start' astrology

> >>>>>> faculty/curriculum in colleges/universities

> >>>> recognized by it, but that

> >>>>>> comes in year 2000+! WHY did it take so long,

> >>>> when Lala Lajpat Rai had

> >>>>>> the gumption to make that happen in that GREAT

> >>>> Institution that he

> >>>>>> started many many decades ago on pretty much a

> >>>> shoe-string budget and

> >>>>>> literally a PRAYER as the saying goes? As a VERY

> >>>> PROUD of my

> >>>>>> EDUCATIONAL HERITAGE and ex-alumnus of Kashi

> >>>> Hindu Vishwavidyalaya

> >>>>>> (Banaras Hindu University or B.H.U. as it is

> >>>> known to anglophiles and

> >>>>>> moderns!!) despite its problems and politics in

> >>>> the recent decades

> >>>>>> which pains me personally inside -- why did it

> >>>> take so long for the

> >>>>>> UGC (is there a hindi term for UGC? Assuming of

> >>>> course that Hindi is

> >>>>>> still the Rashtra Bhasha of India!

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Listen, I am not trying to make trouble or take

> >>>> India Government to

> >>>>>> task (as if I could from such a distance!). All

> >>>> I am saying is that

> >>>>>> the fact remains that Jyotish remains a pie in

> >>>> the sky for most

> >>>>>> Indians even and something still steeped in

> >>>> magic and amulets and

> >>>>>> mantras and something that they would continue

> >>>> to pay homage to when

> >>>>>> they are caught between the rock and the hard

> >>>> place, both created by

> >>>>>> them over a long period of time, over lifetimes

> >>>> even!

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Much lip-service has been paid to jyotish over

> >>>> centuries or at least

> >>>>>> decades. When will we JYOTISHIS get serious

> >>>> about it? ONCE we do, as a

> >>>>>> collective and STRONG group, all the UGCs and

> >>>> vice-chancellors will

> >>>>>> follow. To that end, three institutions must

> >>>> receive our gratitude.

> >>>>>> Firstly B.V. Raman and his ICAS, next KN Rao and

> >>>> his Bharatiya Vidya

> >>>>>> Bhavan and finally Sanjay Rath and his SVJC

> >>>> Organization, in the order

> >>>>>> of chronology strictly and nothing else in my

> >>>> view.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> Let us all stick to facts and neither try

> >>>> preaching to the converted

> >>>>>> in these seemingly large but really small slices

> >>>> of global population

> >>>>>> and more importantly, let us all try and find

> >>>> commonalities and not

> >>>>>> differences amongst us or it will take all of us

> >>>> down, sooner than you

> >>>>>> think!

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> RR

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> <end of sermon -- the soapbox is now available

> >>>> for the next speaker!>

> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> vedic astrology, sridhar

> >>>> k <kopparsa@>

> >>>>>> wrote:

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> The decision to use the Lahiri Ayanamsa, was

> >>>> taken by a committe of

> >>>>>> Eminent Astrologers, appointed by the Govt of

> >>>> India, not by the Govt

> >>>>>> as such.

> >>>>>>> Recently, the UGC (University Grants

> >>>> commission) has given

> >>>>>> permission to teach ASTROLOGY in Colleges,

> >>>> recognized by it.

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@> wrote:

> >>>>>>> Francois,

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> My two cents on this matter!

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> Though often claimed that 'most' Indian

> >>>> astrologers use Lahiri, the

> >>>>>>> only way to determine that would be to poll the

> >>>> astrologers that

> >>>>>>> practice Jyotish in India or worldwide. No such

> >>>> poll has ever been

> >>>>>>> taken or published. Even such a poll has not

> >>>> been taken over internet

> >>>>>>> with its mixed population of jyotishis

> >>>> (beginner, intermediate,

> >>>>>>> advanced).

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> Hence I do not believe we should make such a

> >>>> comment based on the

> >>>>>>> small sample we may have personally observed.

> >>>> Particularly if the

> >>>>>>> sample constitutes people from one school or

> >>>> closely related schools.

> >>>>>>> They would obviously tend to use similar

> >>>> ayanamshas, won't they? :-)

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>> Secondly, Govt of India may have given its

> >>>> blessing to Lahiri

> >>>>>>> ayanamsha to cut down the noise created by 33+

> >>>> values of ayanamsha in

> >>>>

> >>> === message truncated ===

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> DR. V M Rao

> >>> 22, 7th A Main

> >>> CHBS First Layout

> >>> Vijayanagar

> >>> Bangalore-560040 India

> >>> tel: 09341269290

> >>> e-mail: vidyanand23@

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> _________

> >>> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new

> >>> Security Centre. http://uk.security.

>