Lahiri Ayanamsha or Raman Ayanamsha

April 20, 2009

Dear friends,

I recently joined your group and delighted to be here.

My objective to join this group is to strengthen my very less knowledge of

astrology and contribute with every little intellectual resource I may have.I

also take this opportunity to bow before all those blessed people who have got

more drops of this ocean of knowledge than others like me who are desperately

seeking more and more of it. May God bless us all !

Here I would like to ask a few questions and get enlightened. Please be patient

as I am learning.

My first question (in form of this post) is

Which ayanamsha is better and why ?

- Lahiri's or Raman's

Kindly also share your opinion about K.P. and Faghan's values(ayanamsha).

Thank you everyone,

Best regards

Jay

April 21, 2009

Dear Jay,

this ayanamsha thing has been an ongoing struggle for jyotishis as far back as I

can recall and while strong voices have sounded their Bheri from time to time

during my empirical watch, voices coming and going -- a few ayanamshas have been

claimed to be true -- each to absolutely die for! And then it gets complicated

because even within the same ayanamsha, some introduced the geotopic variable of

parallax corrected moon and one software programmer more volatile than others

quickly got influenced and added that to his software, many others did not and

so on.

Now there is another variant being introduced that kind of goes even beyond

ayanamsha which basically shifts the entire platform up or down and not variably

across the planetary array, some planets going up, others down!

Some astrology doyens have tried to use their strong voices to make it too

simple, which apparently it is not! How else would we after decades of bickering

and published criticisms have not been able to get one commonly accepted value

of ayanamsha? Do the proponents of one or other camp of ayanamsha really think

that the rest of the world is sadly mistaken?

My two cents? Don't waste your time worrying about ayanamsha -- it is not make

or break unless you use something very out of the norm, like zero ayanamsha or

something like that.

Remain curious about astrology for it indeed is a very intriguing reality, but

do not fall in love with it and do not call it science lightly! By the very

token, do not call it superstition either, as if science and superstition were

two either or poles!

Personally speaking -- I have used both ayanamshas (see header) and use neither

now but a value closer to Raman's values. If you must know, so called Raman

ayanamsha is really similar if not identical to the one given by Sri Yukteshwar

Giri in his book The Holy Science but with the more modern annual rate of

recession of SVP (as opposed to 54-constant).

RR

, " Jai Nahata " <nahata_jay wrote:

>

> Dear friends,

>

> I recently joined your group and delighted to be here.

>

> My objective to join this group is to strengthen my very less knowledge of

astrology and contribute with every little intellectual resource I may have.I

also take this opportunity to bow before all those blessed people who have got

more drops of this ocean of knowledge than others like me who are desperately

seeking more and more of it. May God bless us all !

> Here I would like to ask a few questions and get enlightened. Please be

patient as I am learning.

> My first question (in form of this post) is

>

> Which ayanamsha is better and why ?

> - Lahiri's or Raman's

>

> Kindly also share your opinion about K.P. and Faghan's values(ayanamsha).

>

> Thank you everyone,

>

> Best regards

>

> Jay

>

April 21, 2009

aum namah shivaya

dear jay,

ayanamsa is indeed a very tricky subject and u need to be really good with

astrology or indeed blesssed to find out the real rate of progession that any

ayanamsa uses. for over a year i have been experimenting with different values

and finally i found that you need to add some seconds to lahiri and deduct some

from raman , to get the REAL value .

i did this and all the dasa bhuktis match up exactly with real life events ..

upto an hour time precision .. can u believe it ?

btw , if u really get the secret , you will need to manually compute ayanamsa

value for each year as using a uniform value will make errors creep in .. !!!

good luck and best regards,

chandan s sabarwal.

April 21, 2009

Hello everyone,

2 Rohini Ranjan ji,

I am delighted that U posted reply to my question. I have collection of almost

all of your articles and glad to be in touch with u. Thank u.

2 Prashant ji,

Sir, thank u for showing clearer direction. I will try Raman a bit more. Btw,

what is exact Surya Siddhant value(or calculation). I also found KP to be giving

sometimes better results than anyother but I rarely like to drive a diesel car

with petrol that is mixing two systems.Thanks again.

2 Chandan ji,

May I request you to give the values you are following(if I am not asking much)

or how much to be added or deducted from these two standard values.

I know that there are some of the very important, complicated and misunderstood

concepts due to which astrology is still to get its right place. I strongly

believe that unneccessary complexities need to be removed through empirical

approach and genuine collobrative research.

Awaiting further opinions.

Thank you once again,

Best regards

Jay

, " chandan486 "

<wavelogix+jyotishremedies wrote:

>

> aum namah shivaya

>

> dear jay,

>

> ayanamsa is indeed a very tricky subject and u need to be really good with

astrology or indeed blesssed to find out the real rate of progession that any

ayanamsa uses. for over a year i have been experimenting with different values

and finally i found that you need to add some seconds to lahiri and deduct some

from raman , to get the REAL value .

>

> i did this and all the dasa bhuktis match up exactly with real life events ..

upto an hour time precision .. can u believe it ?

>

> btw , if u really get the secret , you will need to manually compute ayanamsa

value for each year as using a uniform value will make errors creep in .. !!!

>

> good luck and best regards,

> chandan s sabarwal.

>

April 21, 2009

Chandan ji,

Good revealation.But ayanamsha value varying every year does not given

consistency to Astrology.

Between two models of lahiri and Raman,you said that additions and deductions

have to be done to arrive real values.These can be considered if we are clear

with reference to 360 days or 365 days computations.

Infact it is for Astrologer to depend on one model with which they can feel

better and work out results than to keep the ayanamsha factor open ended.It is

all that zodiacal rotation in ecleptical manner adds complexity as velocities

too become unpredictable.scientifically we are trying to ascertain,these two

ayanamsa,particulalry of lahiri is well recognised for adoptation universally

vrkrishnan

--- On Tue, 4/21/09, chandan486 <wavelogix+jyotishremedies wrote:

chandan486 <wavelogix+jyotishremedies

Re: Lahiri Ayanamsha or Raman Ayanamsha

Tuesday, April 21, 2009, 10:46 AM

aum namah shivaya

dear jay,

ayanamsa is indeed a very tricky subject and u need to be really good with

astrology or indeed blesssed to find out the real rate of progession that any

ayanamsa uses. for over a year i have been experimenting with different values

and finally i found that you need to add some seconds to lahiri and deduct some

from raman , to get the REAL value .

i did this and all the dasa bhuktis match up exactly with real life events ..

upto an hour time precision .. can u believe it ?

btw , if u really get the secret , you will need to manually compute ayanamsa

value for each year as using a uniform value will make errors creep in .. !!!

good luck and best regards,

chandan s sabarwal.

April 23, 2009

aum namah shivaya

oops ! ... forgot to add , i use 360 degress or 1 solar year as year definition

....

regards,

chandan s sabarwal.

April 23, 2009

Ayanamsha is originally a Suryasiddhantic concept, in which it is defined as

libration of the " bhachakra "

(orbit of lunar asterisms) within a maximum range of 27 degrees, full

cycle being of 108 degrees which is derived by multiplying 360 with 0.3

; someone multiplied again and got a maximum value of 8 degrees which

is found in the oldest Western record in Theon. Later Islamic

astrologers put its value aound 9-10 degrees. Copernicus also used this

librating ayanamsha.

Physical astronomy found there is no such thing as libration of the

equinoxes, and therefore removed the very notion of libration /

trepidation. They were right. Ayanamsha is not a phenomenon of physical

world.

Later, Colebrooke & c imposed the physical concept of precession on

Indian concept of ayanamsha. Burgess also followed this line , as did

Lahiri and all those who wrongly believe Suryasiddhanta to be a work of

physical astronomy. Unfortunately, these socalled experts did not even

care to translate the original verses of Suryasiddhanta honestly, in

which ayanamsha has no relation with movement of equinoxes, but is

defined as to and fro libration of the bhachakra. There is no means in

physical astronomy through which we can test the validity of this

Suryasiddhantic claim, because there is no physical entity at the orbit

of 60 years which is said to be the orbit of bhachakra in

Suryasiddhanta, and beyond which all objects are deemed to be

non-planets, includeing Uranus, Neptune, etc.

Followers of Colebrooke & c had their best exponent in NC Lahiri who

used modern value of precession of equinoxes to find the period of zero

ayanamsha, and failing to find any noticeable star at the first point

of sidereal Aries or start of Ashvini, found Spica at the nakshatra

Chitra in 285 AD. This he declared to be the zero date of ayanamsha,

which was slavishly accepted by " supporters " of physical astronomy,

whio forgot that Chitra was never reference point in any system of

astrology or astronomy. The reference point is first point of Ashvini

in most cases and Krittika in some cases, but never Chitra. This

prompted Chandrahari to propound his alternative concept of ayanamsha.

Chandrahari's view was conceptually better than Lahiri's, but he

followed the false reasonimg of Burgess who deliberately mis-translated

relevant verses of Suryasiddhanta and cited some portions of Siddhanta

Shiromani to im[pose modern concept of precession on Suryasiddhantic

ayanamsha, because Burgess could not believe in the existence of a

trepidating equinox and guessed that the verses were mutilated which

was the duty of Burgess to rectify. In his zeal, Burgess quoted a verse

from Siddhanta Shiromani in which it was said that sampaat point has a

periodicity of once revolution per 144000 years. Burgess omitted the

whole context, which gives a formula for computing precession of the

equinoxes. It was the most accurate formula for preccession till modern

times. Hipparchus had a much crude computation, but Bhaskar's accurate

formula ( ClickHere ) is never cited by these enthusiasts.

It is noteworthy that while giving an accurate period of precession,

Bhaskar-II cites Suryasiddhanta as a source of this ancient formula.

This formula of physical or Drikpakshiya worls was known to ancient

experts, but they never caleed it ayanamsha. All of them believed in

the Suryasiddhantic notion of librating ayanamsha, from India to Europe.

Had they no knowledge of actual precession, we could believe in false

propaganda of Colebrooke, Burgess, Whitney, Lahiri & c about the

mistake of ancients in believing in a vibrating equinox. But Bhaskar

makes it clear that chakraayana or circular motion of equinox in ~25500

years was known to Indians since Vedic times, he makes it amply clear

by referring to Shruti for his source of Suryasiddhantic formula of

precession of equinoxes.

Before Colebrooke, Burgess, Whitney, Lahiri & c , all Indians

believed in trepidating ayanamsa, ie ayanamsha as a trepidation of

bhachakra and not as precession of equinoxes. Precession of equinox

takes place along the full circle which is known as chakraayana in

ancient terminilogy, while ayanamsha moves like a pendulum within a

maximum range of +27 and -27 degrees which was known as dolaayana. When

Suryasiddhantic planetary positions and ayanamsha had great differences

with planets of physical world, Suryasiddhanta was universally

acclaimed as the best of all siddhantas. Other siddhantas were not even

preserved, while astrologically most essential portions of

Suryasiddhanta have been preserved. Suryasiddhanta deals with

non-physical world or Bhuva-loka on which deities like Surya Deva and

Chandra Deva reside, whom we cannot see sensorily, while physical

planets reside in the physical world which is open to sense perception.

Hence, the only proof of Suryasiddhanta is its astrological test, for

which Suryasiddhantic software of horoscope can be freely downloaded

from Kundalee and messages posted at Support .

-VJ

================= =================

________________________________

chandan486 <wavelogix+jyotishremedies

Thursday, April 23, 2009 2:10:32 PM

Re: Lahiri Ayanamsha or Raman Ayanamsha

aum namah shivaya

oops ! ... forgot to add , i use 360 degress or 1 solar year as year definition

....

regards,

chandan s sabarwal.

April 23, 2009

ok .. very nice explanation . but ever tried doing a reading without ayanamsa ?

Sayana values ? even there is no mention of ayanamsa in any classical texts such

as BPHS or Jaimini Sutras , then i wonder , why so much the hype with this

ayanamsa .. ? also , i have experienced personal gains in life on dates which

are seemingly contradictory to the laws of transits based on ayanamsa but

absolutely fair based on Sayana ..

humble regards,

chandan s sabarwal.

April 24, 2009

||Jai Ramakrishna||

Dear Chandan,

Like you even I also wonder, the classical works are based on which

Ayanamsha?Almost all classical texts, are silent in this issue--as they have

been interested in predictive purposes only, while hardly few works on Samhita &

Ganita areas of Astrology.

Panchasiddhantika has been composed by Shree Mihira Acharya aka Shree Varaha

Mihira.

However, without Sayana Values are nothing but the so-called Tropical Ayanamsha.

In Tropical Ayanamsha, the position of Sun is given prime importance & is in

relation with the movement of the Sun, which is again dependent on the English

Calendar, whilst in Nirayana Ayanamsha(Sidereal) is not dependent either on

English Calendar nor on the movement. Here movement of Moon is of importance,

then the calculation of distance between Sun to calculate tithis & then

calculate months & finally apply it for lunar months & solar months as well.

Thats why you will find " Indian Sun Sign " & " Tropical Sun Sign " or " Zodiac sign "

will not match everytime.

Thank you,

.

http://gauravastro.150m.com

, " chandan486 "

<wavelogix+jyotishremedies wrote:

>

> ok .. very nice explanation . but ever tried doing a reading without ayanamsa

? Sayana values ? even there is no mention of ayanamsa in any classical texts

such as BPHS or Jaimini Sutras , then i wonder , why so much the hype with this

ayanamsa .. ? also , i have experienced personal gains in life on dates which

are seemingly contradictory to the laws of transits based on ayanamsa but

absolutely fair based on Sayana ..

>

> humble regards,

> chandan s sabarwal.

>

April 24, 2009

AYANAMSHA : Original Definition

Classical texts are NOT silent on ayanamsha. It is a topic of Siddhanta Jyotisha

and not Phalita, and is well defined in ancient Sidhhanta, although that

definition is knowingly or unknowingly being neglected by many astrologers now.

Ayanamsha is originally a Suryasiddhantic concept, in which it is defined as

libration of the " bhachakra " (orbit of lunar asterisms) within a maximum range

of 27 degrees, full cycle being of 108 degrees which is derived by multiplying

360 with 0.3 ; someone multiplied again and got a maximum value of 8 degrees

which is found in the oldest Western record in Theon of Alexandria (~4th century

AD). Later Islamic astrologers put its value aound 9 -10 degrees. Copernicus

also used this librating ayanamsha.

Physical astronomy found there is no such thing as libration of the equinoxes,

and therefore removed the very notion of libration / trepidation. They were

right. Ayanamsha is not a phenomenon of physical world.

Later, Colebrooke & c imposed the physical concept of precession on Indian

concept of ayanamsha. Burgess also followed this line , as did Lahiri and all

those who wrongly believe Suryasiddhanta to be a work of physical astronomy.

Unfortunately, these socalled experts did not even care to translate the

original verses of Suryasiddhanta honestly, in which ayanamsha has no relation

with movement of equinoxes, but is defined as to and fro libration of the

bhachakra. There is no means in physical astronomy through which we can test the

validity of this Suryasiddhantic claim, because there is no physical entity at

the orbit of 60 years which is said to be the orbit of bhachakra in

Suryasiddhanta, and beyond which all objects are deemed to be non-planets,

includeing Uranus, Neptune, etc.

Followers of Colebrooke & c had their best exponent in NC Lahiri who used modern

value of precession of equinoxes to find the period of zero ayanamsha, and

failing to find any noticeable star at the first point of sidereal Aries or

start of Ashvini, found Spica at the nakshatra Chitra in 285 AD. This he

declared to be the zero date of ayanamsha, which was slavishly accepted by

" supporters " of physical astronomy, whio forgot that Chitra was never reference

point in any system of astrology or astronomy. The reference point is first

point of Ashvini in most cases (and Krittika in some cases like Vimshottari or

koorma Chakra), but never Chitra. This prompted Chandrahari to propound his

alternative concept of ayanamsha. Chandrahari' s view was conceptually better

than Lahiri's, but he followed the false reasonimg of Burgess who deliberately

mis-translated relevant verses of Suryasiddhanta and cited some portions of

Siddhanta Shiromani to im[pose modern concept

of precession on Suryasiddhantic ayanamsha, because Burgess could not believe

in the existence of a trepidating equinox and guessed that the verses were

mutilated which was the duty of Burgess to rectify. In his zeal, Burgess quoted

a verse from Siddhanta Shiromani in which it was said that sampaat point has a

periodicity of once revolution per 144000 years. Burgess omitted the whole

context, which gives a formula for computing precession of the equinoxes. It was

the most accurate formula for preccession till modern times. Hipparchus had a

much crude computation, but Bhaskar's accurate formula ( ClickHere ) is never

cited by these enthusiasts.

It is noteworthy that while giving an accurate period of precession, Bhaskar-II

cites Suryasiddhanta as a source of this ancient formula. This formula of

physical or Drikpakshiya worls was known to ancient experts, but they never

caleed it ayanamsha. All of them believed in the Suryasiddhantic notion of

librating ayanamsha, from India to Europe. Had they no knowledge of actual

precession, we could believe in false propaganda of Colebrooke, Burgess,

Whitney, Lahiri & c about the mistake of ancients in believing in a vibrating

equinox. But Bhaskar makes it clear that chakraayana or circular motion of

equinox in ~25500 years was known to Indians since Vedic times, he makes it

amply clear by referring to Shruti for his source of Suryasiddhantic formula of

precession of equinoxes.

Before Colebrooke, Burgess, Whitney, Lahiri & c , all Indians believed in

trepidating ayanamsa, ie ayanamsha as a trepidation of bhachakra and not as

precession of equinoxes. Precession of equinox takes place along the full circle

which is known as chakraayana in ancient terminilogy, while ayanamsha moves like

a pendulum within a maximum range of +27 and -27 degrees which was known as

dolaayana. When Suryasiddhantic planetary positions and ayanamsha had great

differences with planets of physical world, Suryasiddhanta was universally

acclaimed as the best of all siddhantas. Other siddhantas were not even

preserved, while astrologically most essential portions of Suryasiddhanta have

been preserved. Suryasiddhanta deals with non-physical world or Bhuva-loka on

which deities like Surya Deva and Chandra Deva reside, whom we cannot see

sensorily, while physical planets reside in the physical world which is open to

sense perception. Hence, the only proof of

Suryasiddhanta is its astrological test, for which Suryasiddhantic software of

horoscope can be freely downloaded from Kundalee and messages posted at Support

..

-VJ

==================== =================

________________________________

<gaurav.ghosh

Friday, April 24, 2009 10:33:57 AM

Re: Lahiri Ayanamsha or Raman Ayanamsha

||Jai Ramakrishna| |