RE:Cross postings

[Guest guest]

Dear Rajanikanth ji, Thanks for the mail and appreciation. Two things should be clarified - ==> Please continue that and forgive the silence of the lambs (beginners) - let the lions roar! <== There are no lambs or lions in this group - but only friends of equal repute who want to share their knowledge and opinions about ancient indian astrology. There fore there is no roar - but only loveful hugs. Occasional

fury you may find too is (and should not be) also not against individuals but only regarding opinion differences. Everybody is free to have their own understanding ...nay, it is better to say that "everybody has their unique opinions and understanding"....we are just sharing it. ==> > Please do not get irritated by detractors. I would have really appreciated it had you just > ignored those cross postings. Most of us joined this group to learn something about > practical astrology and not what 'mlecha' said. <== Kaul ji is our well respected friend, what ever be his opinion. It is a status he deserves as an individual who has done a lot of work in the field of his interest. But the point under consideration and I am against is the large amount of "CROSS POSTINGS" (posts that appear in other group and forwarded to this group) he does. Most of the groups does not appreciate cross postings. It is has the following demerits - * The reader will not be aware where the discussion began and were it ended. * The reader lacks the essential knowledge about the knowledge level and arguments of the participants and will get no idea about the arguments made prior to that and after that. (Forwarded posts only provide an one-sided

view) * The moderator and members of the original group may not appreciate their messages being forwarded to some other forum. (Cross posting is an individual wish with out consulting and at times against, the group opinion of the original group) * Cross postings does not have any continuity - since it may differ widely from the subjects and threads discussed in the group. (Kaul ji's mail are stark example of the same). They are like broken piece of glass thrown into some body else's house without considering their like or dislike. * Cross postings violates the group etiquette. (No groups appreciate the same) * Usually Kauls

cross postings are against ancient indian astrology, and is filled with his petty personal accounts. (Who is interested in his personal stories and mistakes than the subject itself? Is it a place to write his autobiography occasionally - so that his ego could be full filled? Most of his cross posting in most of the groups does this - and usually nothing else - rather irritatingly. His mails are filled with bad language and name calling used against many) ==> > The first time I read Kaul ji's mail, I understood that if I read anymore, I would end up in an > asylum. <== This you rightly said.. lol.. I felt the same about Kaul ji at times, and this actually causes me to be companionate about him. The man on the surface of water makes a lot of splashing sound - where as he will not when he dives in to the depths. But what to do - the asylum phase is yet prevailing in Kaul ji - as if like being childish at the age of 70. * Cross postings (especially from fanatic forums) is like a contamination - disturbing the normal flow of our group. (The original posters are not their to reply, if the link continues nor the cross poster would be usually interested in continuing the thread!) * If some one is interested in such ideas they could have became a member of those groups itself - but usually this does not happen

even after cross postings. If the cross posting was/is related to the thread under discussion, that could have appreciated. But usually it is not! Considering all these points, I think for our group too it is better to request the members to AVOID CROSS POSTINGS, except in case where the cross posting was/is related to the thread under discussion. Hope you will agree with at least some of these points. Love. Sreenadh Rajanikanth R <rajani_kdr wrote: Dear Srinadh ji I am a beginner in astrology. So I really cannot contribute much, but am trying to listen and understand the wise words of learned people in this group. The first time I read Kaul ji's mail, I understood that if I read anymore, I would end up in an asylum. So I stopped reading it and just ignore his mails. You have started on the right path now by beginning with the lagna. It will be really beneficial for beginners and even for advanced learners just to be sure that there aren't any flaws in thier knowledge. A step by step process of sharing

your knowledge is a great idea. Please do not get irritated by detractors. I would have really appreciated it had you just ignored those cross postings. Most of us joined this group to learn something about practical astrology and not what 'mlecha' said. You are doing a great job. Please continue that and forgive the silence of the lambs (beginners) - let the lions roar! Regards Rajanikanth "Sreenadh" <sreesog > To: HinduCalendar , Subject: Fwd: Re: Parasara Samhita / Parasara Tantra / Parasara SmritiSun, 09 Sep

2007 15:38:57 -0000 Dear Kaul ji,I hope you have noticed this mail below. PLEASE STOP CROSS POSTINGSTO ANCIENT_INDIAN_ASTROLOGY GROUP! If not the same would be treated asan annoyance to the normal group activity and interest.Love,Sreenadh , "Sreenadh"<sreesog wrote:Dear Kaul ji,I am becoming tired off your posts, and recent interaction with the members of your fanatics forum (hinducivilization) agitates me. Please minimize your posts - here we are not much interested in all these personal history and agitations you want to discuss. Now this forum is settling down to a free flow - concentrating on what we want to discuss (based on group polls), and so please don't disturb much. Note: At

times it becomes necessary to say – enough is enough. If you want to say some thing - it is ok; but no more cross postings. Regards,Sreenadh , "Avtar Krishen Kaul" <jyotirved@> wrote:>> hinducivilization , "Avtar Krishen Kaul" > <jyotirved@> wrote:> > Shri Vedaprakash ji,> Namaskar!> Please bear with me for this longish post!> I am a Saraswat Brahmin by birth and was an amateur astrologer a > couple of decades back, following Lahiri Ayanamsha, as it was > recommended by every other astrologer. As such, whenever I read any > statement especially from some foreigner that ancient Hindus were > very poor about the knowledge of planetary astronomy in the

pre-> Surya Sidhanta era, it riled me to no end. On reading further that > even the Surya Sidhanta has a Grecho-Chaldean influence I would get > mad! I had the maximum faith in the Surya Sidhanta, since the Vishva > Panchanga published by Beneras Hindu University, Varanasi, was based > on it! And as evrybody knows, BHU is supposed to be the top-notch > university for propagating Hindu Dharma and philosophy! How could > they publish a panchanga on the basis of SS unless it had been > revealed by Surya Bhagwan himself!> > I tried my best to find some straw to save myself from drowning in > the ocean of disbelief on astrology! Ironically, somebody > suggested "Bharatayi Jyotisha Shastra" by Shankar Balakrishna > Dikshit and with great difficulty I got the first part of that work > with an English translation and a complete book with Hindi > translation!>

> To my utter surprise and even dismay, Dikshit had said unequivocally > that the Vedas or the Vedanga Jyotisha or Yajur Jyotisha or Atharva > Jyotisha or the Mahabharata or any other work prior to the Surya > Sidhanta did not contain any Mesha etc. Rashis! According to him > Mangal, Shani etc. planets were conspicuous by their absence from > the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha though the Atharva Jyotisha of > about fourth century BCE and the Mahabharata has talked about > planets!!! > > Till then it was my view that predictive astrology was the be all > and end all of the Vedas, and as such, if there were no rashis or > Mangal, shani etc. planets in the Vedas, then the Vedas were no good > since if our Vedic Rishis could not read horosocopes, they must > certainly have been sloppy and useless!> > It also meant that our Vedas did not contain anything about

> predictive astrology and all our boasting that our ancestors were > the most accomplished astrologers was all an idle prattling!> > I tried to take the bull by the horns and instead of believing > Pingree or Dikshit or anybody else, I went through the Vedas and the > Vedanga Jyotisha etc. myself! However, I was relieved to find that > our Vedic Rishis were no fatalists at all, but they would exhort us > at every stage to continue to perform yajnyas etc. The ethos of the > Vedas had been as if summarized in the mantra of the Isha Upanishada> "kurvaneva eha karmani jijeevishet shatam samah> evam tvayi nanyatheto asti na karma lipyete nare"> > i.e.> "You must aspire to live a hundred years while performing your > duties. That is the only way out for you to get rid of the fruits > of karma".> The Katha Upanishada was very catagorical>

"Uttishthata, jagrata, prapya varan nibodhata> kshyurasya dhara nihita guhayam durgam pathas tat kavyo vadantih"> i.e.> "Wake up (if you are asleep to the higher wisdom) Get up (if you are > awake but not making any efforts) approach the learned ones and > learn the Truth from them. The path is sharp like the edge of a > sword and the Truth is hidden in a cave (which means that you are > not going to get it at a platter!)"> > There was no mention in any of the Vedic mantras that we should > consult soothsayers and act only then, nor was there any indication > that we should believe in fate!> > Obviously, thus, we had been taken for a ride for several centuries > by somebody or some people by making us astro-addicts!> > We were told that since Vedanga Jyotisha is a part of the Vedic > lore, it means that predictive astrology was a part of the Vedas!

> Nobody told us the truth that the Vedanga Jyotisha is nothing but a > work of about 14th century BCE which just gives us the crude > methodology of calculating tihi etc.--- that also mean tithi etc.---> for performing Vedic rituals at proper time and date! It does not > say anything about Mesha etc. Rashis or Mangal, shani etc. planets, > leave alone calculating horscopes from the same!> Even today the Owner-cum-moderator of the "Vedic-Astrology" forum > ()goes on repeating the same lie that the VJ is a work about > predictive asgtrology and thus goes on confusing his clients as well > as students and members, either deliberately or unknowingly!> > Thus it was a real revelation to me that our Rishis never advised us > to consult soothsayers and as such they did not require planetary > longitudes for any such horoscopes etc.! So instead of giving our >

Vedic Rishis the credit for this exemplary attitude, we were made to > believe that it was a drawback with us! In fact, as a rational > Hindu I really appreciate this exceptional attitude of our real > Vamadevas since no other culture, whether the Asian or European etc. > etc. had escaped this astro-addiction in one form or the other!> > Now coming to the sidhantas: > The Panchasidhantika does not refer to any other sidhanta except for > the Paitamaha, Romaka, Vasishtha, Paulastya and Surya Sidhanta. > > Varahamihira has referred to several astrologers in his Brihat > Jatakam etc. but he has not referred to any astronomer there! About > Garga etc., he has made some references by "poorvacharya" but not > said anything catagorically about their astronomy! The only > catagorical statement that he has made is "spashta-taro savitrah" > i.e. "out of all the

(five) sidhantas, Surya Sidhanta is the most > accurate" and the rest of them "doora-vibhrashtav" ie. they are far > from accuracy!> > Thus it is absoultely clrear that even if, for the sake of argument, > there was any other sidhanta avialable at the time of Varahamihira > it was worse than the other "doora-vibrashtav" and maybe that is > why he did not even talk about them!> > The problem with the Surya Sidhanta is that it was "revealed" by > Surya Bhagwan! I had an absolute faith in that staement, but that > faith was shaken because the mean longitudes of hardly any planet > was zero ath the time of "Kali Era" i.e. Feb. 17/18, 3102 BCE. If > the real Surya Bhagwan had actually revealed it, at least he would > have had that much of astronomical knowledge!> So the Shri Ganesha of planetary astronomy itself is a blatant lie! > You can well imagine the

accuracy of its fundamental arguments and > well imagine the value of the testimonial "spashta-taro savitrah" > from Varaha Mihira!> > Becasue of this involvement of "Surya Bhagwan" in the SS, every > other subsequent sidhanta, whether the Aryabhati or the Arya or > Sidhanta Shishya dhi vridhi da or the Brahma-sphuta or Arya or > Pitamaha or Parashara etc. etc. had followed in its footsteps i.e. > taken the mean planetary longitudes as zero at February 17/18, 3102 > BCE. Thus all these sidhantas do nothing but perpetuate/propagate a > lie and as the famous saying goes, if you circulate a lie a hundred > times it becomes almost truth! > The only exception to that zero longitudes business was the Sidhanta > Shiromani of Bhaskar-II but even he has not mustred the courage to > say that the Kaliyuga supposed to have startted on Feb. 17/18, 3102 > BCE ws a myth,

a fictitiouis one!> > Similarly, Paitamaha sidhanta should normally mean "A sidhanta > revelaed by Brhmaji" but it is obviously a conction like that of the > SS!> Same is the case with other sidhantas!> > Most of these have re-surfaced with similar names later -- e.g. > there are supposed to be at lest five Brahama Sidhantas around!> > To crown it all, the Vishnudharmotara-purana also gives absolutely > the same longitudes as that of Brahma-sphuta sidhanta, but it does > so in the name of "Pitamaha Sidhanta".> Then again, Narada Purana gives us astrological predictions but > tells ut to calculate our horoscopes from the Surya Sidhanta! It > even interprets the three famous verses "trimshat-kritva yuge > bhanam" in such a manner as to make them just tally almst exactly > with that of Lahir ayanamsha! Fie on such corrks and frads and > liars,

who are actually a curse on Hindu dharma thus!> > So, in a nutshell, it is no use to look for an original sidhanta > anywehre, since just as it is said "vyasochhishtam idam jagat" (all > the shastras are as if regurgitations of the Vedavyasa" it can > safely be said "Mayochhoshtah sarve sidhantah" all the sidhantas of > India are just the regurgitations of Maya the mlechha!> With regards,> A K Kaul> hinducivilization , "Vedaprakash" > <vedamvedaprakash@> wrote:> >> > > > > > > > 1. What is wrong? Which conclusion is erroneous? What you want > to> > convey? If you have any clarifications, ask directly, I am > prepared to> > reply or provide data and information.> > > > > > > > 2.

I reproduce the sentence, "However, as for as India is> > concerned, though it is one of the 18 Siddhantas, it is a myth, > because,> > Varaha Mihira recognized only "FIVE". Forget Parasara!"> > > > > > > > 3. As Varahamihira compiled "the FIVE", it is believed that> > only "the FIVE" are recognized or available.> > > > > > > > 4. I need not mention the 18 Siddhantas and the FIVE of > Varahamihira> > etc. In fact you are totally wrong, when you say, "There are many> > sidhantas (Around 5 more i think: apart from the 5 mentioned in > Pancha> > sidhatika of mihira) including VridhaVasishta sidhanta, Soma > sidhanta> > etc…"> > > > > > > > 5. The Introduction to "Pancasiddhantika of Varahamihira",> > edited and translated by T. S. Kuppanna Sastry

may be referred to > for> > detailed discussion on it (p.4).> > > > > > > > 6. The FIVE as mentioned are different from the FIVE of the> > originals.> > > > > > > > 7. Instead of the 18, why the FIVE have become popular is to be> > explained.> > > > > > > > 8. As for as your comments, "Mihira was just collecting just 5> > of the most popular and authentic Sidhantas; and was (and never> > mentioned) that he was collecting and presenting ALL sidhantas! > From> > where you got that idea?!" Kindly read properly, with sarcasm, I > was> > lamenting that leaving 18, modern scholars are sticking to 5! So I > asked> > why?> > > > > > > > 9. Again for your comments, "Of course Parashara sidhanta is >

not> > available today - but many books such as Utpala commentary etc > mention> > it for sure; which prooves that such a text existed for sure", I> > have already mentioned that such texts were available during 16th-> 19th> > centuries, but taken away by the Missionaries and European > Companies. I> > already requested, "Prof. R. N. Iyengar and other scholars like him> > should take efforts to get back the manuscripts available in > foreign> > Universities, archives and research Institutes".> > > > > > > > 10. Thibaut, O. Neugebauer, D. Pingree, and others have pointed > about> > the missing manuscripts of PS. The manuscript used by Pingree (Ms.> > No.288 of Bombay University) was missing (Ibid, p.XVII). This > proves the> > systematic stealing of important manuscripts by scholars even

> during> > 20th century from India. Whereas, we are fighting with each other> > without going into the details, the seriousness of problem and > doing> > real research to protect our history. Kindly read my earlier > postings in> > the HC. Nos. 15139, 15155,15164, 16380, 18499, 19441, 19492 etc.,> > related to smuggling and stealing of Indian palm-leaf books.> > > > > > > > VEDAPRAKASH> > > > 05-09-2007> > > > hinducivilization , "Sreenadh" <sreesog@>> > wrote:> > >> > > Dear Vedprakash ji,> > > You said:> > > ==>> > > However, as for as India is concerned, though it is one of the 18> > > Siddhantas, it is a myth, because, Varaha Mihira

recognized> > > only "FIVE". Forget Parasara!> > > <==> > > That is wrong (erroneous conclusion)! There are many sidhantas> > > (Around 5 more i think: apart from the 5 mentioned in Pancha> > > sidhatika of mihira) including VridhaVasishta sidhanta, Soma> > > sidhanta etc available even today, which existed prior to Mihira > and> > > never got mentioned by Mihira. Mihira was just collecting just 5 > of> > > the most popular and authentic Sidhantas; and was (and never> > > mentioned) that he was collecting and presenting ALL sidhantas! > From> > > where you got that idea?! Of course Parashara sidhanta is not> > > available today - but many books such as Utpala commentary etc> > > mention it for sure; which prooves that such a text existed for > sure.> > > Love,>

> > Sreenadh> > >> > > hinducivilization , "Vedaprakash"> > > vedamvedaprakash@ wrote:> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Parasara Samhita / Parasara Tantra / Parasara Smriti> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > As usual, I checked about the manuscripts available in India,> > > abroad> > > > etc.> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > I find that Roberto de Nobili (1577-1656) had taken away> > > manuscripts of> > > > the entire above first, probably sent to Vatican through Matteo> > > Ricci.> > > > He discussed about the works of Parasara!> > > >>

> > >> > > >> > > > Jean Venant Bouchet (1655-1732) sent not only geographical> > > (particularly> > > > maps) but also astronomical books, charts and tables. Clooney > has> > > > written a book on him!> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Bartholomaus Ziegenbalg (1682-1719) and Heinrich Plutschau > (1677-> > > 1752)> > > > collected many palm-leaf books and valuables. Barthalomeo later> > > > collected such manuscripts from the South and took them in > person> > > to> > > > Denmark and India (1709-1710). Go to the website, much > publicized> > > by> > > > "The Hindu" about the manuscript collection taken by them and> > > > kept in Halle - Francke foundations.> > >

>> > > >> > > >> > > > Joseph Constanzo (Constantius) Beschi (1680-1742) not only used> > > such> > > > palm-leaf books but also composed a "Tiruccabai Kanitham".> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Collin Mackanzie (1753-c.1820) had completed the work of taking> > > entire> > > > thing in his last strike.> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > C. P. Brown (1798-1884) too did the same from Andhrapradesh. > His> > > > interest in "Cyclic tables" had been enormous exceeding his> > > > so-called Vemanna's interpretation of society!> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > All these prove that not only "Parasara" was well known but the> > > >

works of Parasara had been in great demand in Europe and the> > > Jesuits> > > > were quickly procuring and passing them on to Europe.> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > However, as for as India is concerned, though it is one of the > 18> > > > Siddhantas, it is a myth, because, Varaha Mihira recognized > only> > > > "FIVE". Forget Parasara!> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > OK, who wanted them in Europe?> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Were they fools to study Parasara Smriti like Nobili to know > how> > > to make> > > > sacred thread and so on? Not all, Nobili had been very clever > in> > > deed> > > > (Vincent Cronin, A Pearl to India, p.108). He

learned to make> > > sacred> > > > thread from Parasara Smriti. Learned how to compute thithis > etc,.,> > > from> > > > Parasara Samhita, but sent the details to Gregory, the Pope.> > > Discussed> > > > Kepler laws with Indian astronomers, but sent the Parasara > Karana> > > to> > > > European scientists [K. V. Ramakrishna Rao, Transmission of> > > Scientific> > > > Knowledge from Ancient Tamizhagam to Europe (15th to 20th> > > centuries), a> > > > paper sent to HEC 2006 Conference, Los Angeles and its Summary> > > > reportedly published in Hindu Renaissance Journal, though the> > > author has> > > > not received any copy!].> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Prof. R. N. Iyengar and

other scholars like him should take> > > efforts to> > > > get back the manuscripts available in foreign Universities,> > > archives and> > > > research Institutes.> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > VEDAPRAKASH> > > >> > > > (HC. No. 246, 04-09-2007)> > > >> > >> >> > --- End forwarded message --->--- End forwarded message --- .

Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.