Puranic Astrology -BPHS-Rama/Krishna comparison etc

October 22, 2007

Dear Pradeep,

Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu astrology as

blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are

something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas about

the origin of Hindu astrology.

I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-period or

that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it is not

my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at all,

but was written much later than that.

Best regards,

Finn

, " vijayadas_pradeep "

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

>

> It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> substance.

> I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing this

> during your previous discussions as well.

>

> I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you are

> against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation- shruti -

> the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you correctly,you

> are only disputing the completeness and originality of the current

> version.This can be true.

>

> I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed shastra

> with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of inquisitive-

> Truthseeking-souls.

>

> Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to

> Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt those.This is

> prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This is my

> personal opinion.

>

> On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization etc

> which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> calendar domain.

>

> Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters mentioned in

> Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised under

> the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will express my

> opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i

> feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not wise.Rama

> is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the mental

> situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root - the

> soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own reflection and

> inlfuences.

> Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible that

> some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> mythological representations to suit their case.But i am incompetent

> to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

>

> Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take

> actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our

> inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

>

> If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly pardon.Wishing

> all propserity.

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> >

> > Gopal Goel wrote:

> >

> > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> Parasara

> > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer chapter 8

> of

> > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give information on

> > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's 74 to

> > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st Charn of

> > star Kritika.<<

> >

> > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I seem to

> > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> realized

> > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I

> found

> > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of

> Lagadha

> > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> >

> > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox and the

> > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was able to

> > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> somewhare

> > around 1300 BC.

> >

> > Gopal Goel wrote:

> >

> > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with Vishnu

> > Puran.<<

> >

> > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the same

> style

> > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple Maitriya.

> This

> > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins

> > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> >

> > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times, this

> is

> > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no other

> > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of

> Vishnu

> > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana. Then

> > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> >

> > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya (Nature of

> > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu

> Purana,

> > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-Veda

> as

> > well.

> >

> > Gopal Goel wrote:

> >

> > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on BPHS.This

> > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> India.<<

> >

> > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that Bhatophala

> never

> > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He could

> also

> > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also know as

> > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time. Even

> that

> > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara and it

> was

> > not written in the Vedic period.

> >

> > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to India in

> > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like

> > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think this

> simply

> > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at that

> time,

> > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> >

> > Very friendly,

> > Finn Wandahl

> >

>

October 23, 2007

dear finn wandahl.

If u hav anything to say i expect u to say in plain words ,Dont worry abt blasphemy in hinduism .Only few people who is against the truth or re serch of truth are making hue and cry .What is the harm in academic discussions?R we imposing any thing on any body ?

Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of periods lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav happened .Now see the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in predictve astrology and now many dont know why rishis given this basics or characteristics for planets and rasis .The yukti part of jyothisha is getting eroded .

Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of mars ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So many are parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .

New generations like us also deterioted to a great extent becuse major part of our life atleast first 20 years in life spend to get an academic degree and otherwise u r not respected even in indian society and we used less time to learn our parampara professions.

The people who jumping around is actualy killing the real essence of indian tradition which the based on foundation of truth and search for truth and rishis and their intentions are differrent .As truth itself is god .And hinduism is not a monolithic religion.

regrds vijaya raghavan guruvayur .

, "Finn Wandahl" <finn.wandahl wrote:>> Dear Pradeep,> > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people> misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu astrology as> blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are> something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas about> the origin of Hindu astrology. > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-period or> that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it is not> my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have> today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at all,> but was written much later than that.> > Best regards,> Finn > > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"> vijayadas_pradeep@ wrote:> >> > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members> > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with > > substance.> > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing this > > during your previous discussions as well.> > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you are > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation- shruti - > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you correctly,you > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the current > > version.This can be true.> > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed shastra > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of inquisitive-> > Truthseeking-souls.> > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt those.This is > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This is my > > personal opinion.> > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization etc > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within > > calendar domain.> > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters mentioned in > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised under > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will express my > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not wise.Rama > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the mental > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root - the > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own reflection and > > inlfuences.> > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible that > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am incompetent > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.> > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding. > > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly pardon.Wishing > > all propserity. > > > > Respect> > Pradeep> > , "Finn Wandahl" > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote: > > > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage > > Parasara> > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer chapter 8 > > of> > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give information on> > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's 74 to> > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st Charn of> > > star Kritika.<<> > > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I seem to> > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I > > realized> > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I > > found> > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of > > Lagadha> > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81. > > > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox and the> > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was able to> > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being > > somewhare> > > around 1300 BC. > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with Vishnu> > > Puran.<<> > > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the same > > style> > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple Maitriya. > > This> > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or> > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins> > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.> > > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times, this > > is> > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no other> > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of > > Vishnu> > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana. Then> > > perhaps later on someone removed it. > > > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya (Nature of> > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu > > Purana,> > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-Veda > > as> > > well.> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had> > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on BPHS.This> > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in > > India.<<> > > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that Bhatophala > > never> > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He could > > also> > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also know as> > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time. Even > > that> > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara and it > > was> > > not written in the Vedic period.> > > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to India in> > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like> > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book "India". I think this > > simply> > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at that > > time,> > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.> > > > > > Very friendly,> > > Finn Wandahl> > >> >>

October 23, 2007

Dear Pradeep ji,

Thanks for presenting your unique view in these matters - be bold

it should be so, and it is that which makes this group worthy. Yes, I

know that our opinions differ in many things - but why worry? -

individual differences is what makes us what we are. So be bold and

strong - it is an academic discussion, and none should bring

the 'feeling' into such discussions - may be that is not the way. See

even to this opinion - some may differ - and that is its uniqueness!

Perspectives differ - or even at times we intentionally change our

perspectives to bring out the arguments and knowledge from the other

participant.

Fin ji's views are unique, so as your's and so as mine and so as

Kauls and so on. In many areas we may agree, in many areas we may

not - that is all just natural - and that is what makes the

discussion worthy. If everyone is of the same opinion what is there

to discuss at all! So discussion is possible only when there is

enough differing and coinciding areas between the participants -

which we all have for sure.

Disussions becomes impossible only when, the discussion change into

competition or war, and individuals becomes non-recepitive, or when

become relectant even to view from other's perspective, even if

accepting it or not. We are better than that - and so happy hugs

always..

Love and Hugs,

Sreenadh

, " vijayadas_pradeep "

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

>

> It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> substance.

> I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing

this

> during your previous discussions as well.

>

> I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you are

> against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation- shruti -

> the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

correctly,you

> are only disputing the completeness and originality of the current

> version.This can be true.

>

> I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed

shastra

> with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of inquisitive-

> Truthseeking-souls.

>

> Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to

> Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt those.This is

> prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This is

my

> personal opinion.

>

> On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization etc

> which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> calendar domain.

>

> Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters mentioned

in

> Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised under

> the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will express

my

> opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i

> feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

wise.Rama

> is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the mental

> situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root - the

> soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own reflection

and

> inlfuences.

> Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible that

> some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

incompetent

> to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

>

> Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take

> actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our

> inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

>

> If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

pardon.Wishing

> all propserity.

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> >

> > Gopal Goel wrote:

> >

> > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> Parasara

> > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer chapter 8

> of

> > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give information

on

> > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's 74

to

> > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st Charn

of

> > star Kritika.<<

> >

> > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I seem to

> > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> realized

> > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I

> found

> > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of

> Lagadha

> > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> >

> > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox and

the

> > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was able to

> > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> somewhare

> > around 1300 BC.

> >

> > Gopal Goel wrote:

> >

> > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with Vishnu

> > Puran.<<

> >

> > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the same

> style

> > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple Maitriya.

> This

> > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins

> > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> >

> > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times, this

> is

> > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no other

> > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of

> Vishnu

> > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana.

Then

> > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> >

> > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya (Nature

of

> > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu

> Purana,

> > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-

Veda

> as

> > well.

> >

> > Gopal Goel wrote:

> >

> > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on BPHS.This

> > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> India.<<

> >

> > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that Bhatophala

> never

> > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He could

> also

> > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also know

as

> > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time. Even

> that

> > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara and it

> was

> > not written in the Vedic period.

> >

> > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to India in

> > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like

> > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think this

> simply

> > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at that

> time,

> > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> >

> > Very friendly,

> > Finn Wandahl

> >

>

October 23, 2007

Dear Finn ji,

==>

> And criticizing me for to much historic attitude is pointless when

> we are trying to get the chronology of Hindu astrology right.

<==

Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is very important - and

the discussion (no, please don't term it 'criticizing' – even the

word `constructive criticism' may suit, but no, not this), naturally

may include everyone presenting their own perspectives. I was just

doing that and was not forcing anything - we should abide by our own

perspective and then only the efforts will produce more valuable

results.

==>

> I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

> today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at all,

> but was written much later than that.

<==

I totally agree to this statement.

Love,

Sreenadh

, " Finn Wandahl "

<finn.wandahl wrote:

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu astrology

as

> blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are

> something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas

about

> the origin of Hindu astrology.

>

> I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-period

or

> that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it is

not

> my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we

have

> today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at all,

> but was written much later than that.

>

> Best regards,

> Finn

>

> , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> >

> > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> > substance.

> > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing

this

> > during your previous discussions as well.

> >

> > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you

are

> > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation-

shruti -

> > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

correctly,you

> > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the

current

> > version.This can be true.

> >

> > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed

shastra

> > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of inquisitive-

> > Truthseeking-souls.

> >

> > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to

> > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt those.This

is

> > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This is

my

> > personal opinion.

> >

> > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization

etc

> > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> > calendar domain.

> >

> > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters mentioned

in

> > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised

under

> > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will express

my

> > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i

> > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

wise.Rama

> > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the mental

> > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root -

the

> > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own reflection

and

> > inlfuences.

> > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible

that

> > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

incompetent

> > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> >

> > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take

> > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our

> > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> >

> > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

pardon.Wishing

> > all propserity.

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > >

> > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > >

> > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> > Parasara

> > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer chapter

8

> > of

> > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

information on

> > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's

74 to

> > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st

Charn of

> > > star Kritika.<<

> > >

> > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I seem

to

> > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> > realized

> > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I

> > found

> > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of

> > Lagadha

> > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > >

> > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox and

the

> > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was able

to

> > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> > somewhare

> > > around 1300 BC.

> > >

> > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > >

> > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with

Vishnu

> > > Puran.<<

> > >

> > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the

same

> > style

> > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

Maitriya.

> > This

> > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins

> > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > >

> > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times,

this

> > is

> > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no other

> > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of

> > Vishnu

> > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana.

Then

> > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > >

> > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya

(Nature of

> > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu

> > Purana,

> > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-

Veda

> > as

> > > well.

> > >

> > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > >

> > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

BPHS.This

> > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> > India.<<

> > >

> > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that Bhatophala

> > never

> > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He

could

> > also

> > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also

know as

> > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time. Even

> > that

> > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara and

it

> > was

> > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > >

> > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to India

in

> > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like

> > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think this

> > simply

> > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at that

> > time,

> > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > >

> > > Very friendly,

> > > Finn Wandahl

> > >

> >

>

October 23, 2007

Dear Raghavan ji,

==>

> Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of

> periods lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav

> happened .Now see the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in

> predictve astrology and now many dont know why rishis given this

> basics or characteristics for planets and rasis .The yukti part of

> jyothisha is getting eroded .

> Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of

> mars ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So

> many are parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .

<==

Well said!! Can you shed some light over such issues? I request you

to please do the same - as time permits. Thanks for participation and

contribution.

Love,

Sreenadh

, " lion_draco1983 "

<lion_draco1983 wrote:

>

> dear finn wandahl.

>

> If u hav anything to say i expect u to say in plain words ,Dont

worry

> abt blasphemy in hinduism .Only few people who is against the truth

or

> re serch of truth are making hue and cry .What is the harm in

academic

> discussions?R we imposing any thing on any body ?

>

> Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of

periods

> lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav

happened .Now see

> the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in predictve

astrology

> and now many dont know why rishis given this basics or

characteristics

> for planets and rasis .The yukti part of jyothisha is getting

eroded .

>

> Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of

mars

> ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So many are

> parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .

>

> New generations like us also deterioted to a great extent becuse

major

> part of our life atleast first 20 years in life spend to get an

academic

> degree and otherwise u r not respected even in indian society and we

> used less time to learn our parampara professions.

>

> The people who jumping around is actualy killing the real essence

of

> indian tradition which the based on foundation of truth and

search for

> truth and rishis and their intentions are differrent .As truth

itself is

> god .And hinduism is not a monolithic religion.

>

> regrds vijaya raghavan guruvayur .

>

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Pradeep,

> >

> > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

astrology as

> > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are

> > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas

about

> > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> >

> > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-

period or

> > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it

is not

> > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we

have

> > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at

all,

> > but was written much later than that.

> >

> > Best regards,

> > Finn

> >

> > --- In

, " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > vijayadas_pradeep@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > >

> > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> > > substance.

> > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing

this

> > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > >

> > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you

are

> > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation-

shruti -

> > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

correctly,you

> > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the

current

> > > version.This can be true.

> > >

> > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed

shastra

> > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

inquisitive-

> > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > >

> > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to

> > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

those.This is

> > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This

is my

> > > personal opinion.

> > >

> > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization

etc

> > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> > > calendar domain.

> > >

> > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters

mentioned in

> > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised

under

> > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will

express my

> > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i

> > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

wise.Rama

> > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the

mental

> > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root -

the

> > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

reflection and

> > > inlfuences.

> > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible

that

> > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

incompetent

> > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> > >

> > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take

> > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our

> > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > >

> > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

pardon.Wishing

> > > all propserity.

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> > > Parasara

> > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer

chapter 8

> > > of

> > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

information

> on

> > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's

74

> to

> > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st

Charn

> of

> > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > >

> > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I

seem to

> > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> > > realized

> > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I

> > > found

> > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of

> > > Lagadha

> > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > >

> > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox

and

> the

> > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was

able to

> > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> > > somewhare

> > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with

Vishnu

> > > > Puran.<<

> > > >

> > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the

same

> > > style

> > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

Maitriya.

> > > This

> > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins

> > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > >

> > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times,

this

> > > is

> > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no

other

> > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of

> > > Vishnu

> > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana.

> Then

> > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > >

> > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya

(Nature

> of

> > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu

> > > Purana,

> > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-

Veda

> > > as

> > > > well.

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

BPHS.This

> > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> > > India.<<

> > > >

> > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

Bhatophala

> > > never

> > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He

could

> > > also

> > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also

know

> as

> > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time.

Even

> > > that

> > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara

and it

> > > was

> > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > >

> > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to

India in

> > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like

> > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think this

> > > simply

> > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at

that

> > > time,

> > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > > >

> > > > Very friendly,

> > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

October 23, 2007

Dear Friends, When we talk about Lord RAMA and Krishna and Vedic era and other such matters of common interest to astrologers, we should ,first of all decide the boundaries of these eras. I Suggest the following: 1 Vedic Era -This extends upto Mahabharata Period. Why I am suggesting this. Because Sage Vaysa compiled the vedas and put them in chronological order. He is author of Bramha SUTRA and brought to light the teaching of lord Krishna to Mankind. Shri-mad-Bhagvat GITA HAS BECOME GUIDING FORCE FOR OVER 5000 YEARS. 2. POST VEDIC ERA- This extends up to the incarnation of Lord BUDDHA AND MAHAAVIRSWAMI.(Jain literature has a rich tradition of Astrological literature) 3. Early historic era - This includes the period of Great Chankya, Maurya dynasty,Upto 2nd A.D. 4. Post Historic Period- When golden period of gupta dynasty starts, - a period when

India touched new heights in literary field. This is the period when all famous manuscripts brought to life again. This is reason many Western thinkers (including some Indian friends )feel that PURANIC LITERATURE was created in this era. This is the era of revival 0of old literature and not basically of original creation. . 5. 7TH A.D. till now- the era of modern History. If some consensus is formed on this time frame ,ON then some worth while discussions are possible. I await the comments of savants. Regards. Sreenadh <sreesog wrote: Dear Finn ji,==>> And criticizing me for to much historic attitude is pointless when > we are trying to get the chronology of Hindu astrology right.<==Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is very important - and the discussion (no, please don't term it 'criticizing' – even the word `constructive criticism' may suit, but no, not this), naturally may include everyone presenting their own perspectives. I was just doing that and was not forcing anything - we should abide by our own perspective and then only the efforts will produce more valuable results.==>> I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have> today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at all,> but was written much later than that.<==I totally agree to this

statement.Love,Sreenadh , "Finn Wandahl" <finn.wandahl wrote:>> Dear Pradeep,> > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people> misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu astrology as> blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are> something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas about> the origin of Hindu astrology. > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-period or> that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it is not> my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have> today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at all,> but was written much later than

that.> > Best regards,> Finn > > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:> >> > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members> > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with > > substance.> > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing this > > during your previous discussions as well.> > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you are > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation- shruti - > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you correctly,you > > are only disputing

the completeness and originality of the current > > version.This can be true.> > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed shastra > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of inquisitive-> > Truthseeking-souls.> > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt those.This is > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This is my > > personal opinion.> > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization etc > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within > > calendar domain.> > >

> Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters mentioned in > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised under > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will express my > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not wise.Rama > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the mental > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root - the > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own reflection and > > inlfuences.> > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is

possible that > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am incompetent > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.> > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding. > > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly pardon.Wishing > > all propserity. > > > > Respect> > Pradeep> > , "Finn Wandahl" > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:> > >> > >

Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote: > > > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage > > Parasara> > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer chapter 8 > > of> > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give information on> > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's 74 to> > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st Charn of> > > star Kritika.<<> > > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I seem to> > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I > > realized> > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I > > found> > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply

quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of > > Lagadha> > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81. > > > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox and the> > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was able to> > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being > > somewhare> > > around 1300 BC. > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with Vishnu> > > Puran.<<> > > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the same > > style> > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple Maitriya. > > This> > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or> > > re-written by the same people,

probably someone some Brahmins> > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.> > > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times, this > > is> > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no other> > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of > > Vishnu> > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana. Then> > > perhaps later on someone removed it. > > > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya (Nature of> > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu > > Purana,> > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-Veda > > as> > > well.> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > > > >>The famous

commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had> > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on BPHS.This> > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in > > India.<<> > > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that Bhatophala > > never> > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He could > > also> > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also know as> > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time. Even > > that> > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara and it > > was> > > not written in the Vedic period.> > > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to India in> > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the

other old textbook like> > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book "India". I think this > > simply> > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at that > > time,> > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.> > > > > > Very friendly,> > > Finn Wandahl> > >> >>G.K.GOELPh: 09350311433Add: L-409, SARITA VIHARNEW DELHI-110 076INDIA

Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required.

October 23, 2007

Dear Goal ji,

This is absurd!! I don't believe in such instantaneous revelations

without study - and don't think that such issues can be solved at the

click of a mouse, or by typing 2 lines in flash of a second.

Know that many good scholars had send much time and efforts for

such studies - the time frame and book you assume to know or

understand under the said period has baffled even the great scholars -

and so good and sincere scholars always preferred to deal with this

subject only in small chunks only upto the point to which they felt

that they could keep their sincerity. Yes, it may not the same with

all - but, to be true - the whole things you tell below - i feel like

a joke. I have some simple questions -

* Are you speaking about archeological history, or is it about

literary history? or about the imagination based on puranic and epic

characters and other characters of some other drama? or is it a

cocktail of all these? i.e just hysterical

* Is it solely based on Sanskrit books alone - or also depends on

Brahmi and Pali books and evidences available? Do you believe that

except Sanskrit no other language had any literature?

* Most important - Are you a historian? i.e. Sincerely can you call

yourself so? If so are you aware of archeological methods, ancient

scripts (like Brahmi, pali, kharoshti), and scientific period (time)

determination methods and their flaws?

* OR do you call yourself a literary historian? If so do you mean

to say that you are searching or studying the history of books? or

history reflected in books? What could be the pitfalls involved in

such a study?

So the point is, I would humbly say that we are not the proper

persons to boldly say or suggest such classifications. Yes, but we

can express our usually irrelevant views or beliefs, without much

basis - and the arguments can eat up many days. ) Due to this

reason I would be staying away from this tread - and won't even like

to express my views on such chronology determination efforts of the

large chunks.

Note: No offence intended. So please don't take it so.

Love,

Sreenadh

, Gopal Goel

<gkgoel1937 wrote:

>

> Dear Friends,

> When we talk about Lord RAMA and Krishna and Vedic era and other

such

> matters of common interest to astrologers, we should ,first of

all decide the boundaries of these eras.

> I Suggest the following:

> 1 Vedic Era -This extends upto Mahabharata Period. Why I am

suggesting this. Because Sage Vaysa compiled the vedas and put them

in chronological order.

> He is author of Bramha SUTRA and brought to light the teaching of

lord Krishna to Mankind. Shri-mad-Bhagvat GITA HAS BECOME GUIDING

FORCE FOR OVER 5000 YEARS.

> 2. POST VEDIC ERA- This extends up to the incarnation of Lord

BUDDHA AND MAHAAVIRSWAMI.(Jain literature has a rich tradition of

Astrological literature)

> 3. Early historic era - This includes the period of Great

Chankya, Maurya dynasty,Upto 2nd A.D.

> 4. Post Historic Period- When golden period of gupta dynasty

starts, - a period

> when India touched new heights in literary field. This is the

period when all famous manuscripts brought to life again. This is

reason many Western

> thinkers (including some Indian friends )feel that PURANIC

LITERATURE

> was created in this era. This is the era of revival 0of old

literature and not basically of original creation.

> .

> 5. 7TH A.D. till now- the era of modern History.

> If some consensus is formed on this time frame ,ON then some

worth while

> discussions are possible.

> I await the comments of savants.

> Regards.

>

> Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

> Dear Finn ji,

> ==>

> > And criticizing me for to much historic attitude is pointless

when

> > we are trying to get the chronology of Hindu astrology right.

> <==

> Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is very important - and

> the discussion (no, please don't term it 'criticizing' – even the

> word `constructive criticism' may suit, but no, not this),

naturally

> may include everyone presenting their own perspectives. I was just

> doing that and was not forcing anything - we should abide by our

own

> perspective and then only the efforts will produce more valuable

> results.

> ==>

> > I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

> > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at

all,

> > but was written much later than that.

> <==

> I totally agree to this statement.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Pradeep,

> >

> > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

astrology

> as

> > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are

> > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas

> about

> > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> >

> > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-

period

> or

> > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it

is

> not

> > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we

> have

> > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at

all,

> > but was written much later than that.

> >

> > Best regards,

> > Finn

> >

> > --- In

, " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > >

> > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> > > substance.

> > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing

> this

> > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > >

> > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you

> are

> > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation-

> shruti -

> > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

> correctly,you

> > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the

> current

> > > version.This can be true.

> > >

> > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed

> shastra

> > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

inquisitive-

> > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > >

> > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating

to

> > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

those.This

> is

> > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This

is

> my

> > > personal opinion.

> > >

> > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization

> etc

> > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> > > calendar domain.

> > >

> > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters

mentioned

> in

> > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised

> under

> > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will

express

> my

> > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i

> > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

> wise.Rama

> > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the

mental

> > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root -

> the

> > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

reflection

> and

> > > inlfuences.

> > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible

> that

> > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

> incompetent

> > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> > >

> > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or

take

> > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for

our

> > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > >

> > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

> pardon.Wishing

> > > all propserity.

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> > > Parasara

> > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer

chapter

> 8

> > > of

> > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

> information on

> > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's

> 74 to

> > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st

> Charn of

> > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > >

> > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I

seem

> to

> > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> > > realized

> > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly

I

> > > found

> > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of

> > > Lagadha

> > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > >

> > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox

and

> the

> > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was

able

> to

> > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> > > somewhare

> > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with

> Vishnu

> > > > Puran.<<

> > > >

> > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the

> same

> > > style

> > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

> Maitriya.

> > > This

> > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins

> > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > >

> > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times,

> this

> > > is

> > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no

other

> > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of

> > > Vishnu

> > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada

Purana.

> Then

> > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > >

> > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya

> (Nature of

> > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu

> > > Purana,

> > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-

> Veda

> > > as

> > > > well.

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

> BPHS.This

> > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> > > India.<<

> > > >

> > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

Bhatophala

> > > never

> > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He

> could

> > > also

> > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also

> know as

> > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time.

Even

> > > that

> > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara

and

> it

> > > was

> > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > >

> > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to

India

> in

> > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like

> > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think

this

> > > simply

> > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at

that

> > > time,

> > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > > >

> > > > Very friendly,

> > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > >

> > >

> >

G.K.GOEL

> Ph: 09350311433

> Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> NEW DELHI-110 076

> INDIA

>

> Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required.

>

October 23, 2007

Dear Sreenadh,

I sent a strong message to you, and you have responded to some of it,

but not to the most important issue. You obviously overlooked the

request I made, and didn't respond. So, if you don't mind, I will

repeat it:

>>Please don't try to manipulate or outsmart me like that again.<<

Obviously you think you can continue in the same arrogant way...

It was very unpleasant to read your reply to the message from Mr.

Gopal Goel (below). He explained a line of thinking that he believes

to be right, and he most certainly didn't deserve the kind of reply

you gave him.

You may consider Mr. Gopal Goel's line of thinking as being weird or

whatever. But what about your own line of thinking? You claim that

Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong to the 6th century AD, which is way

out of line with the opinion of most of the leading religious

scientists, historians etc. etc.

There is no reason to crucify Mr. Gopal Goel for expressing his

opinion, which is exactly what you did.

How about showing a little kindness by meeting people where they are,

and leave them a place to stand? If you disagree with somebody, then

you can ask them to clarify or you can simply state that you disagree

and give your arguments, or you can even ignore them. But it should be

done in a nice and kind way.

Even more so when one is a moderator...

Very friendly,

Finn Wandahl

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Goal ji,

> This is absurd!! I don't believe in such instantaneous revelations

> without study - and don't think that such issues can be solved at the

> click of a mouse, or by typing 2 lines in flash of a second.

> Know that many good scholars had send much time and efforts for

> such studies - the time frame and book you assume to know or

> understand under the said period has baffled even the great scholars -

> and so good and sincere scholars always preferred to deal with this

> subject only in small chunks only upto the point to which they felt

> that they could keep their sincerity. Yes, it may not the same with

> all - but, to be true - the whole things you tell below - i feel like

> a joke. I have some simple questions -

> * Are you speaking about archeological history, or is it about

> literary history? or about the imagination based on puranic and epic

> characters and other characters of some other drama? or is it a

> cocktail of all these? i.e just hysterical

> * Is it solely based on Sanskrit books alone - or also depends on

> Brahmi and Pali books and evidences available? Do you believe that

> except Sanskrit no other language had any literature?

> * Most important - Are you a historian? i.e. Sincerely can you call

> yourself so? If so are you aware of archeological methods, ancient

> scripts (like Brahmi, pali, kharoshti), and scientific period (time)

> determination methods and their flaws?

> * OR do you call yourself a literary historian? If so do you mean

> to say that you are searching or studying the history of books? or

> history reflected in books? What could be the pitfalls involved in

> such a study?

>

> So the point is, I would humbly say that we are not the proper

> persons to boldly say or suggest such classifications. Yes, but we

> can express our usually irrelevant views or beliefs, without much

> basis - and the arguments can eat up many days. ) Due to this

> reason I would be staying away from this tread - and won't even like

> to express my views on such chronology determination efforts of the

> large chunks.

> Note: No offence intended. So please don't take it so.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , Gopal Goel

> <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Friends,

> > When we talk about Lord RAMA and Krishna and Vedic era and other

> such

> > matters of common interest to astrologers, we should ,first of

> all decide the boundaries of these eras.

> > I Suggest the following:

> > 1 Vedic Era -This extends upto Mahabharata Period. Why I am

> suggesting this. Because Sage Vaysa compiled the vedas and put them

> in chronological order.

> > He is author of Bramha SUTRA and brought to light the teaching of

> lord Krishna to Mankind. Shri-mad-Bhagvat GITA HAS BECOME GUIDING

> FORCE FOR OVER 5000 YEARS.

> > 2. POST VEDIC ERA- This extends up to the incarnation of Lord

> BUDDHA AND MAHAAVIRSWAMI.(Jain literature has a rich tradition of

> Astrological literature)

> > 3. Early historic era - This includes the period of Great

> Chankya, Maurya dynasty,Upto 2nd A.D.

> > 4. Post Historic Period- When golden period of gupta dynasty

> starts, - a period

> > when India touched new heights in literary field. This is the

> period when all famous manuscripts brought to life again. This is

> reason many Western

> > thinkers (including some Indian friends )feel that PURANIC

> LITERATURE

> > was created in this era. This is the era of revival 0of old

> literature and not basically of original creation.

> > .

> > 5. 7TH A.D. till now- the era of modern History.

> > If some consensus is formed on this time frame ,ON then some

> worth while

> > discussions are possible.

> > I await the comments of savants.

> > Regards.

> >

> > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > Dear Finn ji,

> > ==>

> > > And criticizing me for to much historic attitude is pointless

> when

> > > we are trying to get the chronology of Hindu astrology right.

> > <==

> > Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is very important - and

> > the discussion (no, please don't term it 'criticizing' – even the

> > word `constructive criticism' may suit, but no, not this),

> naturally

> > may include everyone presenting their own perspectives. I was just

> > doing that and was not forcing anything - we should abide by our

> own

> > perspective and then only the efforts will produce more valuable

> > results.

> > ==>

> > > I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

> > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at

> all,

> > > but was written much later than that.

> > <==

> > I totally agree to this statement.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Pradeep,

> > >

> > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

> astrology

> > as

> > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are

> > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas

> > about

> > > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> > >

> > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-

> period

> > or

> > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it

> is

> > not

> > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we

> > have

> > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at

> all,

> > > but was written much later than that.

> > >

> > > Best regards,

> > > Finn

> > >

> > > --- In

> , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > > >

> > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> > > > substance.

> > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing

> > this

> > > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > > >

> > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you

> > are

> > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation-

> > shruti -

> > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

> > correctly,you

> > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the

> > current

> > > > version.This can be true.

> > > >

> > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed

> > shastra

> > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

> inquisitive-

> > > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > > >

> > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating

> to

> > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

> those.This

> > is

> > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This

> is

> > my

> > > > personal opinion.

> > > >

> > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization

> > etc

> > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> > > > calendar domain.

> > > >

> > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters

> mentioned

> > in

> > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised

> > under

> > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will

> express

> > my

> > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i

> > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

> > wise.Rama

> > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the

> mental

> > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root -

> > the

> > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

> reflection

> > and

> > > > inlfuences.

> > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible

> > that

> > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

> > incompetent

> > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> > > >

> > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or

> take

> > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for

> our

> > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > > >

> > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

> > pardon.Wishing

> > > > all propserity.

> > > >

> > > > Respect

> > > > Pradeep

> > > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > > >

> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> > > > Parasara

> > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer

> chapter

> > 8

> > > > of

> > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

> > information on

> > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's

> > 74 to

> > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st

> > Charn of

> > > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > > >

> > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I

> seem

> > to

> > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> > > > realized

> > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly

> I

> > > > found

> > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of

> > > > Lagadha

> > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > > >

> > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox

> and

> > the

> > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was

> able

> > to

> > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> > > > somewhare

> > > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > > >

> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with

> > Vishnu

> > > > > Puran.<<

> > > > >

> > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the

> > same

> > > > style

> > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

> > Maitriya.

> > > > This

> > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins

> > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > > >

> > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times,

> > this

> > > > is

> > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no

> other

> > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of

> > > > Vishnu

> > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada

> Purana.

> > Then

> > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > > >

> > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya

> > (Nature of

> > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu

> > > > Purana,

> > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-

> > Veda

> > > > as

> > > > > well.

> > > > >

> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

> > BPHS.This

> > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> > > > India.<<

> > > > >

> > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

> Bhatophala

> > > > never

> > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He

> > could

> > > > also

> > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also

> > know as

> > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time.

> Even

> > > > that

> > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara

> and

> > it

> > > > was

> > > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > > >

> > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to

> India

> > in

> > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like

> > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think

> this

> > > > simply

> > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at

> that

> > > > time,

> > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > > > >

> > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> > G.K.GOEL

> > Ph: 09350311433

> > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > INDIA

> >

> > Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required.

> >

>

October 23, 2007

Dear Vijaya Raghavan Guruvayur,

Thank you very much!

You have asked a very relevant question about rationale behind the

exaltations of planets. This is no doubt a question that all good

astrologers are confronted with, soner or later.

Actually a few years ago I came across a strange connection, which can

explain it. I hope I get a chance to elaborate on this later on. I

just need to find the proper notes etc. about it first.

Very friendly,

Finn Wandahl

-- In , " lion_draco1983 "

<lion_draco1983 wrote:

>

> dear finn wandahl.

>

> If u hav anything to say i expect u to say in plain words ,Dont worry

> abt blasphemy in hinduism .Only few people who is against the truth or

> re serch of truth are making hue and cry .What is the harm in academic

> discussions?R we imposing any thing on any body ?

>

> Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of

periods

> lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav happened .Now see

> the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in predictve astrology

> and now many dont know why rishis given this basics or characteristics

> for planets and rasis .The yukti part of jyothisha is getting eroded .

>

> Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of mars

> ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So many are

> parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .

>

> New generations like us also deterioted to a great extent becuse major

> part of our life atleast first 20 years in life spend to get an academic

> degree and otherwise u r not respected even in indian society and we

> used less time to learn our parampara professions.

>

> The people who jumping around is actualy killing the real essence of

> indian tradition which the based on foundation of truth and search for

> truth and rishis and their intentions are differrent .As truth itself is

> god .And hinduism is not a monolithic religion.

>

> regrds vijaya raghavan guruvayur .

>

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Pradeep,

> >

> > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu astrology as

> > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are

> > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas about

> > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> >

> > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-period or

> > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it is not

> > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

> > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at all,

> > but was written much later than that.

> >

> > Best regards,

> > Finn

> >

> > , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > vijayadas_pradeep@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > >

> > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> > > substance.

> > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing this

> > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > >

> > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you are

> > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation- shruti -

> > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you correctly,you

> > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the current

> > > version.This can be true.

> > >

> > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed shastra

> > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of inquisitive-

> > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > >

> > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to

> > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt those.This is

> > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This is my

> > > personal opinion.

> > >

> > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization etc

> > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> > > calendar domain.

> > >

> > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters mentioned in

> > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised under

> > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will express my

> > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i

> > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not wise.Rama

> > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the mental

> > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root - the

> > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own reflection and

> > > inlfuences.

> > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible that

> > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am incompetent

> > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> > >

> > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take

> > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our

> > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > >

> > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly pardon.Wishing

> > > all propserity.

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> > > Parasara

> > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer chapter 8

> > > of

> > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give information

> on

> > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's 74

> to

> > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st Charn

> of

> > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > >

> > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I seem to

> > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> > > realized

> > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I

> > > found

> > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of

> > > Lagadha

> > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > >

> > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox and

> the

> > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was able to

> > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> > > somewhare

> > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with Vishnu

> > > > Puran.<<

> > > >

> > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the same

> > > style

> > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple Maitriya.

> > > This

> > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins

> > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > >

> > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times, this

> > > is

> > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no other

> > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of

> > > Vishnu

> > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana.

> Then

> > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > >

> > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya (Nature

> of

> > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu

> > > Purana,

> > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-Veda

> > > as

> > > > well.

> > > >

> > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on BPHS.This

> > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> > > India.<<

> > > >

> > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that Bhatophala

> > > never

> > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He could

> > > also

> > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also know

> as

> > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time. Even

> > > that

> > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara and it

> > > was

> > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > >

> > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to India in

> > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like

> > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think this

> > > simply

> > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at that

> > > time,

> > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > > >

> > > > Very friendly,

> > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

October 24, 2007

dear finn Wandahl .

Thanks for responding the query .

I expect u to illuminate us abt your finding or real rational behind this -Why rishis taken certain rasis as exaltation and certain rasis as debilation points of certain planets and also why and how they assigned rasis for planets .May be this will help us to combine the reason behind various aspects in vedic astrology .I am trying to find the reason or logic and trying to think in line with the rishis .

We expect u a usual display of knowledge like ur writing s i find from your various posting.

thanks and regrds

vijayaraghavan guruvayur.

, "Finn Wandahl" <finn.wandahl wrote:>> Dear Vijaya Raghavan Guruvayur,> > Thank you very much! > > You have asked a very relevant question about rationale behind the> exaltations of planets. This is no doubt a question that all good> astrologers are confronted with, soner or later.> > Actually a few years ago I came across a strange connection, which can> explain it. I hope I get a chance to elaborate on this later on. I> just need to find the proper notes etc. about it first.> > Very friendly,> Finn Wandahl> > > -- In , "lion_draco1983"> lion_draco1983@ wrote:> >> > > > dear finn wandahl.> > > > If u hav anything to say i expect u to say in plain words ,Dont worry> > abt blasphemy in hinduism .Only few people who is against the truth or> > re serch of truth are making hue and cry .What is the harm in academic> > discussions?R we imposing any thing on any body ?> > > > Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of> periods> > lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav happened .Now see> > the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in predictve astrology> > and now many dont know why rishis given this basics or characteristics> > for planets and rasis .The yukti part of jyothisha is getting eroded .> > > > > > > > Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of mars> > ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So many are> > parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .> > > > > > > > New generations like us also deterioted to a great extent becuse major> > part of our life atleast first 20 years in life spend to get an academic> > degree and otherwise u r not respected even in indian society and we> > used less time to learn our parampara professions.> > > > > > > > The people who jumping around is actualy killing the real essence of> > indian tradition which the based on foundation of truth and search for> > truth and rishis and their intentions are differrent .As truth itself is> > god .And hinduism is not a monolithic religion.> > > > > > > > regrds vijaya raghavan guruvayur .> > > > > > > > > > , "Finn Wandahl"> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Pradeep,> > >> > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people> > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu astrology as> > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are> > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas about> > > the origin of Hindu astrology.> > >> > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-period or> > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it is not> > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have> > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at all,> > > but was written much later than that.> > >> > > Best regards,> > > Finn> > >> > >> > >> > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"> > > vijayadas_pradeep@ wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members> > > >> > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with> > > > substance.> > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in> > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing this> > > > during your previous discussions as well.> > > >> > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you are> > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation- shruti -> > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you correctly,you> > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the current> > > > version.This can be true.> > > >> > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed shastra> > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of inquisitive-> > > > Truthseeking-souls.> > > >> > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to> > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt those.This is> > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are> > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date> > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This is my> > > > personal opinion.> > > >> > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization etc> > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within> > > > calendar domain.> > > >> > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters mentioned in> > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised under> > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will express my> > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time> > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i> > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not wise.Rama> > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the> > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the mental> > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root - the> > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a> > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own reflection and> > > > inlfuences.> > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible that> > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the> > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am incompetent> > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.> > > >> > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take> > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical> > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our> > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.> > > >> > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly pardon.Wishing> > > > all propserity.> > > >> > > > Respect> > > > Pradeep> > > > , "Finn Wandahl"> > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,> > > > >> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > >> > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage> > > > Parasara> > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer chapter 8> > > > of> > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give information> > on> > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's 74> > to> > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st Charn> > of> > > > > star Kritika.<<> > > > >> > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I seem to> > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I> > > > realized> > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I> > > > found> > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of> > > > Lagadha> > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.> > > > >> > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox and> > the> > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was able to> > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being> > > > somewhare> > > > > around 1300 BC.> > > > >> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > >> > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with Vishnu> > > > > Puran.<<> > > > >> > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the same> > > > style> > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple Maitriya.> > > > This> > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or> > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins> > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.> > > > >> > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times, this> > > > is> > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no other> > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of> > > > Vishnu> > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana.> > Then> > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.> > > > >> > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya (Nature> > of> > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu> > > > Purana,> > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-Veda> > > > as> > > > > well.> > > > >> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > >> > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had> > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on BPHS.This> > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in> > > > India.<<> > > > >> > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that Bhatophala> > > > never> > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He could> > > > also> > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also know> > as> > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time. Even> > > > that> > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara and it> > > > was> > > > > not written in the Vedic period.> > > > >> > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to India in> > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like> > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book "India". I think this> > > > simply> > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at that> > > > time,> > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.> > > > >> > > > > Very friendly,> > > > > Finn Wandahl> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

October 24, 2007

dear sreenadh ji,

My knwoledge of history is like a arm chair historian .

Nevr get enough time to delve into matters seriously .But i blve astrology -u cal it in waht ever name it progreesed tru the devlpment of society .And we can easily find that in india planned agriculture started some thing around 10000 bc (its what scientists and historians says ) ,so the need of agriculture calendar migh hav rise to the progress in predictive part of astro .Like need to rainy and shiny seasons and may be sun and moon entries to various rasis for seeding like this .

Then the devlpment of city states might hav given for spiritual part of astro like good time for muhurtha and yagnas and things like that then slowly more into personal levels as king doms started and kings wanted to personal victory and comforts .then its more become personal .I think this shud be kept in mind while probing anything into astrology .And any kind of divisions in astrological history like epic period or vedic period or budhist period .

Even though one astrological storey during the time of birth of lord budha which happend bc 600,like some sanyasi predicting a world leader or a great sanyasi in budha ,i think their contribution in astrology was minimal tho during budhist periods there is evidences like observatory in Kerala.

But jains the contemporary of budhists had given a big contribution in astrology ,along with tantric peoples .If u see the sangam literature of south india u can see the saivite sidhas like rishi agastya has contributed a great deal in astrology .

And unlike purans and other literature the sangam literature of tamils which is codyfied before 2100 years is having less confusion and says a greate deal abt the living style of south indians and their various aspects in society .Even u can see the medicine ,architechure,dance ,music ,astrology in every thing they hav there own contribution ,u name it they hav it in its peak .This devlpment was headed By the 18 sidhas of sangam literature .

I am not being a segragatist here ,or saying any north -south devide .But facts cannot be ignored while deciphering results .

Regrding astrological part of query sriman finn wandahl will be adressing as when he get time .

regrds vijayaraghavan guruvayur.

, "Sreenadh" <sreesog wrote:>> Dear Raghavan ji,> ==>> > Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of > > periods lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav > > happened .Now see the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in > > predictve astrology and now many dont know why rishis given this > > basics or characteristics for planets and rasis .The yukti part of > > jyothisha is getting eroded .> > > Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of> > mars ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So > > many are parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .> <==> Well said!! Can you shed some light over such issues? I request you > to please do the same - as time permits. Thanks for participation and > contribution.> Love,> Sreenadh> > , "lion_draco1983" > lion_draco1983@ wrote:> >> > > > dear finn wandahl.> > > > If u hav anything to say i expect u to say in plain words ,Dont > worry> > abt blasphemy in hinduism .Only few people who is against the truth > or> > re serch of truth are making hue and cry .What is the harm in > academic> > discussions?R we imposing any thing on any body ?> > > > Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of > periods> > lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav > happened .Now see> > the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in predictve > astrology> > and now many dont know why rishis given this basics or > characteristics> > for planets and rasis .The yukti part of jyothisha is getting > eroded .> > > > > > > > Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of > mars> > ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So many are> > parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .> > > > > > > > New generations like us also deterioted to a great extent becuse > major> > part of our life atleast first 20 years in life spend to get an > academic> > degree and otherwise u r not respected even in indian society and we> > used less time to learn our parampara professions.> > > > > > > > The people who jumping around is actualy killing the real essence > of> > indian tradition which the based on foundation of truth and > search for> > truth and rishis and their intentions are differrent .As truth > itself is> > god .And hinduism is not a monolithic religion.> > > > > > > > regrds vijaya raghavan guruvayur .> > > > > > > > > > , "Finn Wandahl"> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Pradeep,> > >> > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people> > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu > astrology as> > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are> > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas > about> > > the origin of Hindu astrology.> > >> > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-> period or> > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it > is not> > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we > have> > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at > all,> > > but was written much later than that.> > >> > > Best regards,> > > Finn> > >> > >> > >> > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"> > > vijayadas_pradeep@ wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members> > > >> > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with> > > > substance.> > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in> > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing > this> > > > during your previous discussions as well.> > > >> > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you > are> > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation- > shruti -> > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you > correctly,you> > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the > current> > > > version.This can be true.> > > >> > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed > shastra> > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of > inquisitive-> > > > Truthseeking-souls.> > > >> > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to> > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt > those.This is> > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are> > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date> > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This > is my> > > > personal opinion.> > > >> > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization > etc> > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within> > > > calendar domain.> > > >> > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters > mentioned in> > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised > under> > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will > express my> > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time> > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i> > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not > wise.Rama> > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the> > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the > mental> > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root - > the> > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a> > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own > reflection and> > > > inlfuences.> > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible > that> > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the> > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am > incompetent> > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.> > > >> > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take> > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical> > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our> > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.> > > >> > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly > pardon.Wishing> > > > all propserity.> > > >> > > > Respect> > > > Pradeep> > > > , "Finn Wandahl"> > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,> > > > >> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > >> > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage> > > > Parasara> > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer > chapter 8> > > > of> > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give > information> > on> > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's > 74> > to> > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st > Charn> > of> > > > > star Kritika.<<> > > > >> > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I > seem to> > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I> > > > realized> > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I> > > > found> > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of> > > > Lagadha> > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.> > > > >> > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox > and> > the> > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was > able to> > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being> > > > somewhare> > > > > around 1300 BC.> > > > >> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > >> > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with > Vishnu> > > > > Puran.<<> > > > >> > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the > same> > > > style> > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple > Maitriya.> > > > This> > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or> > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins> > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.> > > > >> > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times, > this> > > > is> > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no > other> > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of> > > > Vishnu> > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana.> > Then> > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.> > > > >> > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya > (Nature> > of> > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu> > > > Purana,> > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-> Veda> > > > as> > > > > well.> > > > >> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:> > > > >> > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had> > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on > BPHS.This> > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in> > > > India.<<> > > > >> > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that > Bhatophala> > > > never> > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He > could> > > > also> > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also > know> > as> > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time. > Even> > > > that> > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara > and it> > > > was> > > > > not written in the Vedic period.> > > > >> > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to > India in> > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like> > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book "India". I think this> > > > simply> > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at > that> > > > time,> > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.> > > > >> > > > > Very friendly,> > > > > Finn Wandahl> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

October 24, 2007

Dear Finn ji,

==>

> Actually a few years ago I came across a strange connection, which

> can explain it. I hope I get a chance to elaborate on this later

> on. I just need to find the proper notes etc. about it first.

<==

Thank you very much. I am and, I feel many people in this group

might be ready to wait for such useful information for weeks. Please

don't forget this promise - even if many threads and varying subjects

may come in-between in the mean time.

Love,

Sreenadh

, " Finn Wandahl "

<finn.wandahl wrote:

>

> Dear Vijaya Raghavan Guruvayur,

>

> Thank you very much!

>

> You have asked a very relevant question about rationale behind the

> exaltations of planets. This is no doubt a question that all good

> astrologers are confronted with, soner or later.

>

> Actually a few years ago I came across a strange connection, which

can

> explain it. I hope I get a chance to elaborate on this later on. I

> just need to find the proper notes etc. about it first.

>

> Very friendly,

> Finn Wandahl

>

> -- In , " lion_draco1983 "

> <lion_draco1983@> wrote:

> >

> > dear finn wandahl.

> >

> > If u hav anything to say i expect u to say in plain

words ,Dont worry

> > abt blasphemy in hinduism .Only few people who is against the

truth or

> > re serch of truth are making hue and cry .What is the harm in

academic

> > discussions?R we imposing any thing on any body ?

> >

> > Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of

> periods

> > lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav

happened .Now see

> > the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in predictve

astrology

> > and now many dont know why rishis given this basics or

characteristics

> > for planets and rasis .The yukti part of jyothisha is getting

eroded .

> >

> > Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of

mars

> > ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So many

are

> > parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .

> >

> > New generations like us also deterioted to a great extent becuse

major

> > part of our life atleast first 20 years in life spend to get an

academic

> > degree and otherwise u r not respected even in indian society and

we

> > used less time to learn our parampara professions.

> >

> > The people who jumping around is actualy killing the real

essence of

> > indian tradition which the based on foundation of truth and

search for

> > truth and rishis and their intentions are differrent .As truth

itself is

> > god .And hinduism is not a monolithic religion.

> >

> > regrds vijaya raghavan guruvayur .

> >

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Pradeep,

> > >

> > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

astrology as

> > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there

are

> > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas

about

> > > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> > >

> > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-

period or

> > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it

is not

> > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that

we have

> > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at

all,

> > > but was written much later than that.

> > >

> > > Best regards,

> > > Finn

> > >

> > > --- In

, " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > vijayadas_pradeep@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > > >

> > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> > > > substance.

> > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been

observing this

> > > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > > >

> > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that

you are

> > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation-

shruti -

> > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

correctly,you

> > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the

current

> > > > version.This can be true.

> > > >

> > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed

shastra

> > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

inquisitive-

> > > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > > >

> > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating

to

> > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

those.This is

> > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical

order.This is my

> > > > personal opinion.

> > > >

> > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-

civilization etc

> > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> > > > calendar domain.

> > > >

> > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters

mentioned in

> > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised

under

> > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will

express my

> > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But

i

> > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

wise.Rama

> > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the

mental

> > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his

root - the

> > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

reflection and

> > > > inlfuences.

> > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible

that

> > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

incompetent

> > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> > > >

> > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or

take

> > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for

our

> > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > > >

> > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

pardon.Wishing

> > > > all propserity.

> > > >

> > > > Respect

> > > > Pradeep

> > > > , " Finn

Wandahl "

> > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > > >

> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> > > > Parasara

> > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer

chapter 8

> > > > of

> > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

information

> > on

> > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer

Sloka's 74

> > to

> > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st

Charn

> > of

> > > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > > >

> > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I

seem to

> > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> > > > realized

> > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember

correctly I

> > > > found

> > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha

of

> > > > Lagadha

> > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > > >

> > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox

and

> > the

> > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was

able to

> > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> > > > somewhare

> > > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > > >

> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with

Vishnu

> > > > > Puran.<<

> > > > >

> > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the

same

> > > > style

> > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

Maitriya.

> > > > This

> > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some

Brahmins

> > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > > >

> > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many

times, this

> > > > is

> > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no

other

> > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part

of

> > > > Vishnu

> > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada

Purana.

> > Then

> > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > > >

> > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya

(Nature

> > of

> > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in

Vishnu

> > > > Purana,

> > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in

Atharva-Veda

> > > > as

> > > > > well.

> > > > >

> > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

BPHS.This

> > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> > > > India.<<

> > > > >

> > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

Bhatophala

> > > > never

> > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He

could

> > > > also

> > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also

know

> > as

> > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time.

Even

> > > > that

> > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara

and it

> > > > was

> > > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > > >

> > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to

India in

> > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook

like

> > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think

this

> > > > simply

> > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at

that

> > > > time,

> > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > > > >

> > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

October 24, 2007

Dear Finn ji,

I apologize to goal ji. Thanks for correcting me. Yes, you are

right -

==>

> Even more so when one is a moderator...

<==

Yes, I should limit my self, especially when there is a bigger

chance of misunderstanding my free expressions or statements. I will

keep, and will try to abide by your advise on that. Sorry.

Note 1: I never stated that Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong to

the 6th century AD. I was just mentioning that there was no mention

about this text in any other texts may be upto 6th century AD - but

that does not mean that VJ is of 6th century AD, or that I have a

better understanding of the period of VJ.

Note 2: As far as 'over smarting you' etc is concerned, I never

tried it and never will. Because I know well that every individual is

unique - whether it be you or me. When there is no competition

involved, when one is trying to become himself better and better

every day, such things never even arise. I am trying to be me, and

you you - how can there be some thing like 'manipulating', 'over

smarting' etc? I don't get the point - but sincerely think we can

leave it there - because such things are irrelevant - and has nothing

to do with astrology. I apologize to you for any thing you feel

offended in my previous mails - it was unintended.

Love,

Sreenadh

, " Finn Wandahl "

<finn.wandahl wrote:

>

> Dear Sreenadh,

>

> I sent a strong message to you, and you have responded to some of

it,

> but not to the most important issue. You obviously overlooked the

> request I made, and didn't respond. So, if you don't mind, I will

> repeat it:

>

> >>Please don't try to manipulate or outsmart me like that again.<<

>

> Obviously you think you can continue in the same arrogant way...

>

> It was very unpleasant to read your reply to the message from Mr.

> Gopal Goel (below). He explained a line of thinking that he believes

> to be right, and he most certainly didn't deserve the kind of reply

> you gave him.

>

> You may consider Mr. Gopal Goel's line of thinking as being weird or

> whatever. But what about your own line of thinking? You claim that

> Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong to the 6th century AD, which is

way

> out of line with the opinion of most of the leading religious

> scientists, historians etc. etc.

>

> There is no reason to crucify Mr. Gopal Goel for expressing his

> opinion, which is exactly what you did.

>

> How about showing a little kindness by meeting people where they

are,

> and leave them a place to stand? If you disagree with somebody, then

> you can ask them to clarify or you can simply state that you

disagree

> and give your arguments, or you can even ignore them. But it should

be

> done in a nice and kind way.

>

> Even more so when one is a moderator...

>

> Very friendly,

> Finn Wandahl

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Goal ji,

> > This is absurd!! I don't believe in such instantaneous

revelations

> > without study - and don't think that such issues can be solved at

the

> > click of a mouse, or by typing 2 lines in flash of a second.

> > Know that many good scholars had send much time and efforts for

> > such studies - the time frame and book you assume to know or

> > understand under the said period has baffled even the great

scholars -

> > and so good and sincere scholars always preferred to deal with

this

> > subject only in small chunks only upto the point to which they

felt

> > that they could keep their sincerity. Yes, it may not the same

with

> > all - but, to be true - the whole things you tell below - i feel

like

> > a joke. I have some simple questions -

> > * Are you speaking about archeological history, or is it about

> > literary history? or about the imagination based on puranic and

epic

> > characters and other characters of some other drama? or is it a

> > cocktail of all these? i.e just hysterical

> > * Is it solely based on Sanskrit books alone - or also depends

on

> > Brahmi and Pali books and evidences available? Do you believe

that

> > except Sanskrit no other language had any literature?

> > * Most important - Are you a historian? i.e. Sincerely can you

call

> > yourself so? If so are you aware of archeological methods,

ancient

> > scripts (like Brahmi, pali, kharoshti), and scientific period

(time)

> > determination methods and their flaws?

> > * OR do you call yourself a literary historian? If so do you

mean

> > to say that you are searching or studying the history of books?

or

> > history reflected in books? What could be the pitfalls involved

in

> > such a study?

> >

> > So the point is, I would humbly say that we are not the proper

> > persons to boldly say or suggest such classifications. Yes, but

we

> > can express our usually irrelevant views or beliefs, without much

> > basis - and the arguments can eat up many days. ) Due to this

> > reason I would be staying away from this tread - and won't even

like

> > to express my views on such chronology determination efforts of

the

> > large chunks.

> > Note: No offence intended. So please don't take it so.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , Gopal Goel

> > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Friends,

> > > When we talk about Lord RAMA and Krishna and Vedic era and

other

> > such

> > > matters of common interest to astrologers, we should ,first

of

> > all decide the boundaries of these eras.

> > > I Suggest the following:

> > > 1 Vedic Era -This extends upto Mahabharata Period. Why I am

> > suggesting this. Because Sage Vaysa compiled the vedas and put

them

> > in chronological order.

> > > He is author of Bramha SUTRA and brought to light the

teaching of

> > lord Krishna to Mankind. Shri-mad-Bhagvat GITA HAS BECOME GUIDING

> > FORCE FOR OVER 5000 YEARS.

> > > 2. POST VEDIC ERA- This extends up to the incarnation of Lord

> > BUDDHA AND MAHAAVIRSWAMI.(Jain literature has a rich tradition of

> > Astrological literature)

> > > 3. Early historic era - This includes the period of Great

> > Chankya, Maurya dynasty,Upto 2nd A.D.

> > > 4. Post Historic Period- When golden period of gupta dynasty

> > starts, - a period

> > > when India touched new heights in literary field. This is

the

> > period when all famous manuscripts brought to life again. This is

> > reason many Western

> > > thinkers (including some Indian friends )feel that PURANIC

> > LITERATURE

> > > was created in this era. This is the era of revival 0of old

> > literature and not basically of original creation.

> > > .

> > > 5. 7TH A.D. till now- the era of modern History.

> > > If some consensus is formed on this time frame ,ON then some

> > worth while

> > > discussions are possible.

> > > I await the comments of savants.

> > > Regards.

> > >

> > > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > ==>

> > > > And criticizing me for to much historic attitude is pointless

> > when

> > > > we are trying to get the chronology of Hindu astrology right.

> > > <==

> > > Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is very important -

and

> > > the discussion (no, please don't term it 'criticizing' – even

the

> > > word `constructive criticism' may suit, but no, not this),

> > naturally

> > > may include everyone presenting their own perspectives. I was

just

> > > doing that and was not forcing anything - we should abide by

our

> > own

> > > perspective and then only the efforts will produce more

valuable

> > > results.

> > > ==>

> > > > I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

> > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period

at

> > all,

> > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > <==

> > > I totally agree to this statement.

> > > Love,

> > > Sreenadh

> > >

> > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> > > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

> > astrology

> > > as

> > > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that

there are

> > > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and

ideas

> > > about

> > > > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> > > >

> > > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-

> > period

> > > or

> > > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and

it

> > is

> > > not

> > > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that

we

> > > have

> > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period

at

> > all,

> > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > >

> > > > Best regards,

> > > > Finn

> > > >

> > > > --- In

> > , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > > > >

> > > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails

with

> > > > > substance.

> > > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results

in

> > > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been

observing

> > > this

> > > > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > > > >

> > > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that

you

> > > are

> > > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation-

> > > shruti -

> > > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

> > > correctly,you

> > > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the

> > > current

> > > > > version.This can be true.

> > > > >

> > > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a

revealed

> > > shastra

> > > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

> > inquisitive-

> > > > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > > > >

> > > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions

relating

> > to

> > > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

> > those.This

> > > is

> > > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc

are

> > > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to

date

> > > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical

order.This

> > is

> > > my

> > > > > personal opinion.

> > > > >

> > > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-

civilization

> > > etc

> > > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period

within

> > > > > calendar domain.

> > > > >

> > > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters

> > mentioned

> > > in

> > > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and

scrutinised

> > > under

> > > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will

> > express

> > > my

> > > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when

time

> > > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own

reasons.But i

> > > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

> > > wise.Rama

> > > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the

> > mental

> > > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his

root -

> > > the

> > > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as

a

> > > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

> > reflection

> > > and

> > > > > inlfuences.

> > > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is

possible

> > > that

> > > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

> > > incompetent

> > > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> > > > >

> > > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or

> > take

> > > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle

for

> > our

> > > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > > > >

> > > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

> > > pardon.Wishing

> > > > > all propserity.

> > > > >

> > > > > Respect

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > , " Finn

Wandahl "

> > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by

sage

> > > > > Parasara

> > > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer

> > chapter

> > > 8

> > > > > of

> > > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

> > > information on

> > > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer

Sloka's

> > > 74 to

> > > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in

1st

> > > Charn of

> > > > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but

I

> > seem

> > > to

> > > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading

this, I

> > > > > realized

> > > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember

correctly

> > I

> > > > > found

> > > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga

Jyotisha of

> > > > > Lagadha

> > > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal

equinox

> > and

> > > the

> > > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I

was

> > able

> > > to

> > > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as

being

> > > > > somewhare

> > > > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches

with

> > > Vishnu

> > > > > > Puran.<<

> > > > > >

> > > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with

the

> > > same

> > > > > style

> > > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

> > > Maitriya.

> > > > > This

> > > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected

or

> > > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some

Brahmins

> > > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many

times,

> > > this

> > > > > is

> > > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like

no

> > other

> > > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a

part of

> > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada

> > Purana.

> > > Then

> > > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya

> > > (Nature of

> > > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in

Vishnu

> > > > > Purana,

> > > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in

Atharva-

> > > Veda

> > > > > as

> > > > > > well.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL

had

> > > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

> > > BPHS.This

> > > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back

in

> > > > > India.<<

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

> > Bhatophala

> > > > > never

> > > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written.

He

> > > could

> > > > > also

> > > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora

(also

> > > know as

> > > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long

time.

> > Even

> > > > > that

> > > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage

Parasara

> > and

> > > it

> > > > > was

> > > > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to

> > India

> > > in

> > > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook

like

> > > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think

> > this

> > > > > simply

> > > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost

at

> > that

> > > > > time,

> > > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > G.K.GOEL

> > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > INDIA

> > >

> > > Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required. Click

here.

> > >

> >

>

October 24, 2007

Dear Raghav ji,

I agree with many point and disagree with some. But thanks for the

good post.

==>

> My knwoledge of history is like a arm chair historian .

<==

I am also of the same category.

Love,

Sreenadh

, " lion_draco1983 "

<lion_draco1983 wrote:

>

> dear sreenadh ji,

>

> My knwoledge of history is like a arm chair historian .

>

> Nevr get enough time to delve into matters seriously .But i blve

> astrology -u cal it in waht ever name it progreesed tru the

devlpment of

> society .And we can easily find that in india planned agriculture

> started some thing around 10000 bc (its what scientists and

historians

> says ) ,so the need of agriculture calendar migh hav rise to the

> progress in predictive part of astro .Like need to rainy and shiny

> seasons and may be sun and moon entries to various rasis for seeding

> like this .

>

> Then the devlpment of city states might hav given for spiritual

part

> of astro like good time for muhurtha and yagnas and things like that

> then slowly more into personal levels as king doms started and kings

> wanted to personal victory and comforts .then its more become

personal

> .I think this shud be kept in mind while probing anything into

astrology

> .And any kind of divisions in astrological history like epic period

or

> vedic period or budhist period .

>

> Even though one astrological storey during the time of birth

of

> lord budha which happend bc 600,like some sanyasi predicting a world

> leader or a great sanyasi in budha ,i think their contribution in

> astrology was minimal tho during budhist periods there is evidences

like

> observatory in Kerala.

>

> But jains the contemporary of budhists had given a big contribution

in

> astrology ,along with tantric peoples .If u see the sangam

literature of

> south india u can see the saivite sidhas like rishi agastya has

> contributed a great deal in astrology .

>

> And unlike purans and other literature the sangam literature of

tamils

> which is codyfied before 2100 years is having less confusion and

says a

> greate deal abt the living style of south indians and their various

> aspects in society .Even u can see the medicine ,architechure,dance

> ,music ,astrology in every thing they hav there own contribution ,u

name

> it they hav it in its peak .This devlpment was headed By the 18

sidhas

> of sangam literature .

>

> I am not being a segragatist here ,or saying any north -south

devide

> .But facts cannot be ignored while deciphering results .

>

> Regrding astrological part of query sriman finn wandahl will be

> adressing as when he get time .

>

> regrds vijayaraghavan guruvayur.

>

, " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Raghavan ji,

> > ==>

> > > Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of

> > > periods lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav

> > > happened .Now see the rishis and sidhas has made some

guidelines in

> > > predictve astrology and now many dont know why rishis given this

> > > basics or characteristics for planets and rasis .The yukti part

of

> > > jyothisha is getting eroded .

> >

> > > Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of

> > > mars ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So

> > > many are parrotting some thing without applying the tru

chintha .

> > <==

> > Well said!! Can you shed some light over such issues? I request

you

> > to please do the same - as time permits. Thanks for participation

and

> > contribution.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , " lion_draco1983 "

> > lion_draco1983@ wrote:

> > >

> > > dear finn wandahl.

> > >

> > > If u hav anything to say i expect u to say in plain words ,Dont

> > worry

> > > abt blasphemy in hinduism .Only few people who is against the

truth

> > or

> > > re serch of truth are making hue and cry .What is the harm in

> > academic

> > > discussions?R we imposing any thing on any body ?

> > >

> > > Hinduism being 10 or 15 thousand old and being come tru lot of

> > periods

> > > lot of misappropriations or wrong inclusions might hav

> > happened .Now see

> > > the rishis and sidhas has made some guidelines in predictve

> > astrology

> > > and now many dont know why rishis given this basics or

> > characteristics

> > > for planets and rasis .The yukti part of jyothisha is getting

> > eroded .

> > >

> > > Can any body realy tell why mesha is ucha rasi of sun or rasi of

> > mars

> > > ,how rishis take it also so many other classifications .So many

are

> > > parrotting some thing without applying the tru chintha .

> > >

> > > New generations like us also deterioted to a great extent becuse

> > major

> > > part of our life atleast first 20 years in life spend to get an

> > academic

> > > degree and otherwise u r not respected even in indian society

and we

> > > used less time to learn our parampara professions.

> > >

> > > The people who jumping around is actualy killing the real

essence

> > of

> > > indian tradition which the based on foundation of truth and

> > search for

> > > truth and rishis and their intentions are differrent .As truth

> > itself is

> > > god .And hinduism is not a monolithic religion.

> > >

> > > regrds vijaya raghavan guruvayur .

> > >

> > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> > > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

> > astrology as

> > > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that

there are

> > > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and

ideas

> > about

> > > > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> > > >

> > > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-

> > period or

> > > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and

it

> > is not

> > > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that

we

> > have

> > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period

at

> > all,

> > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > >

> > > > Best regards,

> > > > Finn

> > > >

> > > > --- In

> > , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > vijayadas_pradeep@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > > > >

> > > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails

with

> > > > > substance.

> > > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results

in

> > > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been

observing

> > this

> > > > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > > > >

> > > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that

you

> > are

> > > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation-

> > shruti -

> > > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

> > correctly,you

> > > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the

> > current

> > > > > version.This can be true.

> > > > >

> > > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed

> > shastra

> > > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

> > inquisitive-

> > > > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > > > >

> > > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions

relating to

> > > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

> > those.This is

> > > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc

are

> > > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to

date

> > > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical

order.This

> > is my

> > > > > personal opinion.

> > > > >

> > > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-

civilization

> > etc

> > > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> > > > > calendar domain.

> > > > >

> > > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters

> > mentioned in

> > > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and

scrutinised

> > under

> > > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will

> > express my

> > > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when

time

> > > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own

reasons.But i

> > > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

> > wise.Rama

> > > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the

> > mental

> > > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his

root -

> > the

> > > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as

a

> > > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

> > reflection and

> > > > > inlfuences.

> > > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is

possible

> > that

> > > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

> > incompetent

> > > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> > > > >

> > > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or

take

> > > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle

for our

> > > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > > > >

> > > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

> > pardon.Wishing

> > > > > all propserity.

> > > > >

> > > > > Respect

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > , " Finn

Wandahl "

> > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by

sage

> > > > > Parasara

> > > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer

> > chapter 8

> > > > > of

> > > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

> > information

> > > on

> > > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer

Sloka's

> > 74

> > > to

> > > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st

> > Charn

> > > of

> > > > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I

> > seem to

> > > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading

this, I

> > > > > realized

> > > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember

correctly I

> > > > > found

> > > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga

Jyotisha of

> > > > > Lagadha

> > > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal

equinox

> > and

> > > the

> > > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was

> > able to

> > > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> > > > > somewhare

> > > > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches

with

> > Vishnu

> > > > > > Puran.<<

> > > > > >

> > > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with

the

> > same

> > > > > style

> > > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

> > Maitriya.

> > > > > This

> > > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected

or

> > > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some

Brahmins

> > > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many

times,

> > this

> > > > > is

> > > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no

> > other

> > > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a

part of

> > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada

Purana.

> > > Then

> > > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya

> > (Nature

> > > of

> > > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in

Vishnu

> > > > > Purana,

> > > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in

Atharva-

> > Veda

> > > > > as

> > > > > > well.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL

had

> > > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

> > BPHS.This

> > > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back

in

> > > > > India.<<

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

> > Bhatophala

> > > > > never

> > > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He

> > could

> > > > > also

> > > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora

(also

> > know

> > > as

> > > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time.

> > Even

> > > > > that

> > > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara

> > and it

> > > > > was

> > > > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to

> > India in

> > > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook

like

> > > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think

this

> > > > > simply

> > > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at

> > that

> > > > > time,

> > > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

October 24, 2007

Dear Goel ji,

I totally agree with the following points

==>

* When we say that Puranas etc are written in 200ndA.D. to say upto

700A.D., THIS ONLY MEAN THAT THEY WERE RENARRATED AND REAUDITED.

* Try to find out who had contibuted main Text and when. It is ,but

natural with time ,during the process of narration over the several

centuries , main text are bound ti be distorted..

* BPHS -IN WHATEVER FORM NOW AVAILABLE- IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE

TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.

<==

My appologies to the arrogent statement I made in my earlier mail,

and thanks for your kind contributions.

Love,

Sreenadh

, Gopal Goel

<gkgoel1937 wrote:

>

> Dear Mr. Finn and my angary Friend Mr.Sreenadh,

> I honestly do not mind what Mr. Sreenaddh expressed in his mail.

the present generation is forgettng how to behave with friends and

elders. They are always angree and posses know-all atitude. Such

persons expect that others shoud not only acceppt their views but

also respect thei rview with atmost humility.However neither they

want to understand or have any petience to give a thought over the

views of others.

> Imay like to give my brief back ground. Iam an engineering

graduate of 1960

> batch from IIT -ROORKEE.iAM STUDING iNDIAN scripture since 1952-

most of you may have not born at that time. I have studied Astrology

since 1973 ,and was in close association with P.S.IYER,K.N.RAO,Dr.

Sukdev Chaturvedi snd

> Pt. Sanjay Rath.

> What can be done as we are living in a era where there is no

mutual respect.

> Now I may like to draw some basic aspect of Ancient scruptures:

> 1. Most of the Purana's ,Mahabharta, BPHS ETC are available in

the narration form ,meaning dialogue mode. Never mind what experts

say, it is a rule that dialoges are always based on main TEXT.

> VAYASA PREPARED MAIN TEXT OF mAHABHARTA AND bHAGAVAT MAHA PURANA.

SIMLARLY , after mahabharta war and upto the period of lord

Buddha ,the schools started by the deciplles of Vayasa written core-

basic text oe many Puranas and other scrptures. Subsiquently ,yhey

were narrated to masses .

> Ancient Vadic litrature is in very dificult language which is not

so easy to understand even for scolors. Vayasa created the litrature

in Anushtup Chhanda

> which was easy to understand by masses.

> When we say that Puranas etc are written in 200ndA.D. to say upto

700A.D.,

> THIS ONLY MEAN THAT THEY WERE RENARRATED AND REAUDITED.

> If we assume that these were created in that era, I personaly of

the view that no one should take such an impression.

> Try to find out who had contibuted main Text and when. It is ,but

natural with time ,during the process of narration over the several

centuries , main text are bound ti be distorted..

> I am teaching Astrology since 1991 and also giving lectures in

SHRI LAL BAHADUR SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETH IN DELHI. ALL SCOLORS IN

PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER FORM NOW AVAILABLE-

IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.

> Kindly forget every thing ,and try to benifit from the litrature

now available.

> Regards to all

>

> Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

> Dear Finn ji,

> I apologize to goal ji. Thanks for correcting me. Yes, you are

> right -

> ==>

> > Even more so when one is a moderator...

> <==

> Yes, I should limit my self, especially when there is a bigger

> chance of misunderstanding my free expressions or statements. I

will

> keep, and will try to abide by your advise on that. Sorry.

>

> Note 1: I never stated that Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong to

> the 6th century AD. I was just mentioning that there was no mention

> about this text in any other texts may be upto 6th century AD - but

> that does not mean that VJ is of 6th century AD, or that I have a

> better understanding of the period of VJ.

> Note 2: As far as 'over smarting you' etc is concerned, I never

> tried it and never will. Because I know well that every individual

is

> unique - whether it be you or me. When there is no competition

> involved, when one is trying to become himself better and better

> every day, such things never even arise. I am trying to be me, and

> you you - how can there be some thing like 'manipulating', 'over

> smarting' etc? I don't get the point - but sincerely think we can

> leave it there - because such things are irrelevant - and has

nothing

> to do with astrology. I apologize to you for any thing you feel

> offended in my previous mails - it was unintended.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sreenadh,

> >

> > I sent a strong message to you, and you have responded to some of

> it,

> > but not to the most important issue. You obviously overlooked the

> > request I made, and didn't respond. So, if you don't mind, I will

> > repeat it:

> >

> > >>Please don't try to manipulate or outsmart me like that again.<<

> >

> > Obviously you think you can continue in the same arrogant way...

> >

> > It was very unpleasant to read your reply to the message from Mr.

> > Gopal Goel (below). He explained a line of thinking that he

believes

> > to be right, and he most certainly didn't deserve the kind of

reply

> > you gave him.

> >

> > You may consider Mr. Gopal Goel's line of thinking as being weird

or

> > whatever. But what about your own line of thinking? You claim that

> > Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong to the 6th century AD, which

is

> way

> > out of line with the opinion of most of the leading religious

> > scientists, historians etc. etc.

> >

> > There is no reason to crucify Mr. Gopal Goel for expressing his

> > opinion, which is exactly what you did.

> >

> > How about showing a little kindness by meeting people where they

> are,

> > and leave them a place to stand? If you disagree with somebody,

then

> > you can ask them to clarify or you can simply state that you

> disagree

> > and give your arguments, or you can even ignore them. But it

should

> be

> > done in a nice and kind way.

> >

> > Even more so when one is a moderator...

> >

> > Very friendly,

> > Finn Wandahl

> >

> > , " Sreenadh "

> > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Goal ji,

> > > This is absurd!! I don't believe in such instantaneous

> revelations

> > > without study - and don't think that such issues can be solved

at

> the

> > > click of a mouse, or by typing 2 lines in flash of a second.

> > > Know that many good scholars had send much time and efforts for

> > > such studies - the time frame and book you assume to know or

> > > understand under the said period has baffled even the great

> scholars -

> > > and so good and sincere scholars always preferred to deal with

> this

> > > subject only in small chunks only upto the point to which they

> felt

> > > that they could keep their sincerity. Yes, it may not the same

> with

> > > all - but, to be true - the whole things you tell below - i

feel

> like

> > > a joke. I have some simple questions -

> > > * Are you speaking about archeological history, or is it about

> > > literary history? or about the imagination based on puranic and

> epic

> > > characters and other characters of some other drama? or is it a

> > > cocktail of all these? i.e just hysterical

> > > * Is it solely based on Sanskrit books alone - or also depends

> on

> > > Brahmi and Pali books and evidences available? Do you believe

> that

> > > except Sanskrit no other language had any literature?

> > > * Most important - Are you a historian? i.e. Sincerely can you

> call

> > > yourself so? If so are you aware of archeological methods,

> ancient

> > > scripts (like Brahmi, pali, kharoshti), and scientific period

> (time)

> > > determination methods and their flaws?

> > > * OR do you call yourself a literary historian? If so do you

> mean

> > > to say that you are searching or studying the history of books?

> or

> > > history reflected in books? What could be the pitfalls involved

> in

> > > such a study?

> > >

> > > So the point is, I would humbly say that we are not the proper

> > > persons to boldly say or suggest such classifications. Yes, but

> we

> > > can express our usually irrelevant views or beliefs, without

much

> > > basis - and the arguments can eat up many days. ) Due to this

> > > reason I would be staying away from this tread - and won't even

> like

> > > to express my views on such chronology determination efforts of

> the

> > > large chunks.

> > > Note: No offence intended. So please don't take it so.

> > > Love,

> > > Sreenadh

> > >

> > > , Gopal Goel

> > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Friends,

> > > > When we talk about Lord RAMA and Krishna and Vedic era and

> other

> > > such

> > > > matters of common interest to astrologers, we should ,first

> of

> > > all decide the boundaries of these eras.

> > > > I Suggest the following:

> > > > 1 Vedic Era -This extends upto Mahabharata Period. Why I am

> > > suggesting this. Because Sage Vaysa compiled the vedas and put

> them

> > > in chronological order.

> > > > He is author of Bramha SUTRA and brought to light the

> teaching of

> > > lord Krishna to Mankind. Shri-mad-Bhagvat GITA HAS BECOME

GUIDING

> > > FORCE FOR OVER 5000 YEARS.

> > > > 2. POST VEDIC ERA- This extends up to the incarnation of Lord

> > > BUDDHA AND MAHAAVIRSWAMI.(Jain literature has a rich tradition

of

> > > Astrological literature)

> > > > 3. Early historic era - This includes the period of Great

> > > Chankya, Maurya dynasty,Upto 2nd A.D.

> > > > 4. Post Historic Period- When golden period of gupta dynasty

> > > starts, - a period

> > > > when India touched new heights in literary field. This is

> the

> > > period when all famous manuscripts brought to life again. This

is

> > > reason many Western

> > > > thinkers (including some Indian friends )feel that PURANIC

> > > LITERATURE

> > > > was created in this era. This is the era of revival 0of old

> > > literature and not basically of original creation.

> > > > .

> > > > 5. 7TH A.D. till now- the era of modern History.

> > > > If some consensus is formed on this time frame ,ON then some

> > > worth while

> > > > discussions are possible.

> > > > I await the comments of savants.

> > > > Regards.

> > > >

> > > > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > ==>

> > > > > And criticizing me for to much historic attitude is

pointless

> > > when

> > > > > we are trying to get the chronology of Hindu astrology

right.

> > > > <==

> > > > Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is very important -

> and

> > > > the discussion (no, please don't term it 'criticizing' – even

> the

> > > > word `constructive criticism' may suit, but no, not this),

> > > naturally

> > > > may include everyone presenting their own perspectives. I was

> just

> > > > doing that and was not forcing anything - we should abide by

> our

> > > own

> > > > perspective and then only the efforts will produce more

> valuable

> > > > results.

> > > > ==>

> > > > > I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

> > > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic

period

> at

> > > all,

> > > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > > <==

> > > > I totally agree to this statement.

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > , " Finn

Wandahl "

> > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > >

> > > > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some

people

> > > > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

> > > astrology

> > > > as

> > > > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that

> there are

> > > > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and

> ideas

> > > > about

> > > > > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> > > > >

> > > > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-

> > > period

> > > > or

> > > > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it -

and

> it

> > > is

> > > > not

> > > > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts

that

> we

> > > > have

> > > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic

period

> at

> > > all,

> > > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > > >

> > > > > Best regards,

> > > > > Finn

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In

> > > , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails

> with

> > > > > > substance.

> > > > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which

results

> in

> > > > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been

> observing

> > > > this

> > > > > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception

that

> you

> > > > are

> > > > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of

revelation-

> > > > shruti -

> > > > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

> > > > correctly,you

> > > > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of

the

> > > > current

> > > > > > version.This can be true.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a

> revealed

> > > > shastra

> > > > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

> > > inquisitive-

> > > > > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions

> relating

> > > to

> > > > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

> > > those.This

> > > > is

> > > > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas

etc

> are

> > > > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to

> date

> > > > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical

> order.This

> > > is

> > > > my

> > > > > > personal opinion.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-

> civilization

> > > > etc

> > > > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period

> within

> > > > > > calendar domain.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters

> > > mentioned

> > > > in

> > > > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and

> scrutinised

> > > > under

> > > > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will

> > > express

> > > > my

> > > > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when

> time

> > > > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own

> reasons.But i

> > > > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is

not

> > > > wise.Rama

> > > > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > > > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing

the

> > > mental

> > > > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his

> root -

> > > > the

> > > > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them

as

> a

> > > > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

> > > reflection

> > > > and

> > > > > > inlfuences.

> > > > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is

> possible

> > > > that

> > > > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > > > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

> > > > incompetent

> > > > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout

or

> > > take

> > > > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle

> for

> > > our

> > > > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

> > > > pardon.Wishing

> > > > > > all propserity.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > , " Finn

> Wandahl "

> > > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by

> sage

> > > > > > Parasara

> > > > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer

> > > chapter

> > > > 8

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

> > > > information on

> > > > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer

> Sloka's

> > > > 74 to

> > > > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in

> 1st

> > > > Charn of

> > > > > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify,

but

> I

> > > seem

> > > > to

> > > > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading

> this, I

> > > > > > realized

> > > > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember

> correctly

> > > I

> > > > > > found

> > > > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga

> Jyotisha of

> > > > > > Lagadha

> > > > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal

> equinox

> > > and

> > > > the

> > > > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I

> was

> > > able

> > > > to

> > > > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as

> being

> > > > > > somewhare

> > > > > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches

> with

> > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > Puran.<<

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with

> the

> > > > same

> > > > > > style

> > > > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

> > > > Maitriya.

> > > > > > This

> > > > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written,

collected

> or

> > > > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some

> Brahmins

> > > > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many

> times,

> > > > this

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like

> no

> > > other

> > > > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a

> part of

> > > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada

> > > Purana.

> > > > Then

> > > > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma

Vidya

> > > > (Nature of

> > > > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in

> Vishnu

> > > > > > Purana,

> > > > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in

> Atharva-

> > > > Veda

> > > > > > as

> > > > > > > well.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -

BHATOTPAL

> had

> > > > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

> > > > BPHS.This

> > > > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years

back

> in

> > > > > > India.<<

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

> > > Bhatophala

> > > > > > never

> > > > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written.

> He

> > > > could

> > > > > > also

> > > > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora

> (also

> > > > know as

> > > > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long

> time.

> > > Even

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage

> Parasara

> > > and

> > > > it

> > > > > > was

> > > > > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came

to

> > > India

> > > > in

> > > > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old

textbook

> like

> > > > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I

think

> > > this

> > > > > > simply

> > > > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost

> at

> > > that

> > > > > > time,

> > > > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > G.K.GOEL

> > > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > > INDIA

> > > >

> > > > Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required. Click

> here.

> > > >

> > >

> >

G.K.GOEL

> Ph: 09350311433

> Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> NEW DELHI-110 076

> INDIA

>

> Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click

here

>

October 24, 2007

Dear Shri Finn Wandahl

Thank you for your regards.

Yes i do observe that you are using the word Hindu Astrology ,for

which you might be having a reason.

As i have not dwelled into other parallel treatises other than Hindu

or Indian in origin ,i cannot comment or do any comparative study -

forget about the chronological order or which astrology preceded

another etc.As you are well read you may have your justifications.

As you might have understood,for me,the shlokas mentioned in BPHS

are having a deeper origin as compared to logical derivations

arising out of external observations and experimentations.Thus i

consider them to be appropriate for my studies ..though as you have

rightly observed..there can be incompleteness or missing links.

This can only point to (if incomplete) a reproduction of the text in

totality ,and not the originality of the shlokas.I am glad that you

have expressed the same views in your mail.

I hope this clarifies my doubts as well as those of few other

jyotish seekers.

Respect

Pradeep

, " Finn Wandahl "

<finn.wandahl wrote:

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some people

> misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu astrology

as

> blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that there are

> something wrong with the generally accepted time-line and ideas

about

> the origin of Hindu astrology.

>

> I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the Sruti-period

or

> that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it - and it is

not

> my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we

have

> today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic period at

all,

> but was written much later than that.

>

> Best regards,

> Finn

>

> --- In

, " vijayadas_pradeep "

> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> >

> > It is great to see the valauable participation and mails with

> > substance.

> > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which results in

> > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been observing

this

> > during your previous discussions as well.

> >

> > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception that you

are

> > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of revelation-

shruti -

> > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

correctly,you

> > are only disputing the completeness and originality of the

current

> > version.This can be true.

> >

> > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a revealed

shastra

> > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

inquisitive-

> > Truthseeking-souls.

> >

> > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions relating to

> > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt those.This

is

> > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas etc are

> > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough to date

> > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical order.This

is my

> > personal opinion.

> >

> > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-civilization

etc

> > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period within

> > calendar domain.

> >

> > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and characters

mentioned in

> > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and scrutinised

under

> > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I will

express my

> > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji when time

> > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own reasons.But i

> > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is not

wise.Rama

> > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates the

> > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing the

mental

> > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to his root -

the

> > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon them as a

> > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own reflection

and

> > inlfuences.

> > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is possible

that

> > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter the

> > mythological representations to suit their case.But i am

incompetent

> > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for me.

> >

> > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor shout or take

> > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a puzzle for our

> > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> >

> > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

pardon.Wishing

> > all propserity.

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > >

> > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > >

> > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated by sage

> > Parasara

> > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly refer

chapter 8

> > of

> > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

information on

> > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly refer Sloka's

74 to

> > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was in 1st

Charn of

> > > star Kritika.<<

> > >

> > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify, but I

seem to

> > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading this, I

> > realized

> > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember correctly I

> > found

> > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga Jyotisha of

> > Lagadha

> > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > >

> > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal equinox

and the

> > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this I was

able to

> > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as being

> > somewhare

> > > around 1300 BC.

> > >

> > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > >

> > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra matches with

Vishnu

> > > Puran.<<

> > >

> > > This is very correct and they are also both framed with the

same

> > style

> > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his disciple

Maitriya.

> > This

> > > could in my opinion indicate they were written, collected or

> > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some Brahmins

> > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > >

> > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed many times,

this

> > is

> > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style like no

other

> > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once a part of

> > Vishnu

> > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the Narada Purana.

Then

> > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > >

> > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma Vidya

(Nature of

> > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as in Vishnu

> > Purana,

> > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and in Atharva-

Veda

> > as

> > > well.

> > >

> > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > >

> > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -BHATOTPAL had

> > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand on

BPHS.This

> > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years back in

> > India.<<

> > >

> > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

Bhatophala

> > never

> > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet written. He

could

> > also

> > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara Hora (also

know as

> > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long time.

Even

> > that

> > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage Parasara and

it

> > was

> > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > >

> > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he came to

India in

> > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old textbook like

> > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I think this

> > simply

> > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was lost at

that

> > time,

> > > and the new one that we know today was not yet written.

> > >

> > > Very friendly,

> > > Finn Wandahl

> > >

> >

>

October 24, 2007

Shri Finn Wandahl ji,

Namaskar!

<ALL SCOLORS IN PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER FORM

NOW AVAILABLE- IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.<<

> I totally agree on this.>

There is a joke in Punjabi!

A miser was going to marry off his son in a rich family. The girl's

parents were expected in the miser's family for personal

negotiations. The miser, who had very few household items in his

house, advised his offspring, " Whenever I ask you to bring me

something in the presence of the parents of the girl, you must ask

me -- 'sir, which one do you want' -- whether the one from England

or USA or Australia " ?.

The next day when the girl's parents came, the miser asked his son

to bring him a towel. Promptly, the son asked, " Papa, which towel

do you want? The one from England or USA or Austraila " . The father

replied " Just bring anyone " .

Then again the father asked, " Son, pl. get me my cap " . The son

promptely asked, " Papa, which cap? The one from England or USA or

Australia " ? and so on. The girl's parents were obviously impressed!

Ultimately, the father asked, " Son, please ask your mother to

come " . And the boy promptely asked, " Papa, which one do yo want,

the one from England or USA or Australia " ?

It is immaterial as to whether the miser solemnized his son's

marriage or not, but what is material is that when you express your

satisfaction with BPHS, the million dollar quetion is as to which

BPHS you are satisfied with: 1) The one that was non-existent even

at the time of Bhatotpala---9th century AD; (2) The one published by

Venkateshwar Press, Mumbai in 19th century -- about which even SB

Dikshit had to say that that was the most disgusting work as it was

a concoction? or (3) the one with English translation of R.

Santhanam, which advises us to follow Lahiri Ayanamsha for BPHS,

which means that even Parashara was waiting for " almighty " Lahiri to

be born so that his BPHS could prove correct? or (4) the one by

Sitaram Jha which says that he found Surya Sidhanta calculations

giving correct results for BPHS ---that is the edition R. Santhanam

translated into English!---or (5)the one by Ganesh Dutta Pathak or

(6)the one by C. G. Rajan or (7) the one with an English translation

published by a Connaught Place publisher of New Delhi and so on and

so forth?

I may mention here that no version agress with the contents of any

otehr version! But then that is the beauty of " Vedic astrology " ---

since if every astrologer agreed with everybody else, there would

have be no variety! And as you know, variety is the spice of life,

whether that spice is ayanamshaas or predictions or the version of

BPHS!

With regards,

Avtar Krishen Kaul

, " Finn Wandahl "

<finn.wandahl wrote:

>

> Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

>

> >>ALL SCOLORS IN PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER

FORM

> NOW AVAILABLE- IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.<<

>

> I totally agree on this. I am only questioning the claim that

BPHS, in

> its present form, is ancient and belonging to the Vedic period. I

am

> not at all disputing its quality. So many important astrological

> elements from different schools has been carefully collected and

> preserved in BPHS, which makes it a unique and very useful

compendium

> of Hindu astrology.

>

> Very friendly,

> Finn Wandahl

>

> , Gopal Goel

> <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr. Finn and my angary Friend Mr.Sreenadh,

> > I honestly do not mind what Mr. Sreenaddh expressed in his

mail.

> the present generation is forgettng how to behave with friends and

> elders. They are always angree and posses know-all atitude. Such

> persons expect that others shoud not only acceppt their views but

also

> respect thei rview with atmost humility.However neither they want

to

> understand or have any petience to give a thought over the views

of

> others.

> > Imay like to give my brief back ground. Iam an engineering

> graduate of 1960

> > batch from IIT -ROORKEE.iAM STUDING iNDIAN scripture since

> 1952-most of you may have not born at that time. I have studied

> Astrology since 1973 ,and was in close association with

> P.S.IYER,K.N.RAO,Dr. Sukdev Chaturvedi snd

> > Pt. Sanjay Rath.

> > What can be done as we are living in a era where there is no

> mutual respect.

> > Now I may like to draw some basic aspect of Ancient

scruptures:

> > 1. Most of the Purana's ,Mahabharta, BPHS ETC are available in

the

> narration form ,meaning dialogue mode. Never mind what experts

say, it

> is a rule that dialoges are always based on main TEXT.

> > VAYASA PREPARED MAIN TEXT OF mAHABHARTA AND bHAGAVAT MAHA

PURANA.

> SIMLARLY , after mahabharta war and upto the period of lord Buddha

> ,the schools started by the deciplles of Vayasa written core-basic

> text oe many Puranas and other scrptures. Subsiquently ,yhey were

> narrated to masses .

> > Ancient Vadic litrature is in very dificult language which is

not

> so easy to understand even for scolors. Vayasa created the

litrature

> in Anushtup Chhanda

> > which was easy to understand by masses.

> > When we say that Puranas etc are written in 200ndA.D. to say

upto

> 700A.D.,

> > THIS ONLY MEAN THAT THEY WERE RENARRATED AND REAUDITED.

> > If we assume that these were created in that era, I personaly

of

> the view that no one should take such an impression.

> > Try to find out who had contibuted main Text and when. It

is ,but

> natural with time ,during the process of narration over the several

> centuries , main text are bound ti be distorted..

> > I am teaching Astrology since 1991 and also giving lectures in

> SHRI LAL BAHADUR SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETH IN DELHI. ALL SCOLORS IN

> PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER FORM NOW AVAILABLE-

IS

> ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.

> > Kindly forget every thing ,and try to benifit from the

litrature

> now available.

> > Regards to all

> >

> > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > Dear Finn ji,

> > I apologize to goal ji. Thanks for correcting me. Yes, you are

> > right -

> > ==>

> > > Even more so when one is a moderator...

> > <==

> > Yes, I should limit my self, especially when there is a bigger

> > chance of misunderstanding my free expressions or statements. I

will

> > keep, and will try to abide by your advise on that. Sorry.

> >

> > Note 1: I never stated that Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong

to

> > the 6th century AD. I was just mentioning that there was no

mention

> > about this text in any other texts may be upto 6th century AD -

but

> > that does not mean that VJ is of 6th century AD, or that I have

a

> > better understanding of the period of VJ.

> > Note 2: As far as 'over smarting you' etc is concerned, I never

> > tried it and never will. Because I know well that every

individual is

> > unique - whether it be you or me. When there is no competition

> > involved, when one is trying to become himself better and better

> > every day, such things never even arise. I am trying to be me,

and

> > you you - how can there be some thing like 'manipulating', 'over

> > smarting' etc? I don't get the point - but sincerely think we

can

> > leave it there - because such things are irrelevant - and has

nothing

> > to do with astrology. I apologize to you for any thing you feel

> > offended in my previous mails - it was unintended.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > >

> > > I sent a strong message to you, and you have responded to some

of

> > it,

> > > but not to the most important issue. You obviously overlooked

the

> > > request I made, and didn't respond. So, if you don't mind, I

will

> > > repeat it:

> > >

> > > >>Please don't try to manipulate or outsmart me like that

again.<<

> > >

> > > Obviously you think you can continue in the same arrogant

way...

> > >

> > > It was very unpleasant to read your reply to the message from

Mr.

> > > Gopal Goel (below). He explained a line of thinking that he

believes

> > > to be right, and he most certainly didn't deserve the kind of

reply

> > > you gave him.

> > >

> > > You may consider Mr. Gopal Goel's line of thinking as being

weird or

> > > whatever. But what about your own line of thinking? You claim

that

> > > Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong to the 6th century AD,

which is

> > way

> > > out of line with the opinion of most of the leading religious

> > > scientists, historians etc. etc.

> > >

> > > There is no reason to crucify Mr. Gopal Goel for expressing his

> > > opinion, which is exactly what you did.

> > >

> > > How about showing a little kindness by meeting people where

they

> > are,

> > > and leave them a place to stand? If you disagree with

somebody, then

> > > you can ask them to clarify or you can simply state that you

> > disagree

> > > and give your arguments, or you can even ignore them. But it

should

> > be

> > > done in a nice and kind way.

> > >

> > > Even more so when one is a moderator...

> > >

> > > Very friendly,

> > > Finn Wandahl

> > >

> > > , " Sreenadh "

> > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Goal ji,

> > > > This is absurd!! I don't believe in such instantaneous

> > revelations

> > > > without study - and don't think that such issues can be

solved at

> > the

> > > > click of a mouse, or by typing 2 lines in flash of a second.

> > > > Know that many good scholars had send much time and efforts

for

> > > > such studies - the time frame and book you assume to know or

> > > > understand under the said period has baffled even the great

> > scholars -

> > > > and so good and sincere scholars always preferred to deal

with

> > this

> > > > subject only in small chunks only upto the point to which

they

> > felt

> > > > that they could keep their sincerity. Yes, it may not the

same

> > with

> > > > all - but, to be true - the whole things you tell below - i

feel

> > like

> > > > a joke. I have some simple questions -

> > > > * Are you speaking about archeological history, or is it

about

> > > > literary history? or about the imagination based on puranic

and

> > epic

> > > > characters and other characters of some other drama? or is

it a

> > > > cocktail of all these? i.e just hysterical

> > > > * Is it solely based on Sanskrit books alone - or also

depends

> > on

> > > > Brahmi and Pali books and evidences available? Do you

believe

> > that

> > > > except Sanskrit no other language had any literature?

> > > > * Most important - Are you a historian? i.e. Sincerely can

you

> > call

> > > > yourself so? If so are you aware of archeological methods,

> > ancient

> > > > scripts (like Brahmi, pali, kharoshti), and scientific

period

> > (time)

> > > > determination methods and their flaws?

> > > > * OR do you call yourself a literary historian? If so do you

> > mean

> > > > to say that you are searching or studying the history of

books?

> > or

> > > > history reflected in books? What could be the pitfalls

involved

> > in

> > > > such a study?

> > > >

> > > > So the point is, I would humbly say that we are not the

proper

> > > > persons to boldly say or suggest such classifications. Yes,

but

> > we

> > > > can express our usually irrelevant views or beliefs, without

much

> > > > basis - and the arguments can eat up many days. ) Due to

this

> > > > reason I would be staying away from this tread - and won't

even

> > like

> > > > to express my views on such chronology determination efforts

of

> > the

> > > > large chunks.

> > > > Note: No offence intended. So please don't take it so.

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > , Gopal Goel

> > > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Friends,

> > > > > When we talk about Lord RAMA and Krishna and Vedic era and

> > other

> > > > such

> > > > > matters of common interest to astrologers, we

should ,first

> > of

> > > > all decide the boundaries of these eras.

> > > > > I Suggest the following:

> > > > > 1 Vedic Era -This extends upto Mahabharata Period. Why I

am

> > > > suggesting this. Because Sage Vaysa compiled the vedas and

put

> > them

> > > > in chronological order.

> > > > > He is author of Bramha SUTRA and brought to light the

> > teaching of

> > > > lord Krishna to Mankind. Shri-mad-Bhagvat GITA HAS BECOME

GUIDING

> > > > FORCE FOR OVER 5000 YEARS.

> > > > > 2. POST VEDIC ERA- This extends up to the incarnation of

Lord

> > > > BUDDHA AND MAHAAVIRSWAMI.(Jain literature has a rich

tradition of

> > > > Astrological literature)

> > > > > 3. Early historic era - This includes the period of Great

> > > > Chankya, Maurya dynasty,Upto 2nd A.D.

> > > > > 4. Post Historic Period- When golden period of gupta

dynasty

> > > > starts, - a period

> > > > > when India touched new heights in literary field. This is

> > the

> > > > period when all famous manuscripts brought to life again.

This is

> > > > reason many Western

> > > > > thinkers (including some Indian friends )feel that PURANIC

> > > > LITERATURE

> > > > > was created in this era. This is the era of revival 0of

old

> > > > literature and not basically of original creation.

> > > > > .

> > > > > 5. 7TH A.D. till now- the era of modern History.

> > > > > If some consensus is formed on this time frame ,ON then

some

> > > > worth while

> > > > > discussions are possible.

> > > > > I await the comments of savants.

> > > > > Regards.

> > > > >

> > > > > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > > ==>

> > > > > > And criticizing me for to much historic attitude is

pointless

> > > > when

> > > > > > we are trying to get the chronology of Hindu astrology

right.

> > > > > <==

> > > > > Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is very

important -

> > and

> > > > > the discussion (no, please don't term it 'criticizing' –

even

> > the

> > > > > word `constructive criticism' may suit, but no, not this),

> > > > naturally

> > > > > may include everyone presenting their own perspectives. I

was

> > just

> > > > > doing that and was not forcing anything - we should abide

by

> > our

> > > > own

> > > > > perspective and then only the efforts will produce more

> > valuable

> > > > > results.

> > > > > ==>

> > > > > > I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

> > > > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic

period

> > at

> > > > all,

> > > > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > > > <==

> > > > > I totally agree to this statement.

> > > > > Love,

> > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Finn

Wandahl "

> > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some

people

> > > > > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

> > > > astrology

> > > > > as

> > > > > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that

> > there are

> > > > > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line

and

> > ideas

> > > > > about

> > > > > > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the

Sruti-

> > > > period

> > > > > or

> > > > > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it -

and

> > it

> > > > is

> > > > > not

> > > > > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts

that

> > we

> > > > > have

> > > > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic

period

> > at

> > > > all,

> > > > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Best regards,

> > > > > > Finn

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In

> > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and

mails

> > with

> > > > > > > substance.

> > > > > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which

results

> > in

> > > > > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been

> > observing

> > > > > this

> > > > > > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception

that

> > you

> > > > > are

> > > > > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of

revelation-

> > > > > shruti -

> > > > > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

> > > > > correctly,you

> > > > > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of

the

> > > > > current

> > > > > > > version.This can be true.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a

> > revealed

> > > > > shastra

> > > > > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

> > > > inquisitive-

> > > > > > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions

> > relating

> > > > to

> > > > > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

> > > > those.This

> > > > > is

> > > > > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas

etc

> > are

> > > > > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough

to

> > date

> > > > > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical

> > order.This

> > > > is

> > > > > my

> > > > > > > personal opinion.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-

> > civilization

> > > > > etc

> > > > > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period

> > within

> > > > > > > calendar domain.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and

characters

> > > > mentioned

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and

> > scrutinised

> > > > > under

> > > > > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I

will

> > > > express

> > > > > my

> > > > > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji

when

> > time

> > > > > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own

> > reasons.But i

> > > > > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is

not

> > > > > wise.Rama

> > > > > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates

the

> > > > > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing

the

> > > > mental

> > > > > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to

his

> > root -

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon

them as

> > a

> > > > > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

> > > > reflection

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > inlfuences.

> > > > > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is

> > possible

> > > > > that

> > > > > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter

the

> > > > > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i

am

> > > > > incompetent

> > > > > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for

me.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor

shout or

> > > > take

> > > > > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > > > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a

puzzle

> > for

> > > > our

> > > > > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

> > > > > pardon.Wishing

> > > > > > > all propserity.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > , " Finn

> > Wandahl "

> > > > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated

by

> > sage

> > > > > > > Parasara

> > > > > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly

refer

> > > > chapter

> > > > > 8

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

> > > > > information on

> > > > > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly

refer

> > Sloka's

> > > > > 74 to

> > > > > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was

in

> > 1st

> > > > > Charn of

> > > > > > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify,

but

> > I

> > > > seem

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading

> > this, I

> > > > > > > realized

> > > > > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember

> > correctly

> > > > I

> > > > > > > found

> > > > > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga

> > Jyotisha of

> > > > > > > Lagadha

> > > > > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal

> > equinox

> > > > and

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this

I

> > was

> > > > able

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as

> > being

> > > > > > > somewhare

> > > > > > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra

matches

> > with

> > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > > Puran.<<

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed

with

> > the

> > > > > same

> > > > > > > style

> > > > > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his

disciple

> > > > > Maitriya.

> > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written,

collected

> > or

> > > > > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some

> > Brahmins

> > > > > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed

many

> > times,

> > > > > this

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style

like

> > no

> > > > other

> > > > > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once

a

> > part of

> > > > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the

Narada

> > > > Purana.

> > > > > Then

> > > > > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma

Vidya

> > > > > (Nature of

> > > > > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as

in

> > Vishnu

> > > > > > > Purana,

> > > > > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and

in

> > Atharva-

> > > > > Veda

> > > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > well.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -

BHATOTPAL

> > had

> > > > > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand

on

> > > > > BPHS.This

> > > > > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years

back

> > in

> > > > > > > India.<<

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

> > > > Bhatophala

> > > > > > > never

> > > > > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet

written.

> > He

> > > > > could

> > > > > > > also

> > > > > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara

Hora

> > (also

> > > > > know as

> > > > > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long

> > time.

> > > > Even

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage

> > Parasara

> > > > and

> > > > > it

> > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he

came to

> > > > India

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old

textbook

> > like

> > > > > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I

think

> > > > this

> > > > > > > simply

> > > > > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was

lost

> > at

> > > > that

> > > > > > > time,

> > > > > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet

written.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > G.K.GOEL

> > > > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > > > INDIA

> > > > >

> > > > > Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required. Click

> > here.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> > G.K.GOEL

> > Ph: 09350311433

> > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > INDIA

> >

> > Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger.

Click here

> >

>

October 24, 2007

Dear Ash,

Thank you very much. No doubt the Krushna Astakavarga System is very

impressive and interesting. I wish I had the time to study that too,

but life is simply too short...:-)

However, the KAS-Ayanamsa seems to be nearly one degree less than

Lahiri, which would in some cases give serious problems for me in my

line of working, in such cases when a planet is close to zero degrees

in a sign or when dealing with the Navamsa position of a planet.

Do you actually use the KAS-Ayanamsa, or do you use KAS-system with

the Lahiri-Ayanamsa?

Very friendly,

Finn Wandahl

, " Ash " <kas wrote:

>

> Dear Finn,

>

> The Krushna Ayanamsa value given by Krushnaji is 24th Feb 366 AD. This

> value is part and parcel of the KAS system. This value is given by

> Krushnaji and as used by his Guruji and forefathers. There is a the

entire

> Nadi portion in KAS as well.

>

> It's interesting that you said that Nadi give 341 AD as the date of

overlap.

>

> Here is the link for your reference.

>

> http://krushna.sageasita.com/pdf/lesson06.pdf

>

> Cheers !!!

>

> Ash -> <http://www.ashtro.ca> http://www.ashtro.ca

>

> _____

>

> On Behalf Of Finn

Wandahl

> Wednesday October 24, 2007 11:24 AM

>

> Re: Puranic Astrology

-BPHS-Rama/Krishna

> comparison etc

>

> Dear Mr. Avtar Krishan Kaul,

>

> Actually nobody knows the version of Parasara Hora that was lost or

> non-existent at the time of both Bhatopala and Albiruni (9th & 11th

> century AD), so I could hardly be satisfied with that or the opposite,

> though I would VERY much like to study it...

>

> I have only got two versions of BPHS, 1) the sanskrit/english version

> by Girish Chand Sharma, which I personally prefer, and 2) the

> sanskrit/english version by R. Santhanan. Earlier I had a hindi

> version also, but I have long forgotten which edition it was.

>

> I always use the Ayanamsa of N.C. Lahiri, which is based on the idea

> of the fix-star Spica being opposite to zero degrees Aries. We each

> have our reasons for the coices we make. My reason is simply the fact

> that I have found it to be the most accurate Ayanamsa for

> Nadi-readings, which is a part of line of working, whether they are

> based on Nadiamsas or on Yogas like in Bhrigu Samhita etc. I have

> found it to work better with Lahiri-Ayanamsa. It is also my impression

> that this Ayanamsa or one very close it is used by many Nadi

> astrologers and Bhrigu Shastris.

>

> Back in 1980 I asked my mentor the late Hindu astrologer Manik Chand

> Jain about the subject of Ayanamsa. I wanted to know if there was any

> kind of ancient authority supporting the Chaitra & #8209;paksha or Lahiri

> Ayanamsa, which he was using.

>

> Manik then told me to read very carefully the chapters on Precession

> in the books written by dr. Bh. Satyanarayana Rao, which can be found

> at page 76 in his " Scientific Astrology " from 1936 and at page 60 in

> his book " The Nadi Rectification " from 1959. Obviously some of the

> Nadis are based on an Ayanamsa-value close to Lahiri and KP. Please

> see the following quotation from one of dr. Bh. Satyanarayana Rao's

books:

>

> " The Poona Conference of 1925 adopted the Ayanamsa of 22* 40' 35 "

> calculated by Prof. Apte by taking the amount of Makara (Capricorn)

> Sankranti according to Surya Siddhanta. In some issues of the

> Astrological Magazine, Bangalore, it was stated that the precessional

> difference in Kaka Bhusandar Nadi for 22nd March, 1926 was given as

> 22* degrees 44' minutes. Accordingly, the year 297 AD happens to be

> the one approximately for the coincidence of the two zodiacs;

> according to the Nadi it was 341 AD if the motion of 50.12 seconds

> only was used instead of the present observed 50.26 seconds a year. "

>

> I hope this answers you questions...

>

> Very friendly,

> Finn Wandahl

>

> > BPHS you are satisfied with: 1) The one that was non-existent even

> > at the time of Bhatotpala---9th century AD; (2) The one published by

> > Venkateshwar Press, Mumbai in 19th century -- about which even SB

> > Dikshit had to say that that was the most disgusting work as it was

> > a concoction? or (3) the one with English translation of R.

> > Santhanam,

>

> ancient_indian_

<%40>

> astrology , " Avtar Krishen Kaul "

> <jyotirved@> wrote:

> >

> > Shri Finn Wandahl ji,

> > Namaskar!

> >

> > <ALL SCOLORS IN PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER FORM

> > NOW AVAILABLE- IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.<<

> > > I totally agree on this.>

> >

> > There is a joke in Punjabi!

> > A miser was going to marry off his son in a rich family. The girl's

> > parents were expected in the miser's family for personal

> > negotiations. The miser, who had very few household items in his

> > house, advised his offspring, " Whenever I ask you to bring me

> > something in the presence of the parents of the girl, you must ask

> > me -- 'sir, which one do you want' -- whether the one from England

> > or USA or Australia " ?.

> > The next day when the girl's parents came, the miser asked his son

> > to bring him a towel. Promptly, the son asked, " Papa, which towel

> > do you want? The one from England or USA or Austraila " . The father

> > replied " Just bring anyone " .

> > Then again the father asked, " Son, pl. get me my cap " . The son

> > promptely asked, " Papa, which cap? The one from England or USA or

> > Australia " ? and so on. The girl's parents were obviously impressed!

> > Ultimately, the father asked, " Son, please ask your mother to

> > come " . And the boy promptely asked, " Papa, which one do yo want,

> > the one from England or USA or Australia " ?

> >

> > It is immaterial as to whether the miser solemnized his son's

> > marriage or not, but what is material is that when you express your

> > satisfaction with BPHS, the million dollar quetion is as to which

> > BPHS you are satisfied with: 1) The one that was non-existent even

> > at the time of Bhatotpala---9th century AD; (2) The one published by

> > Venkateshwar Press, Mumbai in 19th century -- about which even SB

> > Dikshit had to say that that was the most disgusting work as it was

> > a concoction? or (3) the one with English translation of R.

> > Santhanam, which advises us to follow Lahiri Ayanamsha for BPHS,

> > which means that even Parashara was waiting for " almighty " Lahiri to

> > be born so that his BPHS could prove correct? or (4) the one by

> > Sitaram Jha which says that he found Surya Sidhanta calculations

> > giving correct results for BPHS ---that is the edition R. Santhanam

> > translated into English!---or (5)the one by Ganesh Dutta Pathak or

> > (6)the one by C. G. Rajan or (7) the one with an English translation

> > published by a Connaught Place publisher of New Delhi and so on and

> > so forth?

> >

> > I may mention here that no version agress with the contents of any

> > otehr version! But then that is the beauty of " Vedic astrology " ---

> > since if every astrologer agreed with everybody else, there would

> > have be no variety! And as you know, variety is the spice of life,

> > whether that spice is ayanamshaas or predictions or the version of

> > BPHS!

> > With regards,

> > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> >

> > ancient_indian_

<%40>

> astrology , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > >

> > > >>ALL SCOLORS IN PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER

> > FORM

> > > NOW AVAILABLE- IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.<<

> > >

> > > I totally agree on this. I am only questioning the claim that

> > BPHS, in

> > > its present form, is ancient and belonging to the Vedic period. I

> > am

> > > not at all disputing its quality. So many important astrological

> > > elements from different schools has been carefully collected and

> > > preserved in BPHS, which makes it a unique and very useful

> > compendium

> > > of Hindu astrology.

> > >

> > > Very friendly,

> > > Finn Wandahl

> > >

> > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology , Gopal Goel

> > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Mr. Finn and my angary Friend Mr.Sreenadh,

> > > > I honestly do not mind what Mr. Sreenaddh expressed in his

> > mail.

> > > the present generation is forgettng how to behave with friends and

> > > elders. They are always angree and posses know-all atitude. Such

> > > persons expect that others shoud not only acceppt their views but

> > also

> > > respect thei rview with atmost humility.However neither they want

> > to

> > > understand or have any petience to give a thought over the views

> > of

> > > others.

> > > > Imay like to give my brief back ground. Iam an engineering

> > > graduate of 1960

> > > > batch from IIT -ROORKEE.iAM STUDING iNDIAN scripture since

> > > 1952-most of you may have not born at that time. I have studied

> > > Astrology since 1973 ,and was in close association with

> > > P.S.IYER,K.N.RAO,Dr. Sukdev Chaturvedi snd

> > > > Pt. Sanjay Rath.

> > > > What can be done as we are living in a era where there is no

> > > mutual respect.

> > > > Now I may like to draw some basic aspect of Ancient

> > scruptures:

> > > > 1. Most of the Purana's ,Mahabharta, BPHS ETC are available in

> > the

> > > narration form ,meaning dialogue mode. Never mind what experts

> > say, it

> > > is a rule that dialoges are always based on main TEXT.

> > > > VAYASA PREPARED MAIN TEXT OF mAHABHARTA AND bHAGAVAT MAHA

> > PURANA.

> > > SIMLARLY , after mahabharta war and upto the period of lord Buddha

> > > ,the schools started by the deciplles of Vayasa written core-basic

> > > text oe many Puranas and other scrptures. Subsiquently ,yhey were

> > > narrated to masses .

> > > > Ancient Vadic litrature is in very dificult language which is

> > not

> > > so easy to understand even for scolors. Vayasa created the

> > litrature

> > > in Anushtup Chhanda

> > > > which was easy to understand by masses.

> > > > When we say that Puranas etc are written in 200ndA.D. to say

> > upto

> > > 700A.D.,

> > > > THIS ONLY MEAN THAT THEY WERE RENARRATED AND REAUDITED.

> > > > If we assume that these were created in that era, I personaly

> > of

> > > the view that no one should take such an impression.

> > > > Try to find out who had contibuted main Text and when. It

> > is ,but

> > > natural with time ,during the process of narration over the several

> > > centuries , main text are bound ti be distorted..

> > > > I am teaching Astrology since 1991 and also giving lectures in

> > > SHRI LAL BAHADUR SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETH IN DELHI. ALL SCOLORS IN

> > > PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER FORM NOW AVAILABLE-

> > IS

> > > ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.

> > > > Kindly forget every thing ,and try to benifit from the

> > litrature

> > > now available.

> > > > Regards to all

> > > >

> > > > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > I apologize to goal ji. Thanks for correcting me. Yes, you are

> > > > right -

> > > > ==>

> > > > > Even more so when one is a moderator...

> > > > <==

> > > > Yes, I should limit my self, especially when there is a bigger

> > > > chance of misunderstanding my free expressions or statements. I

> > will

> > > > keep, and will try to abide by your advise on that. Sorry.

> > > >

> > > > Note 1: I never stated that Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong

> > to

> > > > the 6th century AD. I was just mentioning that there was no

> > mention

> > > > about this text in any other texts may be upto 6th century AD -

> > but

> > > > that does not mean that VJ is of 6th century AD, or that I have

> > a

> > > > better understanding of the period of VJ.

> > > > Note 2: As far as 'over smarting you' etc is concerned, I never

> > > > tried it and never will. Because I know well that every

> > individual is

> > > > unique - whether it be you or me. When there is no competition

> > > > involved, when one is trying to become himself better and better

> > > > every day, such things never even arise. I am trying to be me,

> > and

> > > > you you - how can there be some thing like 'manipulating', 'over

> > > > smarting' etc? I don't get the point - but sincerely think we

> > can

> > > > leave it there - because such things are irrelevant - and has

> > nothing

> > > > to do with astrology. I apologize to you for any thing you feel

> > > > offended in my previous mails - it was unintended.

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > > > >

> > > > > I sent a strong message to you, and you have responded to some

> > of

> > > > it,

> > > > > but not to the most important issue. You obviously overlooked

> > the

> > > > > request I made, and didn't respond. So, if you don't mind, I

> > will

> > > > > repeat it:

> > > > >

> > > > > >>Please don't try to manipulate or outsmart me like that

> > again.<<

> > > > >

> > > > > Obviously you think you can continue in the same arrogant

> > way...

> > > > >

> > > > > It was very unpleasant to read your reply to the message from

> > Mr.

> > > > > Gopal Goel (below). He explained a line of thinking that he

> > believes

> > > > > to be right, and he most certainly didn't deserve the kind of

> > reply

> > > > > you gave him.

> > > > >

> > > > > You may consider Mr. Gopal Goel's line of thinking as being

> > weird or

> > > > > whatever. But what about your own line of thinking? You claim

> > that

> > > > > Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong to the 6th century AD,

> > which is

> > > > way

> > > > > out of line with the opinion of most of the leading religious

> > > > > scientists, historians etc. etc.

> > > > >

> > > > > There is no reason to crucify Mr. Gopal Goel for expressing his

> > > > > opinion, which is exactly what you did.

> > > > >

> > > > > How about showing a little kindness by meeting people where

> > they

> > > > are,

> > > > > and leave them a place to stand? If you disagree with

> > somebody, then

> > > > > you can ask them to clarify or you can simply state that you

> > > > disagree

> > > > > and give your arguments, or you can even ignore them. But it

> > should

> > > > be

> > > > > done in a nice and kind way.

> > > > >

> > > > > Even more so when one is a moderator...

> > > > >

> > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > >

> > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology , " Sreenadh "

> > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Goal ji,

> > > > > > This is absurd!! I don't believe in such instantaneous

> > > > revelations

> > > > > > without study - and don't think that such issues can be

> > solved at

> > > > the

> > > > > > click of a mouse, or by typing 2 lines in flash of a second.

> > > > > > Know that many good scholars had send much time and efforts

> > for

> > > > > > such studies - the time frame and book you assume to know or

> > > > > > understand under the said period has baffled even the great

> > > > scholars -

> > > > > > and so good and sincere scholars always preferred to deal

> > with

> > > > this

> > > > > > subject only in small chunks only upto the point to which

> > they

> > > > felt

> > > > > > that they could keep their sincerity. Yes, it may not the

> > same

> > > > with

> > > > > > all - but, to be true - the whole things you tell below - i

> > feel

> > > > like

> > > > > > a joke. I have some simple questions -

> > > > > > * Are you speaking about archeological history, or is it

> > about

> > > > > > literary history? or about the imagination based on puranic

> > and

> > > > epic

> > > > > > characters and other characters of some other drama? or is

> > it a

> > > > > > cocktail of all these? i.e just hysterical

> > > > > > * Is it solely based on Sanskrit books alone - or also

> > depends

> > > > on

> > > > > > Brahmi and Pali books and evidences available? Do you

> > believe

> > > > that

> > > > > > except Sanskrit no other language had any literature?

> > > > > > * Most important - Are you a historian? i.e. Sincerely can

> > you

> > > > call

> > > > > > yourself so? If so are you aware of archeological methods,

> > > > ancient

> > > > > > scripts (like Brahmi, pali, kharoshti), and scientific

> > period

> > > > (time)

> > > > > > determination methods and their flaws?

> > > > > > * OR do you call yourself a literary historian? If so do you

> > > > mean

> > > > > > to say that you are searching or studying the history of

> > books?

> > > > or

> > > > > > history reflected in books? What could be the pitfalls

> > involved

> > > > in

> > > > > > such a study?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > So the point is, I would humbly say that we are not the

> > proper

> > > > > > persons to boldly say or suggest such classifications. Yes,

> > but

> > > > we

> > > > > > can express our usually irrelevant views or beliefs, without

> > much

> > > > > > basis - and the arguments can eat up many days. ) Due to

> > this

> > > > > > reason I would be staying away from this tread - and won't

> > even

> > > > like

> > > > > > to express my views on such chronology determination efforts

> > of

> > > > the

> > > > > > large chunks.

> > > > > > Note: No offence intended. So please don't take it so.

> > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology , Gopal Goel

> > > > > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Friends,

> > > > > > > When we talk about Lord RAMA and Krishna and Vedic era and

> > > > other

> > > > > > such

> > > > > > > matters of common interest to astrologers, we

> > should ,first

> > > > of

> > > > > > all decide the boundaries of these eras.

> > > > > > > I Suggest the following:

> > > > > > > 1 Vedic Era -This extends upto Mahabharata Period. Why I

> > am

> > > > > > suggesting this. Because Sage Vaysa compiled the vedas and

> > put

> > > > them

> > > > > > in chronological order.

> > > > > > > He is author of Bramha SUTRA and brought to light the

> > > > teaching of

> > > > > > lord Krishna to Mankind. Shri-mad-Bhagvat GITA HAS BECOME

> > GUIDING

> > > > > > FORCE FOR OVER 5000 YEARS.

> > > > > > > 2. POST VEDIC ERA- This extends up to the incarnation of

> > Lord

> > > > > > BUDDHA AND MAHAAVIRSWAMI.(Jain literature has a rich

> > tradition of

> > > > > > Astrological literature)

> > > > > > > 3. Early historic era - This includes the period of Great

> > > > > > Chankya, Maurya dynasty,Upto 2nd A.D.

> > > > > > > 4. Post Historic Period- When golden period of gupta

> > dynasty

> > > > > > starts, - a period

> > > > > > > when India touched new heights in literary field. This is

> > > > the

> > > > > > period when all famous manuscripts brought to life again.

> > This is

> > > > > > reason many Western

> > > > > > > thinkers (including some Indian friends )feel that PURANIC

> > > > > > LITERATURE

> > > > > > > was created in this era. This is the era of revival 0of

> > old

> > > > > > literature and not basically of original creation.

> > > > > > > .

> > > > > > > 5. 7TH A.D. till now- the era of modern History.

> > > > > > > If some consensus is formed on this time frame ,ON then

> > some

> > > > > > worth while

> > > > > > > discussions are possible.

> > > > > > > I await the comments of savants.

> > > > > > > Regards.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > And criticizing me for to much historic attitude is

> > pointless

> > > > > > when

> > > > > > > > we are trying to get the chronology of Hindu astrology

> > right.

> > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is very

> > important -

> > > > and

> > > > > > > the discussion (no, please don't term it 'criticizing' -

> > even

> > > > the

> > > > > > > word `constructive criticism' may suit, but no, not this),

> > > > > > naturally

> > > > > > > may include everyone presenting their own perspectives. I

> > was

> > > > just

> > > > > > > doing that and was not forcing anything - we should abide

> > by

> > > > our

> > > > > > own

> > > > > > > perspective and then only the efforts will produce more

> > > > valuable

> > > > > > > results.

> > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts that we have

> > > > > > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic

> > period

> > > > at

> > > > > > all,

> > > > > > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > I totally agree to this statement.

> > > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology , " Finn

> > Wandahl "

> > > > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are right that some

> > people

> > > > > > > > misunderstand my views regarding the chronology of Hindu

> > > > > > astrology

> > > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is to point out that

> > > > there are

> > > > > > > > something wrong with the generally accepted time-line

> > and

> > > > ideas

> > > > > > > about

> > > > > > > > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice astrology in the

> > Sruti-

> > > > > > period

> > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't exist. Far from it -

> > and

> > > > it

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the bulk of the texts

> > that

> > > > we

> > > > > > > have

> > > > > > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not originate in the Vedic

> > period

> > > > at

> > > > > > all,

> > > > > > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Best regards,

> > > > > > > > Finn

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In

> > > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected members

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > It is great to see the valauable participation and

> > mails

> > > > with

> > > > > > > > > substance.

> > > > > > > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding among many which

> > results

> > > > in

> > > > > > > > > consideration of your views as blashphemy.I have been

> > > > observing

> > > > > > > this

> > > > > > > > > during your previous discussions as well.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I feel individuals are somehow having a misconception

> > that

> > > > you

> > > > > > > are

> > > > > > > > > against the ''revelative(one manifesting out of

> > revelation-

> > > > > > > shruti -

> > > > > > > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha. If i understand you

> > > > > > > correctly,you

> > > > > > > > > are only disputing the completeness and originality of

> > the

> > > > > > > current

> > > > > > > > > version.This can be true.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I assume that you do acknowledge that,Jyotisha is a

> > > > revealed

> > > > > > > shastra

> > > > > > > > > with divinity and it manifested out from the minds of

> > > > > > inquisitive-

> > > > > > > > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Eventhough i have observed many historic discussions

> > > > relating

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of confidence to attempt

> > > > > > those.This

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > prehaps because of the cyclic nature of Time.The Yugas

> > etc

> > > > are

> > > > > > > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it is not wise enough

> > to

> > > > date

> > > > > > > > > mythical events and charactres vis-a-vis historical

> > > > order.This

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > personal opinion.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > On the other hand one can date the period of vedic-

> > > > civilization

> > > > > > > etc

> > > > > > > > > which can point to a certain ''specific'' time period

> > > > within

> > > > > > > > > calendar domain.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Even the mythological Yagyas(symbolical) and

> > characters

> > > > > > mentioned

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to be studied and

> > > > scrutinised

> > > > > > > under

> > > > > > > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my personal opinion.I

> > will

> > > > > > express

> > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > opinion regarding Oshos views quoted by Sreenadh ji

> > when

> > > > time

> > > > > > > > > permits.Osho is well learned and may have his own

> > > > reasons.But i

> > > > > > > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on a relative scale is

> > not

> > > > > > > wise.Rama

> > > > > > > > > is representing the Soul while Krishna demonstrates

> > the

> > > > > > > > > manifestation of the desire from the soul.By reviewing

> > the

> > > > > > mental

> > > > > > > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is taking Arjuna back to

> > his

> > > > root -

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his desires and looks upon

> > them as

> > > > a

> > > > > > > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only able to see their own

> > > > > > reflection

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > inlfuences.

> > > > > > > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy not be wise.It is

> > > > possible

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > some ''intelligent'' souls might have tried to alter

> > the

> > > > > > > > > mythological representations to suit their case.But i

> > am

> > > > > > > incompetent

> > > > > > > > > to comment on those and is of secondary importance for

> > me.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Also there is no need for anyone to cry or worryor

> > shout or

> > > > > > take

> > > > > > > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad is conveying a mythical

> > > > > > > > > representation through the symbolic horse.It is a

> > puzzle

> > > > for

> > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > inner pursuits is my humble undersdtanding.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the views of any ,kindly

> > > > > > > pardon.Wishing

> > > > > > > > > all propserity.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology , " Finn

> > > > Wandahl "

> > > > > > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated

> > by

> > > > sage

> > > > > > > > > Parasara

> > > > > > > > > > to his disciple Matrayee about in 2000B.C. Kindly

> > refer

> > > > > > chapter

> > > > > > > 8

> > > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana. this chapter will give

> > > > > > > information on

> > > > > > > > > > Sidreal and tropical Zodiac.Kindly particularly

> > refer

> > > > Sloka's

> > > > > > > 74 to

> > > > > > > > > > 81. these sloka clearly indicate that V.E.POINT was

> > in

> > > > 1st

> > > > > > > Charn of

> > > > > > > > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Not having my books with me I am not able to verify,

> > but

> > > > I

> > > > > > seem

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > remember when researching Vishnu Puranas and reading

> > > > this, I

> > > > > > > > > realized

> > > > > > > > > > that I had seen it somewhere before. If I remember

> > > > correctly

> > > > > > I

> > > > > > > > > found

> > > > > > > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was simply quoting Vedanga

> > > > Jyotisha of

> > > > > > > > > Lagadha

> > > > > > > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra positions of the vernal

> > > > equinox

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga Jyotisha and from this

> > I

> > > > was

> > > > > > able

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > interpolate the aproximate time-period of Lagadha as

> > > > being

> > > > > > > > > somewhare

> > > > > > > > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >>The language of Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra

> > matches

> > > > with

> > > > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > > > > Puran.<<

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > This is very correct and they are also both framed

> > with

> > > > the

> > > > > > > same

> > > > > > > > > style

> > > > > > > > > > of conversation between Sage Parasara and his

> > disciple

> > > > > > > Maitriya.

> > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > could in my opinion indicate they were written,

> > collected

> > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > re-written by the same people, probably someone some

> > > > Brahmins

> > > > > > > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu Purana has been changed

> > many

> > > > times,

> > > > > > > this

> > > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > probably why it is so perfect in its Puranic style

> > like

> > > > no

> > > > > > other

> > > > > > > > > > Purana. I believe it is possible that BPHS was once

> > a

> > > > part of

> > > > > > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > > > > Purana, just like Narada Samhita is part of the

> > Narada

> > > > > > Purana.

> > > > > > > Then

> > > > > > > > > > perhaps later on someone removed it.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Also you can find small hints in BPHS about Brahma

> > Vidya

> > > > > > > (Nature of

> > > > > > > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly the same Brahma Vidya as

> > in

> > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > > > Purana,

> > > > > > > > > > which can again be found in Maitriya Upanishad and

> > in

> > > > Atharva-

> > > > > > > Veda

> > > > > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > > > well.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >>The famous commentator of Varha Mihri works -

> > BHATOTPAL

> > > > had

> > > > > > > > > > acknowledged in his works that he could not lay hand

> > on

> > > > > > > BPHS.This

> > > > > > > > > > shows that Bphs was known and eamous even 1500 years

> > back

> > > > in

> > > > > > > > > India.<<

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Please, your deduction is not correct. The fact that

> > > > > > Bhatophala

> > > > > > > > > never

> > > > > > > > > > saw BPHS is more likely because it was not yet

> > written.

> > > > He

> > > > > > > could

> > > > > > > > > also

> > > > > > > > > > be talking about the earlier version of Parasara

> > Hora

> > > > (also

> > > > > > > know as

> > > > > > > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has been lost for a very long

> > > > time.

> > > > > > Even

> > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > earlier version was not written by the Vedic sage

> > > > Parasara

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > it

> > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > not written in the Vedic period.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also never saw BPHS when he

> > came to

> > > > > > India

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > year 1000 AD, but he mentioned all the other old

> > textbook

> > > > like

> > > > > > > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc. in his book " India " . I

> > think

> > > > > > this

> > > > > > > > > simply

> > > > > > > > > > indicate that the old version of Parasara Hora was

> > lost

> > > > at

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > time,

> > > > > > > > > > and the new one that we know today was not yet

> > written.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > > > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > G.K.GOEL

> > > > > > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > > > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > > > > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > > > > > INDIA

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required. Click

> > > > here.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > G.K.GOEL

> > > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > > INDIA

> > > >

> > > > Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger.

> > Click here

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

October 25, 2007

Dear Finn,

My reply below.

Cheers !!!

Ash -> http://www.ashtro.ca

On Behalf Of Finn Wandahl

Wednesday October 24, 2007

12:58 PM

Subject:

Re: Puranic Astrology -BPHS-Rama/Krishna comparison

etc

Dear Ash,

Thank you very much. No doubt the Krushna Astakavarga System is very

impressive and interesting. I wish I had the time to study that too,

but life is simply too short...:-)

Ash: Yes, however

should you ever in this life time would like to explore, you have the website

and the .

However, the KAS-Ayanamsa seems to be nearly one degree less than

Lahiri, which would in some cases give serious problems for me in my

line of working, in such cases when a planet is close to zero degrees

in a sign or when dealing with the Navamsa position of a planet.

Ash : Yes, KAY (Krushna’s

ayanamsa) is about 54 mins less than Lahiri and it would most definitely change

the Nadis and the Nadi power of planets and Bhav Chalit. And that would change

the Ashtakavarga power of planets in D charts etc etc as well.

Do you actually use the KAS-Ayanamsa, or do you use KAS-system with

the Lahiri-Ayanamsa?

Ash : I only use KAS

system and Krushna’s ayanamsa now. I am very happy with my

findings.

Actually Krushnaji had asked me to provide for a feature to have

multiple Ayanamsa so that those who really want to study the accuracy of

Ayanamsa can change the ayanamsa values and get the power of planets in

KAS. The power of planets will be fixed so things like death or marriage

etc can be easily verified as the laws given are fixed and the worksheet

derived is fixed so that base for testing of ayanamsa becomes fixed. So

once the base and laws are fixed for testing, it will be more meaningful. In

future once I get some more spare time, I shall try to incorporate this feature

so such things can be tested by true researchers for ayanamsa.

The KAS program, can be downloaded from

http://krushna.sageasita.com/kas_worksheets.htm

or one can try this link

http://krushna.sageasita.com/KAS2006v3.2.1.zip

Very friendly,

Finn Wandahl

,

" Ash " <kas wrote:

>

> Dear Finn,

>

> The Krushna Ayanamsa value given by Krushnaji is 24th Feb 366 AD. This

> value is part and parcel of the KAS system. This value is given by

> Krushnaji and as used by his Guruji and forefathers. There is a the

entire

> Nadi portion in KAS as well.

>

> It's interesting that you said that Nadi give 341 AD as the date of

overlap.

>

> Here is the link for your reference.

>

> http://krushna.sageasita.com/pdf/lesson06.pdf

>

> Cheers !!!

>

> Ash -> <http://www.ashtro.ca>

http://www.ashtro.ca

>

> _____

>

On Behalf Of Finn

Wandahl

> Wednesday October 24, 2007 11:24 AM

>

> Re: Puranic Astrology

-BPHS-Rama/Krishna

> comparison etc

>

> Dear Mr. Avtar Krishan Kaul,

>

> Actually nobody knows the version of Parasara Hora that was lost or

> non-existent at the time of both Bhatopala and Albiruni (9th & 11th

> century AD), so I could hardly be satisfied with that or the opposite,

> though I would VERY much like to study it...

>

> I have only got two versions of BPHS, 1) the sanskrit/english version

> by Girish Chand Sharma, which I personally prefer, and 2) the

> sanskrit/english version by R. Santhanan. Earlier I had a hindi

> version also, but I have long forgotten which edition it was.

>

> I always use the Ayanamsa of N.C. Lahiri, which is based on the idea

> of the fix-star Spica being opposite to zero degrees Aries. We each

> have our reasons for the coices we make. My reason is simply the fact

> that I have found it to be the most accurate Ayanamsa for

> Nadi-readings, which is a part of line of working, whether they are

> based on Nadiamsas or on Yogas like in Bhrigu Samhita etc. I have

> found it to work better with Lahiri-Ayanamsa. It is also my impression

> that this Ayanamsa or one very close it is used by many Nadi

> astrologers and Bhrigu Shastris.

>

> Back in 1980 I asked my mentor the late Hindu astrologer Manik Chand

> Jain about the subject of Ayanamsa. I wanted to know if there was any

> kind of ancient authority supporting the Chaitra & #8209;paksha or

Lahiri

> Ayanamsa, which he was using.

>

> Manik then told me to read very carefully the chapters on Precession

> in the books written by dr. Bh. Satyanarayana Rao, which can be found

> at page 76 in his " Scientific Astrology " from 1936 and at page

60 in

> his book " The Nadi Rectification " from 1959. Obviously some of

the

> Nadis are based on an Ayanamsa-value close to Lahiri and KP. Please

> see the following quotation from one of dr. Bh. Satyanarayana Rao's

books:

>

> " The Poona Conference of 1925 adopted the Ayanamsa of 22* 40'

35 "

> calculated by Prof. Apte by taking the amount of Makara (Capricorn)

> Sankranti according to Surya Siddhanta. In some issues of the

> Astrological Magazine, Bangalore,

it was stated that the precessional

> difference in Kaka Bhusandar Nadi for 22nd March, 1926 was given as

> 22* degrees 44' minutes. Accordingly, the year 297 AD happens to be

> the one approximately for the coincidence of the two zodiacs;

> according to the Nadi it was 341 AD if the motion of 50.12 seconds

> only was used instead of the present observed 50.26 seconds a year. "

>

> I hope this answers you questions...

>

> Very friendly,

> Finn Wandahl

>

> > BPHS you are satisfied with: 1) The one that was non-existent even

> > at the time of Bhatotpala---9th century AD; (2) The one

published by

> > Venkateshwar Press, Mumbai in 19th century -- about which even SB

> > Dikshit had to say that that was the most disgusting work as it was

> > a concoction? or (3) the one with English translation of R.

> > Santhanam,

>

> ancient_indian_

<%40>

> astrology ,

" Avtar Krishen Kaul "

> <jyotirved@> wrote:

> >

> > Shri Finn Wandahl ji,

> > Namaskar!

> >

> > <ALL SCOLORS IN PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER

FORM

> > NOW AVAILABLE- IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.<<

> > > I totally agree on this.>

> >

> > There is a joke in Punjabi!

> > A miser was going to marry off his son in a rich family. The girl's

> > parents were expected in the miser's family for personal

> > negotiations. The miser, who had very few household items in his

> > house, advised his offspring, " Whenever I ask you to bring me

> > something in the presence of the parents of the girl, you must ask

> > me -- 'sir, which one do you want' -- whether the one from England

> > or USA or Australia " ?.

> > The next day when the girl's parents came, the miser asked his son

> > to bring him a towel. Promptly, the son asked, " Papa, which

towel

> > do you want? The one from England

or USA

or Austraila " . The father

> > replied " Just bring anyone " .

> > Then again the father asked, " Son, pl. get me my cap " . The

son

> > promptely asked, " Papa, which cap? The one from England or USA

or

> > Australia " ?

and so on. The girl's parents were obviously impressed!

> > Ultimately, the father asked, " Son, please ask your mother to

> > come " . And the boy promptely asked, " Papa, which one do yo

want,

> > the one from England

or USA or Australia " ?

> >

> > It is immaterial as to whether the miser solemnized his son's

> > marriage or not, but what is material is that when you express your

> > satisfaction with BPHS, the million dollar quetion is as to which

> > BPHS you are satisfied with: 1) The one that was non-existent even

> > at the time of Bhatotpala---9th century AD; (2) The one

published by

> > Venkateshwar Press, Mumbai in 19th century -- about which even SB

> > Dikshit had to say that that was the most disgusting work as it was

> > a concoction? or (3) the one with English translation of R.

> > Santhanam, which advises us to follow Lahiri Ayanamsha for BPHS,

> > which means that even Parashara was waiting for " almighty "

Lahiri to

> > be born so that his BPHS could prove correct? or (4) the one by

> > Sitaram Jha which says that he found Surya Sidhanta calculations

> > giving correct results for BPHS ---that is the edition R. Santhanam

> > translated into English!---or (5)the one by Ganesh Dutta Pathak or

> > (6)the one by C. G. Rajan or (7) the one with an English translation

> > published by a Connaught Place publisher of New Delhi and so on and

> > so forth?

> >

> > I may mention here that no version agress with the contents of any

> > otehr version! But then that is the beauty of " Vedic

astrology " ---

> > since if every astrologer agreed with everybody else, there would

> > have be no variety! And as you know, variety is the spice of life,

> > whether that spice is ayanamshaas or predictions or the version of

> > BPHS!

> > With regards,

> > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> >

> > ancient_indian_

<%40>

> astrology ,

" Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > >

> > > >>ALL SCOLORS IN PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN

WHATEVER

> > FORM

> > > NOW AVAILABLE- IS ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON

ASTROLOGY.<<

> > >

> > > I totally agree on this. I am only questioning the claim that

> > BPHS, in

> > > its present form, is ancient and belonging to the Vedic period.

I

> > am

> > > not at all disputing its quality. So many important astrological

> > > elements from different schools has been carefully collected and

> > > preserved in BPHS, which makes it a unique and very useful

> > compendium

> > > of Hindu astrology.

> > >

> > > Very friendly,

> > > Finn Wandahl

> > >

> > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology ,

Gopal Goel

> > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Mr. Finn and my angary Friend Mr.Sreenadh,

> > > > I honestly do not mind what Mr. Sreenaddh expressed in his

> > mail.

> > > the present generation is forgettng how to behave with friends

and

> > > elders. They are always angree and posses know-all atitude. Such

> > > persons expect that others shoud not only acceppt their views

but

> > also

> > > respect thei rview with atmost humility.However neither they

want

> > to

> > > understand or have any petience to give a thought over the views

> > of

> > > others.

> > > > Imay like to give my brief back ground. Iam an engineering

> > > graduate of 1960

> > > > batch from IIT -ROORKEE.iAM STUDING iNDIAN scripture since

> > > 1952-most of you may have not born at that time. I have studied

> > > Astrology since 1973 ,and was in close association with

> > > P.S.IYER,K.N.RAO,Dr. Sukdev Chaturvedi snd

> > > > Pt. Sanjay Rath.

> > > > What can be done as we are living in a era where there is

no

> > > mutual respect.

> > > > Now I may like to draw some basic aspect of Ancient

> > scruptures:

> > > > 1. Most of the Purana's ,Mahabharta, BPHS ETC are available

in

> > the

> > > narration form ,meaning dialogue mode. Never mind what experts

> > say, it

> > > is a rule that dialoges are always based on main TEXT.

> > > > VAYASA PREPARED MAIN TEXT OF mAHABHARTA AND bHAGAVAT MAHA

> > PURANA.

> > > SIMLARLY , after mahabharta war and upto the period of lord

Buddha

> > > ,the schools started by the deciplles of Vayasa written

core-basic

> > > text oe many Puranas and other scrptures. Subsiquently ,yhey

were

> > > narrated to masses .

> > > > Ancient Vadic litrature is in very dificult language which

is

> > not

> > > so easy to understand even for scolors. Vayasa created the

> > litrature

> > > in Anushtup Chhanda

> > > > which was easy to understand by masses.

> > > > When we say that Puranas etc are written in 200ndA.D. to

say

> > upto

> > > 700A.D.,

> > > > THIS ONLY MEAN THAT THEY WERE RENARRATED AND REAUDITED.

> > > > If we assume that these were created in that era, I

personaly

> > of

> > > the view that no one should take such an impression.

> > > > Try to find out who had contibuted main Text and when. It

> > is ,but

> > > natural with time ,during the process of narration over the

several

> > > centuries , main text are bound ti be distorted..

> > > > I am teaching Astrology since 1991 and also giving lectures

in

> > > SHRI LAL BAHADUR SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETH IN DELHI. ALL SCOLORS IN

> > > PIDYAPEETH IS OF THE OPINION BPHS -IN WHATEVER FORM NOW

AVAILABLE-

> > IS

> > > ONE OF THE UNIQUE TRETISE ON ASTROLOGY.

> > > > Kindly forget every thing ,and try to benifit from the

> > litrature

> > > now available.

> > > > Regards to all

> > > >

> > > > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > I apologize to goal ji. Thanks for correcting me. Yes, you

are

> > > > right -

> > > > ==>

> > > > > Even more so when one is a moderator...

> > > > <==

> > > > Yes, I should limit my self, especially when there is a

bigger

> > > > chance of misunderstanding my free expressions or

statements. I

> > will

> > > > keep, and will try to abide by your advise on that. Sorry.

> > > >

> > > > Note 1: I never stated that Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada

belong

> > to

> > > > the 6th century AD. I was just mentioning that there was no

> > mention

> > > > about this text in any other texts may be upto 6th century

AD -

> > but

> > > > that does not mean that VJ is of 6th century AD, or that I

have

> > a

> > > > better understanding of the period of VJ.

> > > > Note 2: As far as 'over smarting you' etc is concerned, I

never

> > > > tried it and never will. Because I know well that every

> > individual is

> > > > unique - whether it be you or me. When there is no

competition

> > > > involved, when one is trying to become himself better and

better

> > > > every day, such things never even arise. I am trying to be

me,

> > and

> > > > you you - how can there be some thing like 'manipulating',

'over

> > > > smarting' etc? I don't get the point - but sincerely think

we

> > can

> > > > leave it there - because such things are irrelevant - and

has

> > nothing

> > > > to do with astrology. I apologize to you for any thing you

feel

> > > > offended in my previous mails - it was unintended.

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology ,

" Finn Wandahl "

> > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > > > >

> > > > > I sent a strong message to you, and you have responded

to some

> > of

> > > > it,

> > > > > but not to the most important issue. You obviously

overlooked

> > the

> > > > > request I made, and didn't respond. So, if you don't

mind, I

> > will

> > > > > repeat it:

> > > > >

> > > > > >>Please don't try to manipulate or outsmart me

like that

> > again.<<

> > > > >

> > > > > Obviously you think you can continue in the same

arrogant

> > way...

> > > > >

> > > > > It was very unpleasant to read your reply to the

message from

> > Mr.

> > > > > Gopal Goel (below). He explained a line of thinking

that he

> > believes

> > > > > to be right, and he most certainly didn't deserve the

kind of

> > reply

> > > > > you gave him.

> > > > >

> > > > > You may consider Mr. Gopal Goel's line of thinking as

being

> > weird or

> > > > > whatever. But what about your own line of thinking?

You claim

> > that

> > > > > Vedanga Jyotisha of Laghada belong to the 6th century

AD,

> > which is

> > > > way

> > > > > out of line with the opinion of most of the leading

religious

> > > > > scientists, historians etc. etc.

> > > > >

> > > > > There is no reason to crucify Mr. Gopal Goel for

expressing his

> > > > > opinion, which is exactly what you did.

> > > > >

> > > > > How about showing a little kindness by meeting people

where

> > they

> > > > are,

> > > > > and leave them a place to stand? If you disagree with

> > somebody, then

> > > > > you can ask them to clarify or you can simply state

that you

> > > > disagree

> > > > > and give your arguments, or you can even ignore them.

But it

> > should

> > > > be

> > > > > done in a nice and kind way.

> > > > >

> > > > > Even more so when one is a moderator...

> > > > >

> > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > >

> > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology ,

" Sreenadh "

> > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Goal ji,

> > > > > > This is absurd!! I don't believe in such

instantaneous

> > > > revelations

> > > > > > without study - and don't think that such issues

can be

> > solved at

> > > > the

> > > > > > click of a mouse, or by typing 2 lines in flash

of a second.

> > > > > > Know that many good scholars had send much time

and efforts

> > for

> > > > > > such studies - the time frame and book you assume

to know or

> > > > > > understand under the said period has baffled even

the great

> > > > scholars -

> > > > > > and so good and sincere scholars always preferred

to deal

> > with

> > > > this

> > > > > > subject only in small chunks only upto the point

to which

> > they

> > > > felt

> > > > > > that they could keep their sincerity. Yes, it may

not the

> > same

> > > > with

> > > > > > all - but, to be true - the whole things you tell

below - i

> > feel

> > > > like

> > > > > > a joke. I have some simple questions -

> > > > > > * Are you speaking about archeological history,

or is it

> > about

> > > > > > literary history? or about the imagination based

on puranic

> > and

> > > > epic

> > > > > > characters and other characters of some other

drama? or is

> > it a

> > > > > > cocktail of all these? i.e just hysterical

> > > > > > * Is it solely based on Sanskrit books alone - or

also

> > depends

> > > > on

> > > > > > Brahmi and Pali books and evidences available? Do

you

> > believe

> > > > that

> > > > > > except Sanskrit no other language had any

literature?

> > > > > > * Most important - Are you a historian? i.e.

Sincerely can

> > you

> > > > call

> > > > > > yourself so? If so are you aware of archeological

methods,

> > > > ancient

> > > > > > scripts (like Brahmi, pali, kharoshti), and

scientific

> > period

> > > > (time)

> > > > > > determination methods and their flaws?

> > > > > > * OR do you call yourself a literary historian?

If so do you

> > > > mean

> > > > > > to say that you are searching or studying the

history of

> > books?

> > > > or

> > > > > > history reflected in books? What could be the

pitfalls

> > involved

> > > > in

> > > > > > such a study?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > So the point is, I would humbly say that we are

not the

> > proper

> > > > > > persons to boldly say or suggest such

classifications. Yes,

> > but

> > > > we

> > > > > > can express our usually irrelevant views or

beliefs, without

> > much

> > > > > > basis - and the arguments can eat up many days.

) Due to

> > this

> > > > > > reason I would be staying away from this tread -

and won't

> > even

> > > > like

> > > > > > to express my views on such chronology

determination efforts

> > of

> > > > the

> > > > > > large chunks.

> > > > > > Note: No offence intended. So please don't take

it so.

> > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology ,

Gopal Goel

> > > > > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Friends,

> > > > > > > When we talk about Lord RAMA and Krishna and Vedic era and

> > > > other

> > > > > > such

> > > > > > > matters of common interest to astrologers,

we

> > should ,first

> > > > of

> > > > > > all decide the boundaries of these eras.

> > > > > > > I Suggest the following:

> > > > > > > 1 Vedic Era -This extends upto Mahabharata

Period. Why I

> > am

> > > > > > suggesting this. Because Sage Vaysa compiled the

vedas and

> > put

> > > > them

> > > > > > in chronological order.

> > > > > > > He is author of Bramha SUTRA and brought to

light the

> > > > teaching of

> > > > > > lord Krishna to

Mankind. Shri-mad-Bhagvat GITA HAS BECOME

> > GUIDING

> > > > > > FORCE FOR OVER 5000 YEARS.

> > > > > > > 2. POST VEDIC ERA- This extends up to the

incarnation of

> > Lord

> > > > > > BUDDHA AND MAHAAVIRSWAMI.(Jain literature has

a rich

> > tradition of

> > > > > > Astrological literature)

> > > > > > > 3. Early historic era - This includes the

period of Great

> > > > > > Chankya, Maurya dynasty,Upto 2nd A.D.

> > > > > > > 4. Post Historic Period- When golden period

of gupta

> > dynasty

> > > > > > starts, - a period

> > > > > > > when India touched new heights in

literary field. This is

> > > > the

> > > > > > period when all famous manuscripts brought to

life again.

> > This is

> > > > > > reason many Western

> > > > > > > thinkers (including some Indian friends

)feel that PURANIC

> > > > > > LITERATURE

> > > > > > > was created in this era. This is the era of

revival 0of

> > old

> > > > > > literature and not basically of original

creation.

> > > > > > > .

> > > > > > > 5. 7TH A.D. till now- the era of modern

History.

> > > > > > > If some consensus is formed on this time

frame ,ON then

> > some

> > > > > > worth while

> > > > > > > discussions are possible.

> > > > > > > I await the comments of savants.

> > > > > > > Regards.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > And criticizing me for to much historic

attitude is

> > pointless

> > > > > > when

> > > > > > > > we are trying to get the chronology of

Hindu astrology

> > right.

> > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > Getting the chronology of Hindu astrology is

very

> > important -

> > > > and

> > > > > > > the discussion (no, please don't term it

'criticizing' -

> > even

> > > > the

> > > > > > > word `constructive criticism' may suit, but

no, not this),

> > > > > > naturally

> > > > > > > may include everyone presenting their own

perspectives. I

> > was

> > > > just

> > > > > > > doing that and was not forcing anything - we

should abide

> > by

> > > > our

> > > > > > own

> > > > > > > perspective and then only the efforts will

produce more

> > > > valuable

> > > > > > > results.

> > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > I am only arguing that the bulk of the

texts that we have

> > > > > > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not

originate in the Vedic

> > period

> > > > at

> > > > > > all,

> > > > > > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > I totally agree to this statement.

> > > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology ,

" Finn

> > Wandahl "

> > > > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Good to see you again, Pradeep! You are

right that some

> > people

> > > > > > > > misunderstand my views regarding the

chronology of Hindu

> > > > > > astrology

> > > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > blasphemy, when in fact my only aim is

to point out that

> > > > there are

> > > > > > > > something wrong with the generally

accepted time-line

> > and

> > > > ideas

> > > > > > > about

> > > > > > > > the origin of Hindu astrology.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I am NOT saying they didn't practice

astrology in the

> > Sruti-

> > > > > > period

> > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > that the Vedic sage Parasara didn't

exist. Far from it -

> > and

> > > > it

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > my opinion. I am only arguing that the

bulk of the texts

> > that

> > > > we

> > > > > > > have

> > > > > > > > today, like BPHS etc., did not

originate in the Vedic

> > period

> > > > at

> > > > > > all,

> > > > > > > > but was written much later than that.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Best regards,

> > > > > > > > Finn

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology ,

" vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Mr.Wandahl and respected

members

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > It is great to see the valauable

participation and

> > mails

> > > > with

> > > > > > > > > substance.

> > > > > > > > > I feel there is a misunderstanding

among many which

> > results

> > > > in

> > > > > > > > > consideration of your views as

blashphemy.I have been

> > > > observing

> > > > > > > this

> > > > > > > > > during your previous discussions

as well.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I feel individuals are somehow

having a misconception

> > that

> > > > you

> > > > > > > are

> > > > > > > > > against the ''revelative(one

manifesting out of

> > revelation-

> > > > > > > shruti -

> > > > > > > > > the heard one) origin of Jyotisha.

If i understand you

> > > > > > > correctly,you

> > > > > > > > > are only disputing the

completeness and originality of

> > the

> > > > > > > current

> > > > > > > > > version.This can be true.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I assume that you do acknowledge

that,Jyotisha is a

> > > > revealed

> > > > > > > shastra

> > > > > > > > > with divinity and it manifested

out from the minds of

> > > > > > inquisitive-

> > > > > > > > > Truthseeking-souls.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Eventhough i have observed many

historic discussions

> > > > relating

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > Jyotisha,i always had a lack of

confidence to attempt

> > > > > > those.This

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > prehaps because of the cyclic

nature of Time.The Yugas

> > etc

> > > > are

> > > > > > > > > repetitive in nature,and i feel it

is not wise enough

> > to

> > > > date

> > > > > > > > > mythical events and charactres

vis-a-vis historical

> > > > order.This

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > personal opinion.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > On the other hand one can date the

period of vedic-

> > > > civilization

> > > > > > > etc

> > > > > > > > > which can point to a certain

''specific'' time period

> > > > within

> > > > > > > > > calendar domain.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Even the mythological

Yagyas(symbolical) and

> > characters

> > > > > > mentioned

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > Ramayana and Bharatha etc needs to

be studied and

> > > > scrutinised

> > > > > > > under

> > > > > > > > > the light of sookshma budhi is my

personal opinion.I

> > will

> > > > > > express

> > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > opinion regarding Oshos views

quoted by Sreenadh ji

> > when

> > > > time

> > > > > > > > > permits.Osho is well learned and

may have his own

> > > > reasons.But i

> > > > > > > > > feel comparing Rama and Krishna on

a relative scale is

> > not

> > > > > > > wise.Rama

> > > > > > > > > is representing the Soul while

Krishna demonstrates

> > the

> > > > > > > > > manifestation of the desire from

the soul.By reviewing

> > the

> > > > > > mental

> > > > > > > > > situation of Arjuna,Krishna is

taking Arjuna back to

> > his

> > > > root -

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > soul.Krishna is aware of his

desires and looks upon

> > them as

> > > > a

> > > > > > > > > Sakshi,while Jeevatmas are only

able to see their own

> > > > > > reflection

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > inlfuences.

> > > > > > > > > Thus weighing Rama and Krishna amy

not be wise.It is

> > > > possible

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > some ''intelligent'' souls

might have tried to alter

> > the

> > > > > > > > > mythological representations to

suit their case.But i

> > am

> > > > > > > incompetent

> > > > > > > > > to comment on those and is of

secondary importance for

> > me.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Also there is no need for anyone

to cry or worryor

> > shout or

> > > > > > take

> > > > > > > > > actions.Brihadaranyakopanishad

is conveying a mythical

> > > > > > > > > representation through the symbolic

horse.It is a

> > puzzle

> > > > for

> > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > inner pursuits is my humble

undersdtanding.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > If i have inadvertently hurt the

views of any ,kindly

> > > > > > > pardon.Wishing

> > > > > > > > > all propserity.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_

> <%40>

> astrology ,

" Finn

> > > > Wandahl "

> > > > > > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Gopal Goel,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >>Vishnu Purana and

Brihat Hora Shastra was narrated

> > by

> > > > sage

> > > > > > > > > Parasara

> > > > > > > > > > to his disciple Matrayee

about in 2000B.C. Kindly

> > refer

> > > > > > chapter

> > > > > > > 8

> > > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > second Ansh of Vishnu purana.

this chapter will give

> > > > > > > information on

> > > > > > > > > > Sidreal and tropical

Zodiac.Kindly particularly

> > refer

> > > > Sloka's

> > > > > > > 74 to

> > > > > > > > > > 81. these sloka clearly

indicate that V.E.POINT was

> > in

> > > > 1st

> > > > > > > Charn of

> > > > > > > > > > star Kritika.<<

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Not having my books with me I

am not able to verify,

> > but

> > > > I

> > > > > > seem

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > remember when researching

Vishnu Puranas and reading

> > > > this, I

> > > > > > > > > realized

> > > > > > > > > > that I had seen it somewhere

before. If I remember

> > > > correctly

> > > > > > I

> > > > > > > > > found

> > > > > > > > > > out that Vishnu Purana was

simply quoting Vedanga

> > > > Jyotisha of

> > > > > > > > > Lagadha

> > > > > > > > > > in ch. 8 sl. 74-81.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Lagadha gives the Nakshatra

positions of the vernal

> > > > equinox

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > solstice point in his Vedanga

Jyotisha and from this

> > I

> > > > was

> > > > > > able

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > interpolate the aproximate

time-period of Lagadha as

> > > > being

> > > > > > > > > somewhare

> > > > > > > > > > around 1300 BC.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >>The language of

Brihat Parasara Hora Shastra

> > matches

> > > > with

> > > > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > > > > Puran.<<

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > This is very correct and they

are also both framed

> > with

> > > > the

> > > > > > > same

> > > > > > > > > style

> > > > > > > > > > of conversation between Sage

Parasara and his

> > disciple

> > > > > > > Maitriya.

> > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > could in my opinion indicate

they were written,

> > collected

> > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > re-written by the same

people, probably someone some

> > > > Brahmins

> > > > > > > > > > belonging to Parasara Gotra.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > It is a fact that Vishnu

Purana has been changed

> > many

> > > > times,

> > > > > > > this

> > > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > probably why it is so perfect

in its Puranic style

> > like

> > > > no

> > > > > > other

> > > > > > > > > > Purana. I believe it is

possible that BPHS was once

> > a

> > > > part of

> > > > > > > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > > > > Purana, just like Narada

Samhita is part of the

> > Narada

> > > > > > Purana.

> > > > > > > Then

> > > > > > > > > > perhaps later on someone

removed it.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Also you can find small hints

in BPHS about Brahma

> > Vidya

> > > > > > > (Nature of

> > > > > > > > > > Brahma) reflecting exactly

the same Brahma Vidya as

> > in

> > > > Vishnu

> > > > > > > > > Purana,

> > > > > > > > > > which can again be found in

Maitriya Upanishad and

> > in

> > > > Atharva-

> > > > > > > Veda

> > > > > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > > > well.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Gopal Goel wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >>The famous

commentator of Varha Mihri works -

> > BHATOTPAL

> > > > had

> > > > > > > > > > acknowledged in his works

that he could not lay hand

> > on

> > > > > > > BPHS.This

> > > > > > > > > > shows that Bphs was known and

eamous even 1500 years

> > back

> > > > in

> > > > > > > > > India.<<

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Please, your deduction is not

correct. The fact that

> > > > > > Bhatophala

> > > > > > > > > never

> > > > > > > > > > saw BPHS is more likely

because it was not yet

> > written.

> > > > He

> > > > > > > could

> > > > > > > > > also

> > > > > > > > > > be talking about the earlier

version of Parasara

> > Hora

> > > > (also

> > > > > > > know as

> > > > > > > > > > Saktiputra Hora) which has

been lost for a very long

> > > > time.

> > > > > > Even

> > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > earlier version was not

written by the Vedic sage

> > > > Parasara

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > it

> > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > not written in the Vedic

period.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > By the way, Al Biruni also

never saw BPHS when he

> > came to

> > > > > > India

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > year 1000 AD, but he

mentioned all the other old

> > textbook

> > > > like

> > > > > > > > > > Saravali, Varaha Mihira etc.

in his book " India " .

I

> > think

> > > > > > this

> > > > > > > > > simply

> > > > > > > > > > indicate that the old version

of Parasara Hora was

> > lost

> > > > at

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > time,

> > > > > > > > > > and the new one that we know

today was not yet

> > written.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Very friendly,

> > > > > > > > > > Finn Wandahl

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > G.K.GOEL

> > > > > > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > > > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > > > > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > > > > > INDIA

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chat on a cool, new interface. No download

required. Click

> > > > here.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > G.K.GOEL

> > > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > > INDIA

> > > >

> > > > Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger.

> > Click here

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

Puranic Astrology -BPHS-Rama/Krishna comparison etc

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

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads