Horoscope of Lord Rama - To Kaul ji, Kishor ji, Finn ji

[Guest guest]

Dear AKK, If not anything else, I agree with one point you are making - this is an Astrology forum and we should stick to Astrology alone. There is no point in discussing History in this forum. That is totally irrelevant as there may not be qualified historians in this forum to make the discussion furitful and take it a logical conclusion. It is a sheer waste of time in addition to hurting many with making such statements which no one can either prove or disprove conclusively. I am not aginst logical discussion. Let us discuss the subject for the forum is created for and not other subjects which 99% of the people would not be interested in. Thanks for making this pitch. Hope soon sanity returns to this group. Regards, Krishna Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved wrote: Dear Sreenadhji,Namaskar!<Why it became necessary? Because the SanskritRamayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only southindians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas - notconsidered as ethical or even sane in today's world.>You are confusing the issues unnecessarily!The fact rmains that there has been a historial personality like Shri Ram prior to Shri Krishen as it is mentioned in several works including the Mbh.Irrespecitve of the

fact whether Kaliyuga started in 3102 BCE or is yet to start, Shri Krishen had incarnated at least --- if worst coms to worst!---prior to one thousand BCE. Obviously, Shri Ram had incarnated much before Him.Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after 2nd century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to Valmiki much prior to that period!Now comes the point of redactions in the Ramayana!There have been redactions in the astronomical works -- plagiarisms galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the astronomical portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due credits! Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the present version of the Surya Sidhanta! Maya the mlechha did not disclose his original name that he was a Greek stooge sent to confuse Hindus by making them astro adicts! Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like "Brighu"

and "Varuna"and "Aruna" and even "Ravana-samhita" and everybody knows in his heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the worst order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara Hora Shastram---all the versions available currently!Uttarakalamrita of some god-forsaken Kalidasa is being claimed to have been written by Maha-kavi Kalidasa and so on!In spite of such glaring fake products jyotishis are running after them and vying with one another to be called as "Varahamahira" when actually he was the "greatest charlatan of the last two millennia"!As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables! You first clear the mental cobwebs of "jyotishis" about all such astrological and "astronomical" works by "stalwats" since you are supposed to be an authority about those books/tpics/points. You (and me as

well!) are no authority on history! Even there we find at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas -- the most prominent ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana, Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few versions in South India, perhaps the most promnent one being "Kamba Ramayana" -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that work, but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we have Ramayanas in several forms!There is a work "Raghuvamasham" by Kalidasa, and it is sheer beauty just for the poetry itself!As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and astronomical points alone in this forum. If you want to discuss the originality or otherwise of the Valmiki Ramayana, then you have to discuss other works also, whether they are from South India or from North. For that purpose, you may create a different forum and have a thorough discussion!

Mention the purpose of that forum in the "frontspiece" there. I will ge glad to join you there also and try to sift the grain from the chaf! But right now you are treading on too many toes unnecessarily and this is not going to serve any purpose!(About the reality of Valmiki Rishi, pl. go through Adyatma Ramayana!About the real qualities/qualifications--or lack of them!--of Brahmins, pl. go through the Manusmriti!)Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue whch is "ancient Indian astrology" (or the lack of it!).With regards,Avtar Krishen Kaul , "Sreenadh" <sreesog wrote:>> Dear Finn ji,> Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but NOT> written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many -

especially> south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by many like -> * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to Bhakri) and> * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)> - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit> ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only south> indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,> jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas - not> considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is a fact> is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies - and> one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of course> many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in this> group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in Ramayana – many> of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both sides

of> the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or> against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we are dealing with> such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical astrology> then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are approaching> the subject sincerely. > Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for the advice. > Love,> Sreenadh> > , "Finn Wandahl"> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadh,> > > > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and NOT a> > divine one...<<> > > > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason to hurt> > some peoples religious

feelings...> > > > Finn> >>

[Guest guest]

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

 

Shri Sreenadh ji,

Namaskar!

From your curent post, it appears that both of us agree that the

astrological references in the Valmiki Ramayana are concoctions

since the planetary positions appear to have been for a period of

second century BCE.

However, you have also said

 

<4) While describing the Nakshatra of Bharata the statement given is

" Pushye jatastu bharato Meena Lagne Prasanna Dhee " should be

translated to " Bharata was born in Pushya Nakshatra, and at that

time Sun & Mercury was in the Sign Pisces " !! (Since Lagna means

Sign - as per the usage in Ramayana; The Sanskrit dictionaries and

Nirukti of the word Lagna too clearly support this meaning of the

word Lagna) ->

 

I do not agree with you here since no astrologer, howevr useless or

ignorant he/she may be or might have been would be unaware of the

fact that lagna means a sign ascending at the time of birth/event.

There is a proecedure for calculating the same in the Surya Sidhanta

also, even if that is the most inaccuate astronomical work. The

complete sholka is " Pushye jatastu Bharato, Mina lagne

prasannadheeh, sarpe jatatavtu saumitri, kuleere abyudite ravav " --

1/18/15

 

Thus according to me Mina Lagna means Mila langa! However, even

if we agree for the sake of argument that lagna means sign, how do

you say that the sun was in Mina since it has very clearly been

stated " kuleere abyudite ravav " i.e. when the sun was in Kuleera

i.e. Karkata Rashi! Thus even if we take the sun of Bhagwan Rama in

Mina instead of Mesha, the sun of Lakshmana and Shatrugana could not

be in Karkata in any case.

The names of nakshatras are very clear i.e. Shri RAm was born in

Aditi-Daivata i.e. Punarvasu (ii) Bharata in Pushya and (iii-iv)

Lakshmana and Shatrugana in " Sarpi " i.e. Ashlesha. They are in a

sequence, but if the sun of Lakshamana and Shatrugana is in Karkata,

who are younger by just two days, the sun of Shri Ram and Bharata

cannot be either in Mina or Mesha!

 

Thus whichever way we look at it, there certainly has been a

manipulation of planetary positions in the Valmiki Ramayana.

With regards,

Avtar Krishen Kaul

>

> Dear Kaul ji,

> ==>

> > ii) The planetary position of Bhagwan Ram as given in the

Valmiki

> > Ramaya was " implanted " in that work by some " jyotishi " of either

> > that period or a later one!

> <==

> Exactly! Not only the horoscope but the whole Ramayana is re-

written

> by 'Brhamanic priests' supported by Sunga dynasty - is the correct

> argument. (And not by Jyotishis). Thus the currently available

> 'Brahmanic Ramayana' (Why insult sage Valmiki) is clearly the work

of

> some 'brahmanic poet' who lived after BC 157, who took a planetary

> position known to him and ascribed it to Rama!!

> ==>

> > Since 157 BC is an era of recorded history without any

obscurity, we

> > do not have any such records that a divine incarnation came into

> > existence then, especially since it is after the Budha-Avtar and

> > after the advent of Maya the mlechha into India!

> <==

> You are absolutely right! And that is why it is said that - it is

> just the imagination of the poet who wrote this poem in the recent

> past. He just took some samples from the recent history known to

> him and manipulated the to create a long poem - that fulfills his

> purpose. I don't have any disregard for the 'Brahmnic poet' who

knew

> what he was doing - but I feel pity for the people who mistook to

> represent actual history, and believe that Monkey men with a tail

> lived in recent past and also that Sanskrit as used in Ramayana

> existed in the period of those monkey people. )

> ==>

> > Even here, you are using " J Hora " for 157 BC when all we had at

that

> > point of time i.e. 157 BC by way of astronomical bibles was the

> > Surya Sidhanta of Maya the mlechha as given in the Pancha

Sidhantika!

> <==

> Kaul ji, that is not that important - since the poet who wrote

> Ramyana is not that accurate in describing the charts - not that

he is

> not giving any longitudes but only describes a planetary position

of

> BC 157. He gives the position of ALL THE PLANETS and mentions

that

> it was Punarvasu Nakshatra and that the Tithi was Navami. No great

> astronomical knowledge is necessory to mention this much, and

> therefore any software will do. Further JHora most of the

people in

> this group is having and they can verify the planetary position

using

> that.

> If you are bewildered by the statement that " ALL THE PLANETS ARE

> MENTIONED " , then here goes the clarification:

> 1) Thiti Navami, Nakshatra Punar vasu - clearly stated

> 2) Ju, Ma in Cancer - clearly stated.

> 3) 5 planets in own house or exaltation - statement not clear.

> Then comes the interesting part -

> 4) While describing the Nakshatra of Bharata the statement given

is

> " Pushye jatastu bharato Meena Lagne Prasanna Dhee " should be

> translated to " Bharata was born in Pushya Nakshatra, and at that

time

> Sun & Mercury was in the Sign Pisces " !! (Since Lagna means Sign -

as

> per the usage in Ramayana; The Sanskrit dictionaries and Nirukti of

> the word Lagna too clearly support this meaning of the word

Lagna) -

> Thus the position of Sun and Mercury are clearly stated!

> 5) While describing the Nakshatra of Lakshmana and Satrukhna it is

> said that the Nakshatra is Aslesha and also that " Kuleere

> Abhuditeaaravo " means " Arra (Mars) was in Capricon (Kuleera) " !!

Which

> is exact! Thus it becomes clear that our confusion about 'Sun in

> Cancer' was just because of a Sandhi problem!! - Thus the position

of

> Mars is clearly stated!

> 6) Thus what remains is the position of Sa and Ve - which as per

the

> given Tropical chart of 14 March 157 BC becomes clarified. Sa is in

> Aquarius and Ve is in Taurus!

> Thus the poet knew well what he is speaking about - the confusion

> till date regarding this planetary position being caused by our

> ignorance and lack of effort to understand the facts!

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , " Avtar Krishen

Kaul "

> <jyotirved@> wrote:

> >

> > Shri Sreenadh ji,

> > Namaskar!

> > <Calculate the planetary position for 14 March -156 (Gregorian

> > Calendar); 9.15 PM approx in JHora; and you will see what I

mean. The

> > Horoscope matches well with the description in Ramayana.>

> >

> > My dear Sreenadhji, you are making really a fool of yourself by

such

> > comments!

> >

> > All you are trying to prove is that the planetary position of

> > Bhagwan Rama, as given in the Valmiki Ramayana, is the planetary

> > position of March 14, 157 BC. Obviously, this leads to two

> > conclusions:

> > 1) Either Bhagwan Ram was born on that date i.e. March 14, 157

BC at

> > 9-15 PM

> > or

> > ii) The planetary position of Bhagwan Ram as given in the

Valmiki

> > Ramaya was " implanted " in that work by some " jyotishi " of either

> > that period or a later one!

> >

> > Since 157 BC is an era of recroded history without any

obscurity, we

> > do not have any such records that a divine incarnation came into

> > existence then, especially since it is after the Budha-Avtar and

> > after the advent of Maya the mlechha into India!

> >

> > Thus all you are proving with your astrological knowledge and

latest

> > astronomical softwares is that some uselss and foolish jyotishi

has

> > implanted the planetary position of March 14, 157 BC into the

> > Valmiki Ramayana just to make even that divine incarnation

> > subservient to planetary suzarinity!

> >

> > Even here, you are using " J Hora " for 157 BC when all we had at

that

> > point of time i.e. 157 BC by way of astronomical bibles was the

> > Surya Sidhanta of Maya the mlechha as given in the Pancha

Sidhantika!

> > And as is an open secret, that is the most useless astronomical

work

> > by someone who did not know even ABC of astronomy, so much so

that

> > he did not have any knowledge of precession either!

> > QED/QEF

> > With regards,

> > AKK

> > , " Sreenadh "

> > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > >

> >

> > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > Calculate the planetary position for 14 March -156 (Gregorian

> > > Calendar); 9.15 PM approx in JHora; and you will see what I

mean.

> > The

> > > Horoscope matches well with the description in Ramayana.

> > > Let us look at the core argument of Kaul ji -

> > > ==>

> > > > iii) The sun could never be in Mesha -- whether the so

called

> > sayana

> > > > or the so called nirayana --- if it was Madhu Masa i.e. the

> > first

> > > > month of the Vasanta Ritu at the time of birth of Bhagwan

Rama.

> > > <==

> > > I am yet to see any reference in so called Valmiki Ramayana

which

> > > states that 'Rama's birth took place in Madhu Masa'; I hope

Kaul ji

> > > will come up with relevant quote from the same text. ;=)

Actually

> > if

> > > we read through Ramayana we could easily see that the birth

took

> > place

> > > BEFORE the advent of Vasanta Ritu.

> > > Also note that the meaning 'Sign(Rasi)' for the word 'Lagna'

is a

> > > very popular one, and the original one. The Nirukta defenition

of

> > the

> > > word 'Lagna' itself means 'Sign (Rasi)' and not Asc, even

though

> > the

> > > second meaning became popular later.

> > > And so the conclusion - who ever made up this text - was

> > describing

> > > a recent planetary position which was well known to him -

possibly

> > a

> > > planetary position of some king in his own period, and that is

why

> > > Ramayana is a mere literary text, and NOT a divine one.

> > > ==>

> > > > If some parts of it seems to be confusing,

> > > > anachronistic, interpolated or manipulated, then it may

better to

> > > > simply wait and make further investigations into the subject.

> > > <==

> > > I agree - but is it not that these discussions itself is

part of

> > the

> > > investigations into the subject?

> > > ==>

> > > > You have come up with some relevant questions regarding

> > Ramayana's

> > > > description of the horoscopes of Rama and Krishna. If

possible

> > it

> > > > may be a good idea to compare these horoscope-descriptions

to

> > > > similar descriptions from other texts.

> > > <==

> > > Yes, I agree - and our field is wast -

> > > Nirayana Astrology - Rishi Horas & Tantric texts

> > > Sayana/Tropical Astrolology - Vedic literature, Epics,

Puranas

> > etc

> > > There is lot of unprocessed, non-scrutinized data around, and

we

> > can

> > > do much; though our studies - whether the conclusions agree

with

> > > popular notions and beliefs or not.

> > > ==>

> > > > The Garga Samhita gives a detailed description of the birth

and

> > the

> > > > horoscopes of both Rama and Krishna. I have seen this

description

> > > > myself. Why not compare the description from Ramayana with

the

> > one

> > > > given in Garga Samhita? Are they similar or are there

> > differences?

> > > > This may actually provide us with some new and relevant

> > information.

> > > <==

> > > I agree - quote and proceed. But remember one thing - our

major

> > > concern in these discussions is 'Astrology in Valmiki

Ramayana'

> > (and

> > > not merely the horoscope of Rama), and let us not forget the

main

> > area

> > > of study, while dealing with diversions. At the end of our

study,

> > for

> > > sure some useful and systematic material should come up. We

> > will

> > > preserve and present it - as a background for further

> > investigations

> > > into other areas. :=)

> > > Love,

> > > Sreenadh

> > >

> > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Mr. Sreenadh & Mr. Kaul,

> > > >

> > > > Perhaps one should not draw too hasty conclusions regarding

the

> > origin

> > > > of the Ramayana. If some parts of it seems to be confusing,

> > > > anachronistic, interpolated or manipulated, then it may

better to

> > > > simply wait and make further investigations into the subject.

> > > >

> > > > You have come up with some relevant questions regarding

> > Ramayana's

> > > > description of the horoscopes of Rama and Krishna. If

possible

> > it may

> > > > be a good idea to compare these horoscope-descriptions to

similar

> > > > descriptions from other texts.

> > > >

> > > > The Garga Samhita gives a detailed description of the birth

and

> > the

> > > > horoscopes of both Rama and Krishna. I have seen this

description

> > > > myself. Why not compare the description from Ramayana with

the

> > one

> > > > given in Garga Samhita? Are they similar or are there

> > differences?

> > > > This may actually provide us with some new and relevant

> > information.

> > > >

> > > > :-)

> > > >

> > > > Finn

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " Sreenadh "

> > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Kaul ji,

> > > > > ==>

> > > > > > The best option, therefore, is that we must admit that

these

> > > > > > astrological combinations in the Ramayanas are later day

> > > > > > interpolations

> > > > > <==

> > > > > Then why don't with a better spirit accept that the

whole

> > ramayana

> > > > > itself is a made up text created between 2nd BC and 2

AD?

> > With the

> > > > > numerous dereference to Buddha & Jain religions,

Ardhasastra

> > (of

> > > > > Vishnugupta) etc and other numerous facts, I believe that

it

> > is clear

> > > > > that it is a text created between 2 BC and 2nd AD for

sure -

> > or better

> > > > > in 2AD in Sunga period itself.

> > > > > There is no wonder that the astrological reference in

> > Ramayana is

> > > > > utterly wrong and seems to be made up and in the line of

all

> > the

> > > > > Animal mass murder yagas and many ugly superstitions.

Actually

> > that

> > > > > only can be expected from such a text that is NOT AT ALL

> > written by

> > > > > sage Valmiki, but possibly by some stupid brahmins of

sunga

> > period.

> > > > > What else do you think can be expected from such a text?!!

> > > > > So I will request you to better accept the fact that -

The

> > whole

> > > > > Ramayana itself is a made up text - a text created with a

> > purpose -

> > > > > created between 2nd century BC and 2nd century AD. Even the

> > > > > astronomical references in it is going in the same

direction.

> > If there

> > > > > WAS a Valmiki Ramayana prior to the currently available

one (as

> > > > > referenced in Mahabharata), then that text is buried in

dept

> > by the

> > > > > political and religious fanatics who had a purpose and

wanted

> > to

> > > > > project brahmanic and vedic prejudices even by calling

Buddha

> > a thief

> > > > > and mass murdering Buddists. It was the hall make of that

era

> > (BC 200

> > > > > to AD 200), and evident from many other literary works as

> > well.

> > > > > So instead of going against astrologers - how about

going

> > against

> > > > > and start cursing - the corrupters of scriptures who in a

> > futile

> > > > > effort to spread Animal killing, and brahmin projecting,

Yaga

> > > > > services, - rewrote all the good old ancient scripts and

even

> > tried to

> > > > > steel and accommodate even the non-vedic astrological

signs

> > also into

> > > > > scripts that propagated such vedic rituals? Isn't it that

> > Ramayana is

> > > > > also a clear proof of the same?

> > > > > I believe - this would be more logically acceptable

path,

> > with

> > > > > enough evidence in support.

> > > > > Endnote: Ramayana is a made-up text. Not at all

authentic.

> > Giving it

> > > > > importance more than a simple literary work is ignorance.

Rama

> > is god

> > > > > or not is irrelevant in an academic discussion of a made

up

> > text like

> > > > > Ramayana. Ramayana is a text which is NOT written by

Valmiki

> > for sure

> > > > > - he cannot be such a corrupted, full of partiality and

hatred

> > > > > influenced, ignorant individual. Sage Valmiki was a great

> > > > > knowledgeable sage as evident from Yoga Vasishta, and

> > ascribing the

> > > > > authorship of a text like currently available Ramayana on

him

> > is a

> > > > > SIN, and an insult of that great sage.

> > > > > I wil better adopt this line of thinking.

> > > > > Love,

> > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Avtar

> > Krishen Kaul "

> > > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Shri Sreenadh ji,

> > > > > > Namaskar!

> > > > > > <I request you to look in to the following argument and

> > > > > > possibilities ->

> > > > > >

> > > > > > On the other hand I reqeuswt all of you to ponder on the

> > following

> > > > > > facts, even if they are unpleasant:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 1. The Valmiki Ramayana is supposed to be Aadi Mahakavya

> > i.e. the

> > > > > > very first Mahakavya (Epic) of Indian history and

Maharshi

> > Valamiki

> > > > > > is known as Aadi Kavi.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 2. The Mahabharata is a much later work.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 3. Shri Rama is supposed to have incarnated much

earlier

> > than

> > > > > > Bhagwan Krishna.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 4. Shri Krishna is supposed to have incarnaed much

earlier

> > than

> > > the

> > > > > > Vedanga Jyotisha period -- 14th century BCE

> > > > > >

> > > > > > A few million dollar questions are:

> > > > > > a) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis or Mangal Shani

etc.

> > > planets

> > > > > > in the VJ

> > > > > > b) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis in the

Mahabharata

> > > > > >

> > > > > > c) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis or any Mangal

Shani

> > etc.

> > > > > > planets in any of the indigenous sidhantas prior to the

> > Surya

> > > > > > Sidhanta of the Pancha Sidhantika!

> > > > > > The questions arising out of these facts are:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > i )How come we find the horoscopic details of Bhagwan

Rama,

> > > Bharata,

> > > > > > Shatruna and even Lakshamana in the Valmiki Ramayana?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ii) How come in spite of the best efforts of all the

> > astronomers

> > > > > > nobody has been able to reconcile the irreconcilable

facts

> > that if

> > > > > > Bhagwan Rama was born in Sun in Mesha and Moon in

Karakta in

> > > > > > Punarvasu nakshatra, it could never have been Navmki

tithi

> > or vice-

> > > > > > versa?

> > > > > > iii) The sun could never be in Mesha -- whether the so

called

> > > sayana

> > > > > > or the so called nirayana --- if it was Madhu Masa i.e.

the

> > first

> > > > > > month of the Vasanta Ritu at the time of birth of

Bhagwan

> > Rama.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > iv)The sun of the younger brothers could never have been

in

> > Karkata

> > > > > > if the sun of Bhagwan Rama was in Mesha or even Mina!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > In a nutshell, the more we try to reconcile these

> > irreconcilable

> > > > > > facts, the more we will be making a laughing stock of

> > ourselves!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The best option, therefore, is that we must admit that

these

> > > > > > astrological combinations in the Ramayanas are later day

> > > > > > interpolations by some good for nothing overzealous

> > astrologers who

> > > > > > did not know even this much of astronomy that if the sun

of

> > Bhagwan

> > > > > > Rama was in Mesha (or even in Mina) it could never have

been

> > in

> > > > > > Karkata just after two days in the case of His siblings!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I MUST PUT ON RECORD THAT JUST FOR THIS FACT THAT WE DO

NOT

> > HAVE A

> > > > > > HOROSCOPE OF BHAGWAN RAM, MY ESTEEM FOR HIM HAS

INCREASED

> > SINCE IT

> > > > > > MEANS THAT HE WAS REALLY KARTUM AKARTUM ANYATHA KARTUM

> > SAMARTH AND

> > > > > > NOT SUBJECT TO PLANETARY SUZARINITY!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > And the tail-piece of all this haranguing is that it

means

> > clearly

> > > > > > that Rishis like Valmiki nad the Veda Vayasa etc. did not

> > > believe in

> > > > > > any pedictive gimmicks either.

> > > > > > With regards,

> > > > > > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In

, " Sreenadh "

> > > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Kaul ji, Kishor ji, Finn ji,

> > > > > > > I request you to look in to the following argument

and

> > > > > > possibilities -

> > > > > > > * The Yaga started at the beginning of Vasanta

Ritu.

> > And

> > > > > > possibly

> > > > > > > ended near the end of Vasanta Ritu. In the 12th

Nakshatra

> > month

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > the end date of Yaga reached (i.e. when 280+ days, the

> > normal

> > > > > > period

> > > > > > > of pregnancy is completed), and when the year was

going to

> > be

> > > > > > > completed, Rama and brothers where born.

> > > > > > > * From the mention of Navami Tithi and Punarvasu

> > nakshatra

> > > it is

> > > > > > > clear that Moon was some where near 27 degrees in

Pisces.

> > > > > > > * It is at the Vishu date (i.e. when Sun is in the

> > vernal

> > > > > > equinox)

> > > > > > > that Vasanta Ritu bigins.

> > > > > > > * Considering the above 3 points it is clear that

VERNAL

> > > EQUINOX

> > > > > > > WAS SOMEWHERE AFTER (NEAR) 27 DEGREE PISCES at the

time of

> > > birth of

> > > > > > > Rama! Can we have a bit more clarify on this? Let us

> > consider the

> > > > > > > following point -

> > > > > > > * Possibly, from the beginning of Vasnata Ritu, it

is

> > after, 60

> > > > > > > days (Vasata Ritu) + 280 days = 340 days, that Rama

was

> > born.

> > > > > > > Completion of the year could take approximately

365.2425 -

> > 340 =

> > > > > > > 25.2425 days more. Means the Ayanamsa (if at all used)

was

> > must

> > > > > > tally

> > > > > > > with this. In any case it is clear that " at the time

of

> > Rama's

> > > > > > birth

> > > > > > > Sun was between solstice and vernal equinox " ! (Because

the

> > next

> > > > > > > Vasnata Ritu was yet to bigin)

> > > > > > > So what is the important derivation and conclusion?

> > Here it

> > > is -

> > > > > > > * If this is the case, certainly either -

> > > > > > > 1)it is the description of a recent planetary

> > position

> > > > > > (possibly

> > > > > > > between 250 BC and 250 AD) OR

> > > > > > > 2)the description of a planetary position at

least

> > 26000

> > > > > > years

> > > > > > > before!

> > > > > > > Because the same position of equinox can repeat

only

> > after

> > > > > > 26000

> > > > > > > years aprox.

> > > > > > > I discard the 2nd choice simply as absurd and

> > impossible -

> > > > > > > considering out understanding of the archeological and

> > linguistic

> > > > > > > history of ancient india.

> > > > > > > So the revelation is that - the planetary position

given

> > in

> > > > > > Ramayana

> > > > > > > is the description of a RECENT planetary position -

> > possibly

> > > > > > between

> > > > > > > 250 BC and 250 AD!! (It is the possible period of

origin

> > > indicated

> > > > > > by

> > > > > > > various references present in Valmiki Ramayana

itself). Is

> > there

> > > > > > any

> > > > > > > year during this period which satisfies the

conditions -

> > provided

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > the text? The points that should become true are -

> > > > > > > * 5 planets should be either in own sign or

exaltation.

> > > > > > > * Jupitor and Moon should be in Cancer

> > > > > > > * It should be Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra

> > > > > > > The extra points that could be considered are -

> > > > > > > * The word 'Lagna' could means 'Sign' as well.

> > Therefore it is

> > > > > > NOT

> > > > > > > necessary that Rama's Asc should be Cancer. (But if it

is

> > so, in

> > > > > > all

> > > > > > > the slokas present in Valmiki Ramayana the

word 'Lagna'

> > should

> > > mean

> > > > > > > 'Sign' itself)

> > > > > > > * The word 'Prasanna dhee' used in Bharata's chart

> > could mean

> > > > > > > Mercury.

> > > > > > > * Since Valmiki Ramayana follows the Vedic path, as

> > could be

> > > > > > > naturally expected, it could be a Tropical horoscope

> > instead of a

> > > > > > > Nirayana horoscope.

> > > > > > > Is there a possible year in between BC 250 and AD

250

> > that

> > > > > > > satisfies these conditions? Could it be: -157 or I

request

> > > Kaul ji

> > > > > > > and others to verify the following planetary position

and

> > the

> > > > > > possible

> > > > > > > date, using Tropical Zodiac-

> > > > > > > * Ju and Moon in Cancer

> > > > > > > * Sun and Me in Pisces

> > > > > > > * Sa in Aquarious

> > > > > > > * Ma in Capricon

> > > > > > > * Ve in Tarus

> > > > > > > * Ra & Ke in Ge-Sg axis

> > > > > > > * Asc Scorpio!

> > > > > > > * Suklapaksha Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra

> > > > > > > Note that all the conditions given in the text

Ramayana

> > becomes

> > > > > > true,

> > > > > > > it the following planetary position is possible. For

> > example -

> > > > > > > * Ma, Sa, Ve are in own sign & Ju, Ma are in

exaltation -

> > > making

> > > > > > 5

> > > > > > > planets in own sign or exaltation.

> > > > > > > * The tithi is Suklapaksha Navami and Nakshatra

> > Punarvasu.

> > > > > > > All the statements given in the text Ramayana could

be

> > > right, it

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > above planetary position is possible (please confirm

it -

> > whether

> > > > > > it

> > > > > > > is possible or not, by checking yourself). But then it

> > becomes

> > > > > > clear

> > > > > > > that the word 'Lagna' is used in Ramayana with the

meaning

> > > 'Sign',

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > the word 'Prasanna dhee' to denote 'Mercury'.

> > > > > > > I might have committed several mistakes in the above

> > > > > > derivations, so

> > > > > > > before confirming it, I am waiting for the response

from

> > the

> > > > > > learned

> > > > > > > scholars.

> > > > > > > Note: Possibly I haven't yet done my homework right,

so

> > pardon

> > > > > > me if

> > > > > > > I have committed mistakes in the above

argumentation.

> > > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In

, " Sreenadh "

> > > > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Kishore ji,

> > > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > Now, coming back to astrology, I always wondered why

> > Valmiki

> > > had

> > > > > > made

> > > > > > > > so much out of the planetary positions of Rama when

all

> > the four

> > > > > > > > brothers have shared the same D1, with Bharata's

lagna

> > being 9

> > > > > > houses

> > > > > > > > away from others, a watery and shubha sthana

> > nevertheless. More

> > > > > > > > poignantly, shatrughan has shared the same D1 yet,

he

> > enjoyed a

> > > > > > normal

> > > > > > > > and smooth life, with some victories (such as over

> > Ilasura) in

> > > > > > his

> > > > > > > > credit, as against the turbulent life that Rama has

> > suffered.

> > > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > > I disagree. Valmiki Ramayana clearly indicates

that in

> > Rama's

> > > > > > chart

> > > > > > > > Sun is in Pisces, and it clearly states that when

> > Lakshmana and

> > > > > > > > Satrukhna were born Sun was in Cancer. Thus the

Natal

> > chart

> > > > > > (calling

> > > > > > > > it D1 is wrong - because D1 means Sign and NOT natal

> > chart) of

> > > > > > them

> > > > > > > > are NOT same, as you refer to. Further the Lagna

also

> > differs.

> > > > > > For

> > > > > > > > Rama the Lagna is Cancer, for Bharata it is Pisces,

and

> > for

> > > > > > Lekshmana

> > > > > > > > and Satrukhna we don't know clearly what it was. If

> > statements

> > > > > > > > available in, currently available Valmiki Ramayana

is

> > true -

> > > then

> > > > > > > > Lakshmana and Satrukhana were born 4+ months after

the

> > birth of

> > > > > > Rama

> > > > > > > > and so the planetary positions of their chart should

> > also

> > > > > > differ. If

> > > > > > > > you are of the opinion that the statement " When the

> > children of

> > > > > > > > Sumitra (Lakshmana and Satrukhna) were born Sun was

in

> > Cancer "

> > > > > > present

> > > > > > > > in current Valmiki Ramaya is wrong - then it is a

> > different

> > > > > > thing. Is

> > > > > > > > that your argument?

> > > > > > > > So in essence the natal chart itself of Rama and

> > brothers

> > > > > > differ,

> > > > > > > > and naturally different results follow.

> > > > > > > > > I think the secret lies in the Divisional charts.

> > > > > > > > You can think anything - but for sure valimiki was

> > unaware of

> > > > > > > > 'Divisional charts' even though a possibility

> > for 'Divisions'

> > > > > > (which

> > > > > > > > alone is supported by ancient astrological classics)

> > exist. But

> > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > too certainly there is not even a single statement

in

> > Ramayana

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > shows that he (the author of that book) was even

aware

> > of

> > > > > > divisions.

> > > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > > As Visti has pointed out that it is quite possible

> > that moon

> > > > > > is at

> > > > > > > > > the very end of 4th pada of the asterism and this

will

> > make

> > > > > > the Sun

> > > > > > > > > being in the last pada of Pisces(possibly) This

will

> > make the

> > > > > > sun

> > > > > > > > > also vargottama.

> > > > > > > > > Now, sun must be betwen 27-30 degrees of the

pisces,

> > which

> > > > > > will take

> > > > > > > > > the lagna to complete the same in 12 minutes. The

> > remaining

> > > > > > lagnas

> > > > > > > > > of Aries, Tarurus and Gemini can be complete in

> > almost 6

> > > > > > hours -

> > > > > > > > > not withstanding the 12 minutes above- making the

> > abhihjt

> > > > > > lagna a

> > > > > > > > > possibility. In such an event, the lagna also

falls in

> > the

> > > > > > first

> > > > > > > > > pada of Cancer, which will make lagna also

vargottama.

> > > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > > First of all Visti is not part of this group and

> > didn't say

> > > > > > anything

> > > > > > > > here (are you posting the same message in multiple

> > groups?! -

> > > > > > ok. you

> > > > > > > > might be referring to someone in some other group).

Now

> > coming

> > > > > > to the

> > > > > > > > arguments about Abhijit etc.

> > > > > > > > * For Navami to happen the distance between Sun

and

> > Moon

> > > > > > should be

> > > > > > > > more than 96 degrees. That means even if Moon is at

the

> > end of

> > > > > > > > Punarvasu Nakshatra (i.e. 93 degree 20 min), the Sun

> > should be

> > > > > > beyond

> > > > > > > > 2 degree 40 min from end point of Pisces. That means

Sun

> > cannot

> > > > > > have a

> > > > > > > > longitude more than 27 degree 20 min in Pises. [i.e.

Sun

> > will

> > > > > > take 10

> > > > > > > > min at least to cover Pisces]. Now Moon being in

Rasi

> > Sandhi,

> > > > > > > > Nakshatra Sandhi and Tithi sandhi, (all showing bad

> > results) I

> > > > > > don't

> > > > > > > > think we should expect that in the chart of an

avatar.

> > What

> > > ever

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > be note the points

> > > > > > > > - Sun needs at least 10+ min to cover

Pisces.

> > > > > > > > - The Sun's longitude cannot be more than

27

> > degree 20

> > > > > > min.

> > > > > > > > * As you rightly pointed out Sun needs 6 hours

approx

> > to cover

> > > > > > Aries,

> > > > > > > > Tarus & Gemini. And thus there is a possibility that

the

> > birth

> > > > > > took

> > > > > > > > place at Noon - possibly in Abhijit Muhurta -

Provided

> > the day

> > > > > > was a

> > > > > > > > near equinox day (i.e. when day and night are almost

> > equal).

> > > Now

> > > > > > comes

> > > > > > > > the interesting part - the birth was in Uttarayana -

so

> > were do

> > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > think the equinox and solstice would be? Before the

27

> > degree

> > > > > > position

> > > > > > > > of Sun - right - what era could it be - and where

was he

> > > equinox

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > solstice then - as Kaul ji rightly puts it. So the

point

> > to be

> > > > > > noted

> > > > > > > > is that

> > > > > > > > - essentially the Abhijit Muhurta argument

> > brings in to

> > > > > > focus

> > > > > > > > the position of Solstice in to consideration.

> > > > > > > > What are your opinions on the same? Can it be BC

> > 50000+ and

> > > > > > still

> > > > > > > > your Abhijit argument true? What do you think?

> > > > > > > > * Another important question is - if Ra or Ke is

in

> > > > > > exaltation -

> > > > > > > > which of them is in exaltation. I mean is it that

when

> > Ra is

> > > > > > exalted

> > > > > > > > then Ke also exalted, increasing the count of

exaltation

> > > planets

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > SIX? Is it that Valmiki missed it? If not what is

the

> > solution

> > > > > > to this

> > > > > > > > 6 planet problem? If you go by the argument both Own

> > house

> > > (Swa)

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > Exaltation (Uccha) are considered, then what is your

> > arguments

> > > > > > FORM

> > > > > > > > VALMIKI RAMAYANA in support of placing Ma, Ve, Sa in

> > some

> > > > > > particular

> > > > > > > > signs? Yes, I could see that even though you

presented

> > such an

> > > > > > > > argument - but never followed it, by providing the

> > supplementary

> > > > > > > > evidence. What do you think about this?

> > > > > > > > There are other doubts too - but I think this is

enough

> > > for the

> > > > > > > > current mail.

> > > > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In

> > , " kishore

> > > > > > patnaik "

> > > > > > > > <kishorepatnaik09@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear all,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > It is a matter of our merits that have been

> > accumulated

> > > > > > during our

> > > > > > > > earlier

> > > > > > > > > births that we are spending this Diwali in the

chant

> > of Rama,

> > > > > > rather

> > > > > > > > than

> > > > > > > > > wasting our time otherwise. I wish everyone on the

> > group a

> > > > > > merry and

> > > > > > > > a holy

> > > > > > > > > Diwali.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Srimad Ramayana is a depository of several yogic

and

> > cosmic

> > > > > > secrets.

> > > > > > > > For

> > > > > > > > > eg., Sree Sundara Kanda is directly interpreted as

the

> > search

> > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > yogi for

> > > > > > > > > the Kundalini downtrodden from Sahasrara to

Muladhara.

> > In

> > > > > > fact, when

> > > > > > > > I have

> > > > > > > > > raised the question, I have expected the Likes of

PVR

> > to

> > > > > > search for an

> > > > > > > > > answer in that angle too,.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Now, coming back to astrology, I always wondered

why

> > Valmiki

> > > > > > had

> > > > > > > made so

> > > > > > > > > much out of the planetary positions of Rama when

all

> > the four

> > > > > > > > brothers have

> > > > > > > > > shared the same D1, with Bharata's lagna being 9

> > houses away

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > others, a

> > > > > > > > > watery and shubha sthana nevertheless. More

> > poignantly,

> > > > > > > shatrughan has

> > > > > > > > > shared the same D1 yet, he enjoyed a normal and

smooth

> > life,

> > > > > > with some

> > > > > > > > > victories (such as over Ilasura) in his credit, as

> > against the

> > > > > > > turbulent

> > > > > > > > > life that Rama has suffered.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I think the secret lies in the Divisional charts.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > It is needless to point out that Moon of Sri Rama

> > enjoys a

> > > > > > > > Vargottama. As

> > > > > > > > > Visti has pointed out that it is quite possible

that

> > moon is

> > > > > > at the

> > > > > > > > very end

> > > > > > > > > of 4th pada of the asterism and this will make the

Sun

> > > being in

> > > > > > > the last

> > > > > > > > > pada of Pisces(possibly) This will make the sun

also

> > > > > > vargottama.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Now, sun must be betwen 27-30 degrees of the

pisces,

> > which

> > > will

> > > > > > > take the

> > > > > > > > > lagna to complete the same in 12 minutes. The

remaining

> > > lagnas

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > Aries,

> > > > > > > > > Tarurus and Gemini can be complete in almost 6

hours -

> > not

> > > > > > > > withstanding the

> > > > > > > > > 12 minutes above- making the abhihjt lagna a

> > possibility. In

> > > > > > such

> > > > > > > > an event

> > > > > > > > > , the lagna also falls in the first pada of

Cancer,

> > which

> > > will

> > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > lagna

> > > > > > > > > also vargottama.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Now, I leave to the Group to discuss further if I

am

> > missing

> > > > > > > something.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > regards,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Kishore patnaik

> > > > > > > > > 98492 70729

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenadh,

 

Religious texts are often self-contradictive and anachronistic by

nature. This goes for all the major religions. But we cannot dismiss

them as being not " divine " for this reason. The very fact that they

have been an object for worship for ages has made them " divine " for

anyone who believe them to be so.

 

Anyway, while dealing with sacred texts of any religion, we need to

show at least a minimum of respect and dignity. Especially when we

debate these texts in public.

 

Very friendly,

Finn Wandahl

 

 

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Finn ji,

> Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but NOT

> written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many - especially

> south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by many like -

> * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to Bhakri) and

> * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)

> - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only south

> indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,

> jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas - not

> considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is a fact

> is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies - and

> one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of course

> many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in this

> group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in Ramayana – many

> of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both sides of

> the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or

> against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we are dealing with

> such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical astrology

> then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are approaching

> the subject sincerely.

> Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for the

advice.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sreenadh,

> >

> > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and NOT a

> > divine one...<<

> >

> > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason to hurt

> > some peoples religious feelings...

> >

> > Finn

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Kaul ji,

==>

> Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after 2nd

> century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to Valmiki

> much prior to that period!

<==

OK. That means that you agree to the fact that large scale

re-casting of ramayana is a clear possibility around 2nd Century BCE.

And the following words of yours clarifies it.

==>

> There have been redactions in the astronomical works -- plagiarisms

> galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the astronomical

> portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due credits!

> Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> present version of the Surya Sidhanta!

<==

Good that we agree on many points.

==>

> Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu " and " Varuna "

> and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in his

> heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the worst

> order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara Hora

> Shastram---all the versions available currently!

<==

That is why the question - Why can't you accept the same to be true

for Ramayana?!! An impartial person must be simply able to do that!

But yes, you want to discard astrology, and then too preserve Hinduism

by preserving all those irrelevant rituals and baseless beliefs. Is

that not charlatanism?

==>

> As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables!

<==

Answer me sincerely - why can't I tell the same to you? It is

clearly what the discussion on Ramayana reveals. )

==>

> You (and me as well!) are no authority on history!

<==

Agree - and I am not after history - except some glimpses of it -

here and there where ever necessary.

==>

> Even there we find at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas --

> the most prominent

> ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> versions in South India, perhaps the most prominent one being " Kamba

> Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that work,

> but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we have

> Ramayanas in several forms!

<==

But what is the importance of several ramayanas here?! We are just

talking about Ramayana that is ascribed to Valmiki - right? Now about

the most prominent Ramayana in south - your statement is utterly

wrong. South is not that simple. In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma

Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat Ezhuttachan; In

Tamil nadu one of them is Kamba Ramayana I believe (but not sure - i

am not an authority on the same) - but there could be some other works

as well. (By the way Kambar wrote that Ramayana at the Krishna temple

in my native village) In several other states in South 'Adhyatma

Ramayana' I believe. But the simple fact is that - south is so vast

with varying cultures and languages of AP,Karnataka, Kerala,

Tamilnadu, and the Tulu language and culture of Western cost. Every

state is a knowledge house - actually the believed to be lost Sanskrit

works are coming to light now a days by re-writing the ancient

Sanskrit works from Southern Regional scripts to Devanagari script.

==>

> As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> astronomical points alone in this forum.

<==

Thanks for the advice.

==>

> pl. go through the Manusmriti!

<==

Lol....) I know what it is - are you starting a new controversy?!!

==>

> Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue which

> is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

<==

We will haply do that - then again don't come in-between with

Valmiki (or any other) Ramayana or such references. ) Do you

remember - it is YOU who started it all. ) If you don't remember

read /message/3495

So the lesson to remember is - don't put your hand in the frying pan!

Or if you does please have the patience to wait till it gets fried

enough! Lol..... ) And now you comes out with the advice – don't

discuss Valmiki Ramyana – if not laugh, what can I do?!! ) Don't

commit the same with Manusmriti – it is ok, in astrology forum we can

safely ignore it.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

 

, " Avtar Krishen Kaul "

<jyotirved wrote:

>

> Dear Sreenadhji,

> Namaskar!

> <Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> Ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only south

> indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,

> jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas - not

> considered as ethical or even sane in today's world.>

>

> You are confusing the issues unnecessarily!

>

> The fact rmains that there has been a historial personality like

> Shri Ram prior to Shri Krishen as it is mentioned in several works

> including the Mbh.

>

> Irrespecitve of the fact whether Kaliyuga started in 3102 BCE or is

> yet to start, Shri Krishen had incarnated at least --- if worst coms

> to worst!---prior to one thousand BCE. Obviously, Shri Ram had

> incarnated much before Him.

>

> Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after 2nd

> century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to Valmiki

> much prior to that period!

>

> Now comes the point of redactions in the Ramayana!

>

> There have been redactions in the astronomical works -- plagiarisms

> galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the astronomical

> portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due credits!

> Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> present version of the Surya Sidhanta! Maya the mlechha did not

> disclose his original name that he was a Greek stooge sent to

> confuse Hindus by making them astro adicts!

>

> Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu " and " Varuna "

> and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in his

> heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the worst

> order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara Hora

> Shastram---all the versions available currently!

>

> Uttarakalamrita of some god-forsaken Kalidasa is being claimed to

> have been written by Maha-kavi Kalidasa and so on!

>

> In spite of such glaring fake products jyotishis are running after

> them and vying with one another to be called as " Varahamahira " when

> actually he was the " greatest charlatan of the last two millennia " !

>

> As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables! You

> first clear the mental cobwebs of " jyotishis " about all such

> astrological and " astronomical " works by " stalwats " since you are

> supposed to be an authority about those books/tpics/points. You

> (and me as well!) are no authority on history! Even there we find

> at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas -- the most prominent

> ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> versions in South India, perhaps the most promnent one being " Kamba

> Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that work,

> but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we have

> Ramayanas in several forms!

>

> There is a work " Raghuvamasham " by Kalidasa, and it is sheer beauty

> just for the poetry itself!

>

> As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> astronomical points alone in this forum. If you want to discuss the

> originality or otherwise of the Valmiki Ramayana, then you have to

> discuss other works also, whether they are from South India or from

> North. For that purpose, you may create a different forum and have

> a thorough discussion! Mention the purpose of that forum in

> the " frontspiece " there. I will ge glad to join you there also and

> try to sift the grain from the chaf! But right now you are treading

> on too many toes unnecessarily and this is not going to serve any

> purpose!

>

> (About the reality of Valmiki Rishi, pl. go through Adyatma Ramayana!

> About the real qualities/qualifications--or lack of them!--of

> Brahmins, pl. go through the Manusmriti!)

> Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue whch

> is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> With regards,

> Avtar Krishen Kaul

>

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Finn ji,

> > Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but NOT

> > written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many -

> especially

> > south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by many

> like -

> > * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to Bhakri)

> and

> > * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)

> > - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only south

> > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,

> > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas - not

> > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is a

> fact

> > is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies - and

> > one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of

> course

> > many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in this

> > group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in Ramayana –

> many

> > of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both sides of

> > the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or

> > against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we are dealing with

> > such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical

> astrology

> > then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are

> approaching

> > the subject sincerely.

> > Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for the

> advice.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > >

> > > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and NOT a

> > > divine one...<<

> > >

> > > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason to

> hurt

> > > some peoples religious feelings...

> > >

> > > Finn

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenadh -

 

Namaste.

 

> approach to Ramayana in a yogic or spiritual perspective - but that

> shouldn't lead to the misunderstanding that, it is the only possible

> while dealing with an ancient text.

 

Guru rules akaash tatva. All scriptures are a function of akaash

tatva. You may have heard of 'akaash patra'. No need to look for

written scriptures in the material world. They can be all sought in

the depths of akaasha.

 

>>The current perspective used is 'Astrological and Historical' -

>>hope you see the point.

 

The 'point' is indeed a fascination revelation. All

paths,perspectives,scriptures,approaches lead to the same

point/bindu/spark lying deep within the akaash tatva - is it not?

 

What is this bindu spark?

 

" OMKAARAM BINDU SAMYUKTAM

NITYAM DHYAYANTI YOGINAH

KAAMADAM MOKSHADAM CHAIVA

OMKAARAAYA NAMO NAMAH "

 

Thank you for your time.

 

Best Wishes,

 

SVC

 

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear SVC,

> We can say all these - till we don't read the currently available

> 'Valmiki Ramayana', and till we approach the question in the

spiritual

> plane only.

> But when we start looking at things in other perspectives as well

> the approach is sure to change.

> I agree with you as far as 'Yoga Ramayan' or the yogic or

spiritual

> interpretation of ramayana is concerned.

> Note: Yoga ramayan, or the Yogic or spiritual interpretation of

> Ramayana is an entirely different subject. The current perspective

> used is 'Astrological and Historical' - hope you see the point.

Every

> perspective gives us some new information, knowledge and

understanding

> – and that is why they should be respected and used. I appreciate

your

> approach to Ramayana in a yogic or spiritual perspective - but that

> shouldn't lead to the misunderstanding that, it is the only possible

> while dealing with an ancient text.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , " svc_astro "

> <svc_astro@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Finn,

> >

> > Namaste. Why is there so much confusion? Does not confusion

connote

> > the state of chittam?

> >

> > What is the origin of Ramayana? Yogically 'Rama' is not a name.

In

> > other words it is verily the 'atma'. Ramanam esoterically infers

> > chanting of 'atma' or 'atma worship' which is the practice of

> > yogasadhana. such constant abhyaasa entails the practitioner to

> > envision 'Ramadwaara' viz. the dwara (portal) between the

eyebrows.

> > When the yogi dives deep within the akaashaa in the ajna 'guhya'

> > (cave) he derives the essence of 'AtmaRama' - This is indeed the

> > origin of 'Ramayana' or simply retracing (vakri gati) back to the

> > source (Rama + ayana).

> >

> > 'TATRA STHITAU YATNO'BHYAASAH' - " Steadiness of mind is attained

> > only through practice. "

> >

> > Hope you got the clue.

> >

> > Best Wishes,

> >

> > SVC

> >

> >

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr. Sreenadh & Mr. Kaul,

> > >

> > > Perhaps one should not draw too hasty conclusions regarding the

> > origin

> > > of the Ramayana. If some parts of it seems to be confusing,

> > > anachronistic, interpolated or manipulated, then it may better

to

> > > simply wait and make further investigations into the subject.

> > >

> > > You have come up with some relevant questions regarding

Ramayana's

> > > description of the horoscopes of Rama and Krishna. If possible

it

> > may

> > > be a good idea to compare these horoscope-descriptions to

similar

> > > descriptions from other texts.

> > >

> > > The Garga Samhita gives a detailed description of the birth and

the

> > > horoscopes of both Rama and Krishna. I have seen this

description

> > > myself. Why not compare the description from Ramayana with the

one

> > > given in Garga Samhita? Are they similar or are there

differences?

> > > This may actually provide us with some new and relevant

> > information.

> > >

> > > :-)

> > >

> > > Finn

> > >

> > >

> > > , " Sreenadh "

> > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Kaul ji,

> > > > ==>

> > > > > The best option, therefore, is that we must admit that these

> > > > > astrological combinations in the Ramayanas are later day

> > > > > interpolations

> > > > <==

> > > > Then why don't with a better spirit accept that the whole

> > ramayana

> > > > itself is a made up text created between 2nd BC and 2 AD?

> > With the

> > > > numerous dereference to Buddha & Jain religions, Ardhasastra

(of

> > > > Vishnugupta) etc and other numerous facts, I believe that it

is

> > clear

> > > > that it is a text created between 2 BC and 2nd AD for sure -

or

> > better

> > > > in 2AD in Sunga period itself.

> > > > There is no wonder that the astrological reference in

Ramayana

> > is

> > > > utterly wrong and seems to be made up and in the line of all

the

> > > > Animal mass murder yagas and many ugly superstitions.

Actually

> > that

> > > > only can be expected from such a text that is NOT AT ALL

written

> > by

> > > > sage Valmiki, but possibly by some stupid brahmins of sunga

> > period.

> > > > What else do you think can be expected from such a text?!!

> > > > So I will request you to better accept the fact that - The

> > whole

> > > > Ramayana itself is a made up text - a text created with a

> > purpose -

> > > > created between 2nd century BC and 2nd century AD. Even the

> > > > astronomical references in it is going in the same direction.

If

> > there

> > > > WAS a Valmiki Ramayana prior to the currently available one

(as

> > > > referenced in Mahabharata), then that text is buried in dept

by

> > the

> > > > political and religious fanatics who had a purpose and wanted

to

> > > > project brahmanic and vedic prejudices even by calling Buddha

a

> > thief

> > > > and mass murdering Buddists. It was the hall make of that era

> > (BC 200

> > > > to AD 200), and evident from many other literary works as

well.

> > > > So instead of going against astrologers - how about going

> > against

> > > > and start cursing - the corrupters of scriptures who in a

futile

> > > > effort to spread Animal killing, and brahmin projecting, Yaga

> > > > services, - rewrote all the good old ancient scripts and even

> > tried to

> > > > steel and accommodate even the non-vedic astrological signs

also

> > into

> > > > scripts that propagated such vedic rituals? Isn't it that

> > Ramayana is

> > > > also a clear proof of the same?

> > > > I believe - this would be more logically acceptable path,

with

> > > > enough evidence in support.

> > > > Endnote: Ramayana is a made-up text. Not at all authentic.

> > Giving it

> > > > importance more than a simple literary work is ignorance.

Rama

> > is god

> > > > or not is irrelevant in an academic discussion of a made up

text

> > like

> > > > Ramayana. Ramayana is a text which is NOT written by Valmiki

for

> > sure

> > > > - he cannot be such a corrupted, full of partiality and hatred

> > > > influenced, ignorant individual. Sage Valmiki was a great

> > > > knowledgeable sage as evident from Yoga Vasishta, and

ascribing

> > the

> > > > authorship of a text like currently available Ramayana on him

is

> > a

> > > > SIN, and an insult of that great sage.

> > > > I wil better adopt this line of thinking.

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > , " Avtar

Krishen

> > Kaul "

> > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Shri Sreenadh ji,

> > > > > Namaskar!

> > > > > <I request you to look in to the following argument and

> > > > > possibilities ->

> > > > >

> > > > > On the other hand I reqeuswt all of you to ponder on the

> > following

> > > > > facts, even if they are unpleasant:

> > > > >

> > > > > 1. The Valmiki Ramayana is supposed to be Aadi Mahakavya

i.e.

> > the

> > > > > very first Mahakavya (Epic) of Indian history and Maharshi

> > Valamiki

> > > > > is known as Aadi Kavi.

> > > > >

> > > > > 2. The Mahabharata is a much later work.

> > > > >

> > > > > 3. Shri Rama is supposed to have incarnated much earlier

than

> > > > > Bhagwan Krishna.

> > > > >

> > > > > 4. Shri Krishna is supposed to have incarnaed much earlier

> > than the

> > > > > Vedanga Jyotisha period -- 14th century BCE

> > > > >

> > > > > A few million dollar questions are:

> > > > > a) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis or Mangal Shani

etc.

> > planets

> > > > > in the VJ

> > > > > b) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis in the Mahabharata

> > > > >

> > > > > c) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis or any Mangal Shani

> > etc.

> > > > > planets in any of the indigenous sidhantas prior to the

Surya

> > > > > Sidhanta of the Pancha Sidhantika!

> > > > > The questions arising out of these facts are:

> > > > >

> > > > > i )How come we find the horoscopic details of Bhagwan Rama,

> > Bharata,

> > > > > Shatruna and even Lakshamana in the Valmiki Ramayana?

> > > > >

> > > > > ii) How come in spite of the best efforts of all the

> > astronomers

> > > > > nobody has been able to reconcile the irreconcilable facts

> > that if

> > > > > Bhagwan Rama was born in Sun in Mesha and Moon in Karakta

in

> > > > > Punarvasu nakshatra, it could never have been Navmki tithi

or

> > vice-

> > > > > versa?

> > > > > iii) The sun could never be in Mesha -- whether the so

called

> > sayana

> > > > > or the so called nirayana --- if it was Madhu Masa i.e. the

> > first

> > > > > month of the Vasanta Ritu at the time of birth of Bhagwan

Rama.

> > > > >

> > > > > iv)The sun of the younger brothers could never have been in

> > Karkata

> > > > > if the sun of Bhagwan Rama was in Mesha or even Mina!

> > > > >

> > > > > In a nutshell, the more we try to reconcile these

> > irreconcilable

> > > > > facts, the more we will be making a laughing stock of

> > ourselves!

> > > > >

> > > > > The best option, therefore, is that we must admit that

these

> > > > > astrological combinations in the Ramayanas are later day

> > > > > interpolations by some good for nothing overzealous

> > astrologers who

> > > > > did not know even this much of astronomy that if the sun of

> > Bhagwan

> > > > > Rama was in Mesha (or even in Mina) it could never have

been

> > in

> > > > > Karkata just after two days in the case of His siblings!

> > > > >

> > > > > I MUST PUT ON RECORD THAT JUST FOR THIS FACT THAT WE DO NOT

> > HAVE A

> > > > > HOROSCOPE OF BHAGWAN RAM, MY ESTEEM FOR HIM HAS INCREASED

> > SINCE IT

> > > > > MEANS THAT HE WAS REALLY KARTUM AKARTUM ANYATHA KARTUM

SAMARTH

> > AND

> > > > > NOT SUBJECT TO PLANETARY SUZARINITY!

> > > > >

> > > > > And the tail-piece of all this haranguing is that it means

> > clearly

> > > > > that Rishis like Valmiki nad the Veda Vayasa etc. did not

> > believe in

> > > > > any pedictive gimmicks either.

> > > > > With regards,

> > > > > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Sreenadh "

> > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Kaul ji, Kishor ji, Finn ji,

> > > > > > I request you to look in to the following argument and

> > > > > possibilities -

> > > > > > * The Yaga started at the beginning of Vasanta Ritu.

And

> > > > > possibly

> > > > > > ended near the end of Vasanta Ritu. In the 12th Nakshatra

> > month

> > > > > from

> > > > > > the end date of Yaga reached (i.e. when 280+ days, the

> > normal

> > > > > period

> > > > > > of pregnancy is completed), and when the year was going

to be

> > > > > > completed, Rama and brothers where born.

> > > > > > * From the mention of Navami Tithi and Punarvasu

> > nakshatra it is

> > > > > > clear that Moon was some where near 27 degrees in

Pisces.

> > > > > > * It is at the Vishu date (i.e. when Sun is in the

> > vernal

> > > > > equinox)

> > > > > > that Vasanta Ritu bigins.

> > > > > > * Considering the above 3 points it is clear that

VERNAL

> > EQUINOX

> > > > > > WAS SOMEWHERE AFTER (NEAR) 27 DEGREE PISCES at the time

of

> > birth of

> > > > > > Rama! Can we have a bit more clarify on this? Let us

> > consider the

> > > > > > following point -

> > > > > > * Possibly, from the beginning of Vasnata Ritu, it is

> > after, 60

> > > > > > days (Vasata Ritu) + 280 days = 340 days, that Rama was

born.

> > > > > > Completion of the year could take approximately 365.2425 -

 

> > 340 =

> > > > > > 25.2425 days more. Means the Ayanamsa (if at all used)

was

> > must

> > > > > tally

> > > > > > with this. In any case it is clear that " at the time of

> > Rama's

> > > > > birth

> > > > > > Sun was between solstice and vernal equinox " ! (Because

the

> > next

> > > > > > Vasnata Ritu was yet to bigin)

> > > > > > So what is the important derivation and conclusion?

Here

> > it is -

> > > > > > * If this is the case, certainly either -

> > > > > > 1)it is the description of a recent planetary

position

> > > > > (possibly

> > > > > > between 250 BC and 250 AD) OR

> > > > > > 2)the description of a planetary position at least

> > 26000

> > > > > years

> > > > > > before!

> > > > > > Because the same position of equinox can repeat only

> > after

> > > > > 26000

> > > > > > years aprox.

> > > > > > I discard the 2nd choice simply as absurd and

impossible -

> > > > > > considering out understanding of the archeological and

> > linguistic

> > > > > > history of ancient india.

> > > > > > So the revelation is that - the planetary position

given

> > in

> > > > > Ramayana

> > > > > > is the description of a RECENT planetary position -

possibly

> > > > > between

> > > > > > 250 BC and 250 AD!! (It is the possible period of origin

> > indicated

> > > > > by

> > > > > > various references present in Valmiki Ramayana itself).

Is

> > there

> > > > > any

> > > > > > year during this period which satisfies the conditions -

> > provided

> > > > > in

> > > > > > the text? The points that should become true are -

> > > > > > * 5 planets should be either in own sign or exaltation.

> > > > > > * Jupitor and Moon should be in Cancer

> > > > > > * It should be Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra

> > > > > > The extra points that could be considered are -

> > > > > > * The word 'Lagna' could means 'Sign' as well.

Therefore

> > it is

> > > > > NOT

> > > > > > necessary that Rama's Asc should be Cancer. (But if it is

> > so, in

> > > > > all

> > > > > > the slokas present in Valmiki Ramayana the word 'Lagna'

> > should mean

> > > > > > 'Sign' itself)

> > > > > > * The word 'Prasanna dhee' used in Bharata's chart

could

> > mean

> > > > > > Mercury.

> > > > > > * Since Valmiki Ramayana follows the Vedic path, as

could

> > be

> > > > > > naturally expected, it could be a Tropical horoscope

instead

> > of a

> > > > > > Nirayana horoscope.

> > > > > > Is there a possible year in between BC 250 and AD 250

that

> > > > > > satisfies these conditions? Could it be: -157 or I

request

> > Kaul ji

> > > > > > and others to verify the following planetary position and

> > the

> > > > > possible

> > > > > > date, using Tropical Zodiac-

> > > > > > * Ju and Moon in Cancer

> > > > > > * Sun and Me in Pisces

> > > > > > * Sa in Aquarious

> > > > > > * Ma in Capricon

> > > > > > * Ve in Tarus

> > > > > > * Ra & Ke in Ge-Sg axis

> > > > > > * Asc Scorpio!

> > > > > > * Suklapaksha Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra

> > > > > > Note that all the conditions given in the text Ramayana

> > becomes

> > > > > true,

> > > > > > it the following planetary position is possible. For

> > example -

> > > > > > * Ma, Sa, Ve are in own sign & Ju, Ma are in

exaltation -

> > making

> > > > > 5

> > > > > > planets in own sign or exaltation.

> > > > > > * The tithi is Suklapaksha Navami and Nakshatra

Punarvasu.

> > > > > > All the statements given in the text Ramayana could be

> > right, it

> > > > > the

> > > > > > above planetary position is possible (please confirm it -

> > whether

> > > > > it

> > > > > > is possible or not, by checking yourself). But then it

> > becomes

> > > > > clear

> > > > > > that the word 'Lagna' is used in Ramayana with the

> > meaning 'Sign',

> > > > > and

> > > > > > the word 'Prasanna dhee' to denote 'Mercury'.

> > > > > > I might have committed several mistakes in the above

> > > > > derivations, so

> > > > > > before confirming it, I am waiting for the response from

the

> > > > > learned

> > > > > > scholars.

> > > > > > Note: Possibly I haven't yet done my homework right, so

> > pardon

> > > > > me if

> > > > > > I have committed mistakes in the above argumentation.

> > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In

, " Sreenadh "

> > > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Kishore ji,

> > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > Now, coming back to astrology, I always wondered why

> > Valmiki had

> > > > > made

> > > > > > > so much out of the planetary positions of Rama when all

> > the four

> > > > > > > brothers have shared the same D1, with Bharata's lagna

> > being 9

> > > > > houses

> > > > > > > away from others, a watery and shubha sthana

> > nevertheless. More

> > > > > > > poignantly, shatrughan has shared the same D1 yet, he

> > enjoyed a

> > > > > normal

> > > > > > > and smooth life, with some victories (such as over

> > Ilasura) in

> > > > > his

> > > > > > > credit, as against the turbulent life that Rama has

> > suffered.

> > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > I disagree. Valmiki Ramayana clearly indicates that

in

> > Rama's

> > > > > chart

> > > > > > > Sun is in Pisces, and it clearly states that when

> > Lakshmana and

> > > > > > > Satrukhna were born Sun was in Cancer. Thus the Natal

> > chart

> > > > > (calling

> > > > > > > it D1 is wrong - because D1 means Sign and NOT natal

> > chart) of

> > > > > them

> > > > > > > are NOT same, as you refer to. Further the Lagna also

> > differs.

> > > > > For

> > > > > > > Rama the Lagna is Cancer, for Bharata it is Pisces, and

> > for

> > > > > Lekshmana

> > > > > > > and Satrukhna we don't know clearly what it was. If

> > statements

> > > > > > > available in, currently available Valmiki Ramayana is

> > true - then

> > > > > > > Lakshmana and Satrukhana were born 4+ months after the

> > birth of

> > > > > Rama

> > > > > > > and so the planetary positions of their chart should

also

> > > > > differ. If

> > > > > > > you are of the opinion that the statement " When the

> > children of

> > > > > > > Sumitra (Lakshmana and Satrukhna) were born Sun was in

> > Cancer "

> > > > > present

> > > > > > > in current Valmiki Ramaya is wrong - then it is a

> > different

> > > > > thing. Is

> > > > > > > that your argument?

> > > > > > > So in essence the natal chart itself of Rama and

> > brothers

> > > > > differ,

> > > > > > > and naturally different results follow.

> > > > > > > > I think the secret lies in the Divisional charts.

> > > > > > > You can think anything - but for sure valimiki was

> > unaware of

> > > > > > > 'Divisional charts' even though a possibility

> > for 'Divisions'

> > > > > (which

> > > > > > > alone is supported by ancient astrological classics)

> > exist. But

> > > > > then

> > > > > > > too certainly there is not even a single statement in

> > Ramayana

> > > > > that

> > > > > > > shows that he (the author of that book) was even aware

of

> > > > > divisions.

> > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > As Visti has pointed out that it is quite possible

that

> > moon

> > > > > is at

> > > > > > > > the very end of 4th pada of the asterism and this

will

> > make

> > > > > the Sun

> > > > > > > > being in the last pada of Pisces(possibly) This will

> > make the

> > > > > sun

> > > > > > > > also vargottama.

> > > > > > > > Now, sun must be betwen 27-30 degrees of the pisces,

> > which

> > > > > will take

> > > > > > > > the lagna to complete the same in 12 minutes. The

> > remaining

> > > > > lagnas

> > > > > > > > of Aries, Tarurus and Gemini can be complete in

almost

> > 6

> > > > > hours -

> > > > > > > > not withstanding the 12 minutes above- making the

> > abhihjt

> > > > > lagna a

> > > > > > > > possibility. In such an event, the lagna also falls

in

> > the

> > > > > first

> > > > > > > > pada of Cancer, which will make lagna also vargottama.

> > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > First of all Visti is not part of this group and

didn't

> > say

> > > > > anything

> > > > > > > here (are you posting the same message in multiple

> > groups?! -

> > > > > ok. you

> > > > > > > might be referring to someone in some other group). Now

> > coming

> > > > > to the

> > > > > > > arguments about Abhijit etc.

> > > > > > > * For Navami to happen the distance between Sun and

> > Moon

> > > > > should be

> > > > > > > more than 96 degrees. That means even if Moon is at the

> > end of

> > > > > > > Punarvasu Nakshatra (i.e. 93 degree 20 min), the Sun

> > should be

> > > > > beyond

> > > > > > > 2 degree 40 min from end point of Pisces. That means

Sun

> > cannot

> > > > > have a

> > > > > > > longitude more than 27 degree 20 min in Pises. [i.e.

Sun

> > will

> > > > > take 10

> > > > > > > min at least to cover Pisces]. Now Moon being in Rasi

> > Sandhi,

> > > > > > > Nakshatra Sandhi and Tithi sandhi, (all showing bad

> > results) I

> > > > > don't

> > > > > > > think we should expect that in the chart of an avatar.

> > What ever

> > > > > that

> > > > > > > be note the points

> > > > > > > - Sun needs at least 10+ min to cover Pisces.

> > > > > > > - The Sun's longitude cannot be more than 27

> > degree 20

> > > > > min.

> > > > > > > * As you rightly pointed out Sun needs 6 hours approx

to

> > cover

> > > > > Aries,

> > > > > > > Tarus & Gemini. And thus there is a possibility that

the

> > birth

> > > > > took

> > > > > > > place at Noon - possibly in Abhijit Muhurta - Provided

the

> > day

> > > > > was a

> > > > > > > near equinox day (i.e. when day and night are almost

> > equal). Now

> > > > > comes

> > > > > > > the interesting part - the birth was in Uttarayana - so

> > were do

> > > > > you

> > > > > > > think the equinox and solstice would be? Before the 27

> > degree

> > > > > position

> > > > > > > of Sun - right - what era could it be - and where was

he

> > equinox

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > solstice then - as Kaul ji rightly puts it. So the

point

> > to be

> > > > > noted

> > > > > > > is that

> > > > > > > - essentially the Abhijit Muhurta argument

brings

> > in to

> > > > > focus

> > > > > > > the position of Solstice in to consideration.

> > > > > > > What are your opinions on the same? Can it be BC

> > 50000+ and

> > > > > still

> > > > > > > your Abhijit argument true? What do you think?

> > > > > > > * Another important question is - if Ra or Ke is in

> > > > > exaltation -

> > > > > > > which of them is in exaltation. I mean is it that when

Ra

> > is

> > > > > exalted

> > > > > > > then Ke also exalted, increasing the count of

exaltation

> > planets

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > SIX? Is it that Valmiki missed it? If not what is the

> > solution

> > > > > to this

> > > > > > > 6 planet problem? If you go by the argument both Own

house

> > (Swa)

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > Exaltation (Uccha) are considered, then what is your

> > arguments

> > > > > FORM

> > > > > > > VALMIKI RAMAYANA in support of placing Ma, Ve, Sa in

some

> > > > > particular

> > > > > > > signs? Yes, I could see that even though you presented

> > such an

> > > > > > > argument - but never followed it, by providing the

> > supplementary

> > > > > > > evidence. What do you think about this?

> > > > > > > There are other doubts too - but I think this is

enough

> > for the

> > > > > > > current mail.

> > > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In

, " kishore

> > > > > patnaik "

> > > > > > > <kishorepatnaik09@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear all,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > It is a matter of our merits that have been

accumulated

> > > > > during our

> > > > > > > earlier

> > > > > > > > births that we are spending this Diwali in the chant

of

> > Rama,

> > > > > rather

> > > > > > > than

> > > > > > > > wasting our time otherwise. I wish everyone on the

group

> > a

> > > > > merry and

> > > > > > > a holy

> > > > > > > > Diwali.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Srimad Ramayana is a depository of several yogic and

> > cosmic

> > > > > secrets.

> > > > > > > For

> > > > > > > > eg., Sree Sundara Kanda is directly interpreted as

the

> > search

> > > > > of a

> > > > > > > yogi for

> > > > > > > > the Kundalini downtrodden from Sahasrara to

Muladhara.

> > In

> > > > > fact, when

> > > > > > > I have

> > > > > > > > raised the question, I have expected the Likes of PVR

to

> > > > > search for an

> > > > > > > > answer in that angle too,.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Now, coming back to astrology, I always wondered why

> > Valmiki

> > > > > had

> > > > > > made so

> > > > > > > > much out of the planetary positions of Rama when all

the

> > four

> > > > > > > brothers have

> > > > > > > > shared the same D1, with Bharata's lagna being 9

houses

> > away

> > > > > from

> > > > > > > others, a

> > > > > > > > watery and shubha sthana nevertheless. More

poignantly,

> > > > > > shatrughan has

> > > > > > > > shared the same D1 yet, he enjoyed a normal and

smooth

> > life,

> > > > > with some

> > > > > > > > victories (such as over Ilasura) in his credit, as

> > against the

> > > > > > turbulent

> > > > > > > > life that Rama has suffered.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I think the secret lies in the Divisional charts.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > It is needless to point out that Moon of Sri Rama

> > enjoys a

> > > > > > > Vargottama. As

> > > > > > > > Visti has pointed out that it is quite possible that

> > moon is

> > > > > at the

> > > > > > > very end

> > > > > > > > of 4th pada of the asterism and this will make the

Sun

> > being in

> > > > > > the last

> > > > > > > > pada of Pisces(possibly) This will make the sun also

> > > > > vargottama.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Now, sun must be betwen 27-30 degrees of the pisces,

> > which will

> > > > > > take the

> > > > > > > > lagna to complete the same in 12 minutes. The

remaining

> > lagnas

> > > > > of

> > > > > > Aries,

> > > > > > > > Tarurus and Gemini can be complete in almost 6

hours -

> > not

> > > > > > > withstanding the

> > > > > > > > 12 minutes above- making the abhihjt lagna a

> > possibility. In

> > > > > such

> > > > > > > an event

> > > > > > > > , the lagna also falls in the first pada of Cancer,

> > which will

> > > > > make

> > > > > > > lagna

> > > > > > > > also vargottama.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Now, I leave to the Group to discuss further if I am

> > missing

> > > > > > something.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > regards,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Kishore patnaik

> > > > > > > > 98492 70729

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Finn ji,

The nirukti and dictionary quotes which gives the meaning 'Sign' to

the word 'Lagna' I will provide - please wait for the next post. Now

coming to your next argument -

==>

> However, even if we agree for the sake of argument that lagna means

> sign, how do you say that the sun was in Mina since it has very

> clearly been stated " kuleere abyudite ravav " i.e. when the sun was

> in Kuleera i.e. Karkata Rashi! Thus even if we take the sun of

> Bhagwan Rama in Mina instead of Mesha, the sun of Lakshmana and

> Shatrugana could not be in Karkata in any case.

<==

It is already answered in a previous mail to Kaul ji. But I will

re-state it here.

" kuleere abyudite ravav " It could be a simple sandhi mistake of a

missing 'aa'. And the correct reading could be " kuleere

abyuditaraavav " , meaning " Mars (aara) was in Capricorn (Kuleera) " .

Note that the meaning of the word Kuleera is given in Sanskrit

Nikhandus as " Kuleero Nakra Karkatau " meaning " The word Kuleera is

used for Capricon and Cancer " . The auther of Hridyapadha vyakhya of

Brihajjataka clearly quotes many references from various Nikhandus and

argues that the meaning Capricorn for the word Kuleera is also very

popular. Note that this solves all the confusion and shows that apart

from the position of Ju & Mo in Cancer the text provides the position

of Many other planets as well. For example it is clear from the

description given along with Bharata's Nakshatra that Sun and Mercury

are in Pisces, and from the one given along while giving the Nakshatra

of Lakshmana and Satrukhna that Mars is in Capricorn! So it becomes

clear that all those brothers are born in consecutive days, and also

that the poet didn't gave the Asc of any of them - but only the

planetary position.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, " Avtar Krishen Kaul "

<jyotirved wrote:

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

>

> Shri Sreenadh ji,

> Namaskar!

> From your curent post, it appears that both of us agree that the

> astrological references in the Valmiki Ramayana are concoctions

> since the planetary positions appear to have been for a period of

> second century BCE.

> However, you have also said

>

> <4) While describing the Nakshatra of Bharata the statement given is

> " Pushye jatastu bharato Meena Lagne Prasanna Dhee " should be

> translated to " Bharata was born in Pushya Nakshatra, and at that

> time Sun & Mercury was in the Sign Pisces " !! (Since Lagna means

> Sign - as per the usage in Ramayana; The Sanskrit dictionaries and

> Nirukti of the word Lagna too clearly support this meaning of the

> word Lagna) ->

>

> I do not agree with you here since no astrologer, howevr useless or

> ignorant he/she may be or might have been would be unaware of the

> fact that lagna means a sign ascending at the time of birth/event.

> There is a proecedure for calculating the same in the Surya Sidhanta

> also, even if that is the most inaccuate astronomical work. The

> complete sholka is " Pushye jatastu Bharato, Mina lagne

> prasannadheeh, sarpe jatatavtu saumitri, kuleere abyudite ravav " --

> 1/18/15

>

> Thus according to me Mina Lagna means Mila langa! However, even

> if we agree for the sake of argument that lagna means sign, how do

> you say that the sun was in Mina since it has very clearly been

> stated " kuleere abyudite ravav " i.e. when the sun was in Kuleera

> i.e. Karkata Rashi! Thus even if we take the sun of Bhagwan Rama in

> Mina instead of Mesha, the sun of Lakshmana and Shatrugana could not

> be in Karkata in any case.

> The names of nakshatras are very clear i.e. Shri RAm was born in

> Aditi-Daivata i.e. Punarvasu (ii) Bharata in Pushya and (iii-iv)

> Lakshmana and Shatrugana in " Sarpi " i.e. Ashlesha. They are in a

> sequence, but if the sun of Lakshamana and Shatrugana is in Karkata,

> who are younger by just two days, the sun of Shri Ram and Bharata

> cannot be either in Mina or Mesha!

>

> Thus whichever way we look at it, there certainly has been a

> manipulation of planetary positions in the Valmiki Ramayana.

> With regards,

> Avtar Krishen Kaul

> >

> > Dear Kaul ji,

> > ==>

> > > ii) The planetary position of Bhagwan Ram as given in the

> Valmiki

> > > Ramaya was " implanted " in that work by some " jyotishi " of either

> > > that period or a later one!

> > <==

> > Exactly! Not only the horoscope but the whole Ramayana is re-

> written

> > by 'Brhamanic priests' supported by Sunga dynasty - is the correct

> > argument. (And not by Jyotishis). Thus the currently available

> > 'Brahmanic Ramayana' (Why insult sage Valmiki) is clearly the work

> of

> > some 'brahmanic poet' who lived after BC 157, who took a planetary

> > position known to him and ascribed it to Rama!!

> > ==>

> > > Since 157 BC is an era of recorded history without any

> obscurity, we

> > > do not have any such records that a divine incarnation came into

> > > existence then, especially since it is after the Budha-Avtar and

> > > after the advent of Maya the mlechha into India!

> > <==

> > You are absolutely right! And that is why it is said that - it is

> > just the imagination of the poet who wrote this poem in the recent

> > past. He just took some samples from the recent history known to

> > him and manipulated the to create a long poem - that fulfills his

> > purpose. I don't have any disregard for the 'Brahmnic poet' who

> knew

> > what he was doing - but I feel pity for the people who mistook to

> > represent actual history, and believe that Monkey men with a tail

> > lived in recent past and also that Sanskrit as used in Ramayana

> > existed in the period of those monkey people. )

> > ==>

> > > Even here, you are using " J Hora " for 157 BC when all we had at

> that

> > > point of time i.e. 157 BC by way of astronomical bibles was the

> > > Surya Sidhanta of Maya the mlechha as given in the Pancha

> Sidhantika!

> > <==

> > Kaul ji, that is not that important - since the poet who wrote

> > Ramyana is not that accurate in describing the charts - not that

> he is

> > not giving any longitudes but only describes a planetary position

> of

> > BC 157. He gives the position of ALL THE PLANETS and mentions

> that

> > it was Punarvasu Nakshatra and that the Tithi was Navami. No great

> > astronomical knowledge is necessory to mention this much, and

> > therefore any software will do. Further JHora most of the

> people in

> > this group is having and they can verify the planetary position

> using

> > that.

> > If you are bewildered by the statement that " ALL THE PLANETS ARE

> > MENTIONED " , then here goes the clarification:

> > 1) Thiti Navami, Nakshatra Punar vasu - clearly stated

> > 2) Ju, Ma in Cancer - clearly stated.

> > 3) 5 planets in own house or exaltation - statement not clear.

> > Then comes the interesting part -

> > 4) While describing the Nakshatra of Bharata the statement given

> is

> > " Pushye jatastu bharato Meena Lagne Prasanna Dhee " should be

> > translated to " Bharata was born in Pushya Nakshatra, and at that

> time

> > Sun & Mercury was in the Sign Pisces " !! (Since Lagna means Sign -

> as

> > per the usage in Ramayana; The Sanskrit dictionaries and Nirukti of

> > the word Lagna too clearly support this meaning of the word

> Lagna) -

> > Thus the position of Sun and Mercury are clearly stated!

> > 5) While describing the Nakshatra of Lakshmana and Satrukhna it is

> > said that the Nakshatra is Aslesha and also that " Kuleere

> > Abhuditeaaravo " means " Arra (Mars) was in Capricon (Kuleera) " !!

> Which

> > is exact! Thus it becomes clear that our confusion about 'Sun in

> > Cancer' was just because of a Sandhi problem!! - Thus the position

> of

> > Mars is clearly stated!

> > 6) Thus what remains is the position of Sa and Ve - which as per

> the

> > given Tropical chart of 14 March 157 BC becomes clarified. Sa is in

> > Aquarius and Ve is in Taurus!

> > Thus the poet knew well what he is speaking about - the confusion

> > till date regarding this planetary position being caused by our

> > ignorance and lack of effort to understand the facts!

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , " Avtar Krishen

> Kaul "

> > <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Sreenadh ji,

> > > Namaskar!

> > > <Calculate the planetary position for 14 March -156 (Gregorian

> > > Calendar); 9.15 PM approx in JHora; and you will see what I

> mean. The

> > > Horoscope matches well with the description in Ramayana.>

> > >

> > > My dear Sreenadhji, you are making really a fool of yourself by

> such

> > > comments!

> > >

> > > All you are trying to prove is that the planetary position of

> > > Bhagwan Rama, as given in the Valmiki Ramayana, is the planetary

> > > position of March 14, 157 BC. Obviously, this leads to two

> > > conclusions:

> > > 1) Either Bhagwan Ram was born on that date i.e. March 14, 157

> BC at

> > > 9-15 PM

> > > or

> > > ii) The planetary position of Bhagwan Ram as given in the

> Valmiki

> > > Ramaya was " implanted " in that work by some " jyotishi " of either

> > > that period or a later one!

> > >

> > > Since 157 BC is an era of recroded history without any

> obscurity, we

> > > do not have any such records that a divine incarnation came into

> > > existence then, especially since it is after the Budha-Avtar and

> > > after the advent of Maya the mlechha into India!

> > >

> > > Thus all you are proving with your astrological knowledge and

> latest

> > > astronomical softwares is that some uselss and foolish jyotishi

> has

> > > implanted the planetary position of March 14, 157 BC into the

> > > Valmiki Ramayana just to make even that divine incarnation

> > > subservient to planetary suzarinity!

> > >

> > > Even here, you are using " J Hora " for 157 BC when all we had at

> that

> > > point of time i.e. 157 BC by way of astronomical bibles was the

> > > Surya Sidhanta of Maya the mlechha as given in the Pancha

> Sidhantika!

> > > And as is an open secret, that is the most useless astronomical

> work

> > > by someone who did not know even ABC of astronomy, so much so

> that

> > > he did not have any knowledge of precession either!

> > > QED/QEF

> > > With regards,

> > > AKK

> > > , " Sreenadh "

> > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > Calculate the planetary position for 14 March -156 (Gregorian

> > > > Calendar); 9.15 PM approx in JHora; and you will see what I

> mean.

> > > The

> > > > Horoscope matches well with the description in Ramayana.

> > > > Let us look at the core argument of Kaul ji -

> > > > ==>

> > > > > iii) The sun could never be in Mesha -- whether the so

> called

> > > sayana

> > > > > or the so called nirayana --- if it was Madhu Masa i.e. the

> > > first

> > > > > month of the Vasanta Ritu at the time of birth of Bhagwan

> Rama.

> > > > <==

> > > > I am yet to see any reference in so called Valmiki Ramayana

> which

> > > > states that 'Rama's birth took place in Madhu Masa'; I hope

> Kaul ji

> > > > will come up with relevant quote from the same text. ;=)

> Actually

> > > if

> > > > we read through Ramayana we could easily see that the birth

> took

> > > place

> > > > BEFORE the advent of Vasanta Ritu.

> > > > Also note that the meaning 'Sign(Rasi)' for the word 'Lagna'

> is a

> > > > very popular one, and the original one. The Nirukta defenition

> of

> > > the

> > > > word 'Lagna' itself means 'Sign (Rasi)' and not Asc, even

> though

> > > the

> > > > second meaning became popular later.

> > > > And so the conclusion - who ever made up this text - was

> > > describing

> > > > a recent planetary position which was well known to him -

> possibly

> > > a

> > > > planetary position of some king in his own period, and that is

> why

> > > > Ramayana is a mere literary text, and NOT a divine one.

> > > > ==>

> > > > > If some parts of it seems to be confusing,

> > > > > anachronistic, interpolated or manipulated, then it may

> better to

> > > > > simply wait and make further investigations into the subject.

> > > > <==

> > > > I agree - but is it not that these discussions itself is

> part of

> > > the

> > > > investigations into the subject?

> > > > ==>

> > > > > You have come up with some relevant questions regarding

> > > Ramayana's

> > > > > description of the horoscopes of Rama and Krishna. If

> possible

> > > it

> > > > > may be a good idea to compare these horoscope-descriptions

> to

> > > > > similar descriptions from other texts.

> > > > <==

> > > > Yes, I agree - and our field is wast -

> > > > Nirayana Astrology - Rishi Horas & Tantric texts

> > > > Sayana/Tropical Astrolology - Vedic literature, Epics,

> Puranas

> > > etc

> > > > There is lot of unprocessed, non-scrutinized data around, and

> we

> > > can

> > > > do much; though our studies - whether the conclusions agree

> with

> > > > popular notions and beliefs or not.

> > > > ==>

> > > > > The Garga Samhita gives a detailed description of the birth

> and

> > > the

> > > > > horoscopes of both Rama and Krishna. I have seen this

> description

> > > > > myself. Why not compare the description from Ramayana with

> the

> > > one

> > > > > given in Garga Samhita? Are they similar or are there

> > > differences?

> > > > > This may actually provide us with some new and relevant

> > > information.

> > > > <==

> > > > I agree - quote and proceed. But remember one thing - our

> major

> > > > concern in these discussions is 'Astrology in Valmiki

> Ramayana'

> > > (and

> > > > not merely the horoscope of Rama), and let us not forget the

> main

> > > area

> > > > of study, while dealing with diversions. At the end of our

> study,

> > > for

> > > > sure some useful and systematic material should come up. We

> > > will

> > > > preserve and present it - as a background for further

> > > investigations

> > > > into other areas. :=)

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > , " Finn Wandahl "

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

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Mr. Sreenadh & Mr. Kaul,

> > > > >

> > > > > Perhaps one should not draw too hasty conclusions regarding

> the

> > > origin

> > > > > of the Ramayana. If some parts of it seems to be confusing,

> > > > > anachronistic, interpolated or manipulated, then it may

> better to

> > > > > simply wait and make further investigations into the subject.

> > > > >

> > > > > You have come up with some relevant questions regarding

> > > Ramayana's

> > > > > description of the horoscopes of Rama and Krishna. If

> possible

> > > it may

> > > > > be a good idea to compare these horoscope-descriptions to

> similar

> > > > > descriptions from other texts.

> > > > >

> > > > > The Garga Samhita gives a detailed description of the birth

> and

> > > the

> > > > > horoscopes of both Rama and Krishna. I have seen this

> description

> > > > > myself. Why not compare the description from Ramayana with

> the

> > > one

> > > > > given in Garga Samhita? Are they similar or are there

> > > differences?

> > > > > This may actually provide us with some new and relevant

> > > information.

> > > > >

> > > > > :-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Finn

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Sreenadh "

> > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Kaul ji,

> > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > The best option, therefore, is that we must admit that

> these

> > > > > > > astrological combinations in the Ramayanas are later day

> > > > > > > interpolations

> > > > > > <==

> > > > > > Then why don't with a better spirit accept that the

> whole

> > > ramayana

> > > > > > itself is a made up text created between 2nd BC and 2

> AD?

> > > With the

> > > > > > numerous dereference to Buddha & Jain religions,

> Ardhasastra

> > > (of

> > > > > > Vishnugupta) etc and other numerous facts, I believe that

> it

> > > is clear

> > > > > > that it is a text created between 2 BC and 2nd AD for

> sure -

> > > or better

> > > > > > in 2AD in Sunga period itself.

> > > > > > There is no wonder that the astrological reference in

> > > Ramayana is

> > > > > > utterly wrong and seems to be made up and in the line of

> all

> > > the

> > > > > > Animal mass murder yagas and many ugly superstitions.

> Actually

> > > that

> > > > > > only can be expected from such a text that is NOT AT ALL

> > > written by

> > > > > > sage Valmiki, but possibly by some stupid brahmins of

> sunga

> > > period.

> > > > > > What else do you think can be expected from such a text?!!

> > > > > > So I will request you to better accept the fact that -

> The

> > > whole

> > > > > > Ramayana itself is a made up text - a text created with a

> > > purpose -

> > > > > > created between 2nd century BC and 2nd century AD. Even the

> > > > > > astronomical references in it is going in the same

> direction.

> > > If there

> > > > > > WAS a Valmiki Ramayana prior to the currently available

> one (as

> > > > > > referenced in Mahabharata), then that text is buried in

> dept

> > > by the

> > > > > > political and religious fanatics who had a purpose and

> wanted

> > > to

> > > > > > project brahmanic and vedic prejudices even by calling

> Buddha

> > > a thief

> > > > > > and mass murdering Buddists. It was the hall make of that

> era

> > > (BC 200

> > > > > > to AD 200), and evident from many other literary works as

> > > well.

> > > > > > So instead of going against astrologers - how about

> going

> > > against

> > > > > > and start cursing - the corrupters of scriptures who in a

> > > futile

> > > > > > effort to spread Animal killing, and brahmin projecting,

> Yaga

> > > > > > services, - rewrote all the good old ancient scripts and

> even

> > > tried to

> > > > > > steel and accommodate even the non-vedic astrological

> signs

> > > also into

> > > > > > scripts that propagated such vedic rituals? Isn't it that

> > > Ramayana is

> > > > > > also a clear proof of the same?

> > > > > > I believe - this would be more logically acceptable

> path,

> > > with

> > > > > > enough evidence in support.

> > > > > > Endnote: Ramayana is a made-up text. Not at all

> authentic.

> > > Giving it

> > > > > > importance more than a simple literary work is ignorance.

> Rama

> > > is god

> > > > > > or not is irrelevant in an academic discussion of a made

> up

> > > text like

> > > > > > Ramayana. Ramayana is a text which is NOT written by

> Valmiki

> > > for sure

> > > > > > - he cannot be such a corrupted, full of partiality and

> hatred

> > > > > > influenced, ignorant individual. Sage Valmiki was a great

> > > > > > knowledgeable sage as evident from Yoga Vasishta, and

> > > ascribing the

> > > > > > authorship of a text like currently available Ramayana on

> him

> > > is a

> > > > > > SIN, and an insult of that great sage.

> > > > > > I wil better adopt this line of thinking.

> > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , " Avtar

> > > Krishen Kaul "

> > > > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shri Sreenadh ji,

> > > > > > > Namaskar!

> > > > > > > <I request you to look in to the following argument and

> > > > > > > possibilities ->

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > On the other hand I reqeuswt all of you to ponder on the

> > > following

> > > > > > > facts, even if they are unpleasant:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 1. The Valmiki Ramayana is supposed to be Aadi Mahakavya

> > > i.e. the

> > > > > > > very first Mahakavya (Epic) of Indian history and

> Maharshi

> > > Valamiki

> > > > > > > is known as Aadi Kavi.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 2. The Mahabharata is a much later work.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 3. Shri Rama is supposed to have incarnated much

> earlier

> > > than

> > > > > > > Bhagwan Krishna.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 4. Shri Krishna is supposed to have incarnaed much

> earlier

> > > than

> > > > the

> > > > > > > Vedanga Jyotisha period -- 14th century BCE

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > A few million dollar questions are:

> > > > > > > a) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis or Mangal Shani

> etc.

> > > > planets

> > > > > > > in the VJ

> > > > > > > b) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis in the

> Mahabharata

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > c) We do not find any Mesha etc. Rashis or any Mangal

> Shani

> > > etc.

> > > > > > > planets in any of the indigenous sidhantas prior to the

> > > Surya

> > > > > > > Sidhanta of the Pancha Sidhantika!

> > > > > > > The questions arising out of these facts are:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > i )How come we find the horoscopic details of Bhagwan

> Rama,

> > > > Bharata,

> > > > > > > Shatruna and even Lakshamana in the Valmiki Ramayana?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > ii) How come in spite of the best efforts of all the

> > > astronomers

> > > > > > > nobody has been able to reconcile the irreconcilable

> facts

> > > that if

> > > > > > > Bhagwan Rama was born in Sun in Mesha and Moon in

> Karakta in

> > > > > > > Punarvasu nakshatra, it could never have been Navmki

> tithi

> > > or vice-

> > > > > > > versa?

> > > > > > > iii) The sun could never be in Mesha -- whether the so

> called

> > > > sayana

> > > > > > > or the so called nirayana --- if it was Madhu Masa i.e.

> the

> > > first

> > > > > > > month of the Vasanta Ritu at the time of birth of

> Bhagwan

> > > Rama.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > iv)The sun of the younger brothers could never have been

> in

> > > Karkata

> > > > > > > if the sun of Bhagwan Rama was in Mesha or even Mina!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > In a nutshell, the more we try to reconcile these

> > > irreconcilable

> > > > > > > facts, the more we will be making a laughing stock of

> > > ourselves!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The best option, therefore, is that we must admit that

> these

> > > > > > > astrological combinations in the Ramayanas are later day

> > > > > > > interpolations by some good for nothing overzealous

> > > astrologers who

> > > > > > > did not know even this much of astronomy that if the sun

> of

> > > Bhagwan

> > > > > > > Rama was in Mesha (or even in Mina) it could never have

> been

> > > in

> > > > > > > Karkata just after two days in the case of His siblings!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I MUST PUT ON RECORD THAT JUST FOR THIS FACT THAT WE DO

> NOT

> > > HAVE A

> > > > > > > HOROSCOPE OF BHAGWAN RAM, MY ESTEEM FOR HIM HAS

> INCREASED

> > > SINCE IT

> > > > > > > MEANS THAT HE WAS REALLY KARTUM AKARTUM ANYATHA KARTUM

> > > SAMARTH AND

> > > > > > > NOT SUBJECT TO PLANETARY SUZARINITY!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > And the tail-piece of all this haranguing is that it

> means

> > > clearly

> > > > > > > that Rishis like Valmiki nad the Veda Vayasa etc. did not

> > > > believe in

> > > > > > > any pedictive gimmicks either.

> > > > > > > With regards,

> > > > > > > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In

> , " Sreenadh "

> > > > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Kaul ji, Kishor ji, Finn ji,

> > > > > > > > I request you to look in to the following argument

> and

> > > > > > > possibilities -

> > > > > > > > * The Yaga started at the beginning of Vasanta

> Ritu.

> > > And

> > > > > > > possibly

> > > > > > > > ended near the end of Vasanta Ritu. In the 12th

> Nakshatra

> > > month

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > the end date of Yaga reached (i.e. when 280+ days, the

> > > normal

> > > > > > > period

> > > > > > > > of pregnancy is completed), and when the year was

> going to

> > > be

> > > > > > > > completed, Rama and brothers where born.

> > > > > > > > * From the mention of Navami Tithi and Punarvasu

> > > nakshatra

> > > > it is

> > > > > > > > clear that Moon was some where near 27 degrees in

> Pisces.

> > > > > > > > * It is at the Vishu date (i.e. when Sun is in the

> > > vernal

> > > > > > > equinox)

> > > > > > > > that Vasanta Ritu bigins.

> > > > > > > > * Considering the above 3 points it is clear that

> VERNAL

> > > > EQUINOX

> > > > > > > > WAS SOMEWHERE AFTER (NEAR) 27 DEGREE PISCES at the

> time of

> > > > birth of

> > > > > > > > Rama! Can we have a bit more clarify on this? Let us

> > > consider the

> > > > > > > > following point -

> > > > > > > > * Possibly, from the beginning of Vasnata Ritu, it

> is

> > > after, 60

> > > > > > > > days (Vasata Ritu) + 280 days = 340 days, that Rama

> was

> > > born.

> > > > > > > > Completion of the year could take approximately

> 365.2425 -

> > > 340 =

> > > > > > > > 25.2425 days more. Means the Ayanamsa (if at all used)

> was

> > > must

> > > > > > > tally

> > > > > > > > with this. In any case it is clear that " at the time

> of

> > > Rama's

> > > > > > > birth

> > > > > > > > Sun was between solstice and vernal equinox " ! (Because

> the

> > > next

> > > > > > > > Vasnata Ritu was yet to bigin)

> > > > > > > > So what is the important derivation and conclusion?

> > > Here it

> > > > is -

> > > > > > > > * If this is the case, certainly either -

> > > > > > > > 1)it is the description of a recent planetary

> > > position

> > > > > > > (possibly

> > > > > > > > between 250 BC and 250 AD) OR

> > > > > > > > 2)the description of a planetary position at

> least

> > > 26000

> > > > > > > years

> > > > > > > > before!

> > > > > > > > Because the same position of equinox can repeat

> only

> > > after

> > > > > > > 26000

> > > > > > > > years aprox.

> > > > > > > > I discard the 2nd choice simply as absurd and

> > > impossible -

> > > > > > > > considering out understanding of the archeological and

> > > linguistic

> > > > > > > > history of ancient india.

> > > > > > > > So the revelation is that - the planetary position

> given

> > > in

> > > > > > > Ramayana

> > > > > > > > is the description of a RECENT planetary position -

> > > possibly

> > > > > > > between

> > > > > > > > 250 BC and 250 AD!! (It is the possible period of

> origin

> > > > indicated

> > > > > > > by

> > > > > > > > various references present in Valmiki Ramayana

> itself). Is

> > > there

> > > > > > > any

> > > > > > > > year during this period which satisfies the

> conditions -

> > > provided

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > the text? The points that should become true are -

> > > > > > > > * 5 planets should be either in own sign or

> exaltation.

> > > > > > > > * Jupitor and Moon should be in Cancer

> > > > > > > > * It should be Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra

> > > > > > > > The extra points that could be considered are -

> > > > > > > > * The word 'Lagna' could means 'Sign' as well.

> > > Therefore it is

> > > > > > > NOT

> > > > > > > > necessary that Rama's Asc should be Cancer. (But if it

> is

> > > so, in

> > > > > > > all

> > > > > > > > the slokas present in Valmiki Ramayana the

> word 'Lagna'

> > > should

> > > > mean

> > > > > > > > 'Sign' itself)

> > > > > > > > * The word 'Prasanna dhee' used in Bharata's chart

> > > could mean

> > > > > > > > Mercury.

> > > > > > > > * Since Valmiki Ramayana follows the Vedic path, as

> > > could be

> > > > > > > > naturally expected, it could be a Tropical horoscope

> > > instead of a

> > > > > > > > Nirayana horoscope.

> > > > > > > > Is there a possible year in between BC 250 and AD

> 250

> > > that

> > > > > > > > satisfies these conditions? Could it be: -157 or I

> request

> > > > Kaul ji

> > > > > > > > and others to verify the following planetary position

> and

> > > the

> > > > > > > possible

> > > > > > > > date, using Tropical Zodiac-

> > > > > > > > * Ju and Moon in Cancer

> > > > > > > > * Sun and Me in Pisces

> > > > > > > > * Sa in Aquarious

> > > > > > > > * Ma in Capricon

> > > > > > > > * Ve in Tarus

> > > > > > > > * Ra & Ke in Ge-Sg axis

> > > > > > > > * Asc Scorpio!

> > > > > > > > * Suklapaksha Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra

> > > > > > > > Note that all the conditions given in the text

> Ramayana

> > > becomes

> > > > > > > true,

> > > > > > > > it the following planetary position is possible. For

> > > example -

> > > > > > > > * Ma, Sa, Ve are in own sign & Ju, Ma are in

> exaltation -

> > > > making

> > > > > > > 5

> > > > > > > > planets in own sign or exaltation.

> > > > > > > > * The tithi is Suklapaksha Navami and Nakshatra

> > > Punarvasu.

> > > > > > > > All the statements given in the text Ramayana could

> be

> > > > right, it

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > above planetary position is possible (please confirm

> it -

> > > whether

> > > > > > > it

> > > > > > > > is possible or not, by checking yourself). But then it

> > > becomes

> > > > > > > clear

> > > > > > > > that the word 'Lagna' is used in Ramayana with the

> meaning

> > > > 'Sign',

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > the word 'Prasanna dhee' to denote 'Mercury'.

> > > > > > > > I might have committed several mistakes in the above

> > > > > > > derivations, so

> > > > > > > > before confirming it, I am waiting for the response

> from

> > > the

> > > > > > > learned

> > > > > > > > scholars.

> > > > > > > > Note: Possibly I haven't yet done my homework right,

> so

> > > pardon

> > > > > > > me if

> > > > > > > > I have committed mistakes in the above

> argumentation.

> > > > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In

> , " Sreenadh "

> > > > > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Kishore ji,

> > > > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > > Now, coming back to astrology, I always wondered why

> > > Valmiki

> > > > had

> > > > > > > made

> > > > > > > > > so much out of the planetary positions of Rama when

> all

> > > the four

> > > > > > > > > brothers have shared the same D1, with Bharata's

> lagna

> > > being 9

> > > > > > > houses

> > > > > > > > > away from others, a watery and shubha sthana

> > > nevertheless. More

> > > > > > > > > poignantly, shatrughan has shared the same D1 yet,

> he

> > > enjoyed a

> > > > > > > normal

> > > > > > > > > and smooth life, with some victories (such as over

> > > Ilasura) in

> > > > > > > his

> > > > > > > > > credit, as against the turbulent life that Rama has

> > > suffered.

> > > > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > > > I disagree. Valmiki Ramayana clearly indicates

> that in

> > > Rama's

> > > > > > > chart

> > > > > > > > > Sun is in Pisces, and it clearly states that when

> > > Lakshmana and

> > > > > > > > > Satrukhna were born Sun was in Cancer. Thus the

> Natal

> > > chart

> > > > > > > (calling

> > > > > > > > > it D1 is wrong - because D1 means Sign and NOT natal

> > > chart) of

> > > > > > > them

> > > > > > > > > are NOT same, as you refer to. Further the Lagna

> also

> > > differs.

> > > > > > > For

> > > > > > > > > Rama the Lagna is Cancer, for Bharata it is Pisces,

> and

> > > for

> > > > > > > Lekshmana

> > > > > > > > > and Satrukhna we don't know clearly what it was. If

> > > statements

> > > > > > > > > available in, currently available Valmiki Ramayana

> is

> > > true -

> > > > then

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmana and Satrukhana were born 4+ months after

> the

> > > birth of

> > > > > > > Rama

> > > > > > > > > and so the planetary positions of their chart should

> > > also

> > > > > > > differ. If

> > > > > > > > > you are of the opinion that the statement " When the

> > > children of

> > > > > > > > > Sumitra (Lakshmana and Satrukhna) were born Sun was

> in

> > > Cancer "

> > > > > > > present

> > > > > > > > > in current Valmiki Ramaya is wrong - then it is a

> > > different

> > > > > > > thing. Is

> > > > > > > > > that your argument?

> > > > > > > > > So in essence the natal chart itself of Rama and

> > > brothers

> > > > > > > differ,

> > > > > > > > > and naturally different results follow.

> > > > > > > > > > I think the secret lies in the Divisional charts.

> > > > > > > > > You can think anything - but for sure valimiki was

> > > unaware of

> > > > > > > > > 'Divisional charts' even though a possibility

> > > for 'Divisions'

> > > > > > > (which

> > > > > > > > > alone is supported by ancient astrological classics)

> > > exist. But

> > > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > > too certainly there is not even a single statement

> in

> > > Ramayana

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > shows that he (the author of that book) was even

> aware

> > > of

> > > > > > > divisions.

> > > > > > > > > ==>

> > > > > > > > > > As Visti has pointed out that it is quite possible

> > > that moon

> > > > > > > is at

> > > > > > > > > > the very end of 4th pada of the asterism and this

> will

> > > make

> > > > > > > the Sun

> > > > > > > > > > being in the last pada of Pisces(possibly) This

> will

> > > make the

> > > > > > > sun

> > > > > > > > > > also vargottama.

> > > > > > > > > > Now, sun must be betwen 27-30 degrees of the

> pisces,

> > > which

> > > > > > > will take

> > > > > > > > > > the lagna to complete the same in 12 minutes. The

> > > remaining

> > > > > > > lagnas

> > > > > > > > > > of Aries, Tarurus and Gemini can be complete in

> > > almost 6

> > > > > > > hours -

> > > > > > > > > > not withstanding the 12 minutes above- making the

> > > abhihjt

> > > > > > > lagna a

> > > > > > > > > > possibility. In such an event, the lagna also

> falls in

> > > the

> > > > > > > first

> > > > > > > > > > pada of Cancer, which will make lagna also

> vargottama.

> > > > > > > > > <==

> > > > > > > > > First of all Visti is not part of this group and

> > > didn't say

> > > > > > > anything

> > > > > > > > > here (are you posting the same message in multiple

> > > groups?! -

> > > > > > > ok. you

> > > > > > > > > might be referring to someone in some other group).

> Now

> > > coming

> > > > > > > to the

> > > > > > > > > arguments about Abhijit etc.

> > > > > > > > > * For Navami to happen the distance between Sun

> and

> > > Moon

> > > > > > > should be

> > > > > > > > > more than 96 degrees. That means even if Moon is at

> the

> > > end of

> > > > > > > > > Punarvasu Nakshatra (i.e. 93 degree 20 min), the Sun

> > > should be

> > > > > > > beyond

> > > > > > > > > 2 degree 40 min from end point of Pisces. That means

> Sun

> > > cannot

> > > > > > > have a

> > > > > > > > > longitude more than 27 degree 20 min in Pises. [i.e.

> Sun

> > > will

> > > > > > > take 10

> > > > > > > > > min at least to cover Pisces]. Now Moon being in

> Rasi

> > > Sandhi,

> > > > > > > > > Nakshatra Sandhi and Tithi sandhi, (all showing bad

> > > results) I

> > > > > > > don't

> > > > > > > > > think we should expect that in the chart of an

> avatar.

> > > What

> > > > ever

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > be note the points

> > > > > > > > > - Sun needs at least 10+ min to cover

> Pisces.

> > > > > > > > > - The Sun's longitude cannot be more than

> 27

> > > degree 20

> > > > > > > min.

> > > > > > > > > * As you rightly pointed out Sun needs 6 hours

> approx

> > > to cover

> > > > > > > Aries,

> > > > > > > > > Tarus & Gemini. And thus there is a possibility that

> the

> > > birth

> > > > > > > took

> > > > > > > > > place at Noon - possibly in Abhijit Muhurta -

> Provided

> > > the day

> > > > > > > was a

> > > > > > > > > near equinox day (i.e. when day and night are almost

> > > equal).

> > > > Now

> > > > > > > comes

> > > > > > > > > the interesting part - the birth was in Uttarayana -

> so

> > > were do

> > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > think the equinox and solstice would be? Before the

> 27

> > > degree

> > > > > > > position

> > > > > > > > > of Sun - right - what era could it be - and where

> was he

> > > > equinox

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > solstice then - as Kaul ji rightly puts it. So the

> point

> > > to be

> > > > > > > noted

> > > > > > > > > is that

> > > > > > > > > - essentially the Abhijit Muhurta argument

> > > brings in to

> > > > > > > focus

> > > > > > > > > the position of Solstice in to consideration.

> > > > > > > > > What are your opinions on the same? Can it be BC

> > > 50000+ and

> > > > > > > still

> > > > > > > > > your Abhijit argument true? What do you think?

> > > > > > > > > * Another important question is - if Ra or Ke is

> in

> > > > > > > exaltation -

> > > > > > > > > which of them is in exaltation. I mean is it that

> when

> > > Ra is

> > > > > > > exalted

> > > > > > > > > then Ke also exalted, increasing the count of

> exaltation

> > > > planets

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > SIX? Is it that Valmiki missed it? If not what is

> the

> > > solution

> > > > > > > to this

> > > > > > > > > 6 planet problem? If you go by the argument both Own

> > > house

> > > > (Swa)

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > Exaltation (Uccha) are considered, then what is your

> > > arguments

> > > > > > > FORM

> > > > > > > > > VALMIKI RAMAYANA in support of placing Ma, Ve, Sa in

> > > some

> > > > > > > particular

> > > > > > > > > signs? Yes, I could see that even though you

> presented

> > > such an

> > > > > > > > > argument - but never followed it, by providing the

> > > supplementary

> > > > > > > > > evidence. What do you think about this?

> > > > > > > > > There are other doubts too - but I think this is

> enough

> > > > for the

> > > > > > > > > current mail.

> > > > > > > > > Love,

> > > > > > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > --- In

> > > , " kishore

> > > > > > > patnaik "

> > > > > > > > > <kishorepatnaik09@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear all,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > It is a matter of our merits that have been

> > > accumulated

> > > > > > > during our

> > > > > > > > > earlier

> > > > > > > > > > births that we are spending this Diwali in the

> chant

> > > of Rama,

> > > > > > > rather

> > > > > > > > > than

> > > > > > > > > > wasting our time otherwise. I wish everyone on the

> > > group a

> > > > > > > merry and

> > > > > > > > > a holy

> > > > > > > > > > Diwali.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Srimad Ramayana is a depository of several yogic

> and

> > > cosmic

> > > > > > > secrets.

> > > > > > > > > For

> > > > > > > > > > eg., Sree Sundara Kanda is directly interpreted as

> the

> > > search

> > > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > > yogi for

> > > > > > > > > > the Kundalini downtrodden from Sahasrara to

> Muladhara.

> > > In

> > > > > > > fact, when

> > > > > > > > > I have

> > > > > > > > > > raised the question, I have expected the Likes of

> PVR

> > > to

> > > > > > > search for an

> > > > > > > > > > answer in that angle too,.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Now, coming back to astrology, I always wondered

> why

> > > Valmiki

> > > > > > > had

> > > > > > > > made so

> > > > > > > > > > much out of the planetary positions of Rama when

> all

> > > the four

> > > > > > > > > brothers have

> > > > > > > > > > shared the same D1, with Bharata's lagna being 9

> > > houses away

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > others, a

> > > > > > > > > > watery and shubha sthana nevertheless. More

> > > poignantly,

> > > > > > > > shatrughan has

> > > > > > > > > > shared the same D1 yet, he enjoyed a normal and

> smooth

> > > life,

> > > > > > > with some

> > > > > > > > > > victories (such as over Ilasura) in his credit, as

> > > against the

> > > > > > > > turbulent

> > > > > > > > > > life that Rama has suffered.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I think the secret lies in the Divisional charts.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > It is needless to point out that Moon of Sri Rama

> > > enjoys a

> > > > > > > > > Vargottama. As

> > > > > > > > > > Visti has pointed out that it is quite possible

> that

> > > moon is

> > > > > > > at the

> > > > > > > > > very end

> > > > > > > > > > of 4th pada of the asterism and this will make the

> Sun

> > > > being in

> > > > > > > > the last

> > > > > > > > > > pada of Pisces(possibly) This will make the sun

> also

> > > > > > > vargottama.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Now, sun must be betwen 27-30 degrees of the

> pisces,

> > > which

> > > > will

> > > > > > > > take the

> > > > > > > > > > lagna to complete the same in 12 minutes. The

> remaining

> > > > lagnas

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > Aries,

> > > > > > > > > > Tarurus and Gemini can be complete in almost 6

> hours -

> > > not

> > > > > > > > > withstanding the

> > > > > > > > > > 12 minutes above- making the abhihjt lagna a

> > > possibility. In

> > > > > > > such

> > > > > > > > > an event

> > > > > > > > > > , the lagna also falls in the first pada of

> Cancer,

> > > which

> > > > will

> > > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > > lagna

> > > > > > > > > > also vargottama.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Now, I leave to the Group to discuss further if I

> am

> > > missing

> > > > > > > > something.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > regards,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Kishore patnaik

> > > > > > > > > > 98492 70729

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Finn ji,

==>

> Religious texts are often self-contradictive and anachronistic by

> nature. This goes for all the major religions. But we cannot dismiss

> them as being not " divine " for this reason. The very fact that they

> have been an object for worship for ages has made them " divine " for

> anyone who believe them to be so.

<==

I agree. Usually I am reluctant of such contraversies - but when

happened to approach a subject I used to approach it sincerely. You

are right in indicating that it is right to avoid some possible

controversies. But note that it is people like Kaul ji who forces us

and brings into arguments - and then jumps out, and request to stop -

as if in frying pan! Yah, it is better to go back to Nirayana

astrology and throw out the discussion related to Tropical astrology

in texts like Ramayana for a while. Also it might be even advisable

(at least for me) to ignore the mails of Kaul ji - for a while. He may

again bring in some new subject and jump around when the arguments

heats up!

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, " Finn Wandahl "

<finn.wandahl wrote:

>

> Dear Sreenadh,

>

> Religious texts are often self-contradictive and anachronistic by

> nature. This goes for all the major religions. But we cannot dismiss

> them as being not " divine " for this reason. The very fact that they

> have been an object for worship for ages has made them " divine " for

> anyone who believe them to be so.

>

> Anyway, while dealing with sacred texts of any religion, we need to

> show at least a minimum of respect and dignity. Especially when we

> debate these texts in public.

>

> Very friendly,

> Finn Wandahl

>

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Finn ji,

> > Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but NOT

> > written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many - especially

> > south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by many

like -

> > * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to Bhakri) and

> > * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)

> > - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only south

> > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,

> > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas - not

> > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is a fact

> > is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies - and

> > one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of course

> > many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in this

> > group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in Ramayana – many

> > of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both sides of

> > the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or

> > against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we are dealing with

> > such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical astrology

> > then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are approaching

> > the subject sincerely.

> > Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for the

> advice.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > >

> > > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and NOT a

> > > divine one...<<

> > >

> > > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason to hurt

> > > some peoples religious feelings...

> > >

> > > Finn

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Shri Sreenadh ji,

Namaskar!

<OK. That means that you agree to the fact that large scale

re-casting of ramayana is a clear possibility around 2nd Century

BCE....And the following words of yours clarifies it.

There have been redactions in the astronomical works -- plagiarisms

galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the astronomical

portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due credits!>

 

All this haranguing is really unnecessary. I have summarized my

stand clearly that if you want to restore any scriptural works ---

whether from South or noth---or epics etc. to their pristine order,

you may just start a different forum for that purpose! I will join

your that forum also, since as you know, my aim is equally to

ascertain the Truth and nothing but Truth. You are cluttering this

forum unnecessarily with such extraneous issues since this forum is

meant to find whether there is any truth in " ancient Indian

astrology " or not.

 

It aught to have been clear to you by now that if our fasts, fairs

and muhurtas were not decreed by " almighty " Lahiris and Lahiriwalas

I would not have touched the topic of the fraud called Vedic

astrology even with a barge pole just as I have not touched the

topics of Tarot Cards or Palmisty or Physiognomy or Vastu etc. etc.

etc. anywhere since they are irrelevant to my task of reforming the

Hindu calendar.

 

It is only because of those reasons that as and when I find any

references to planetary combinations in the Puranas and the epics

etc which " Vedic astrologers " try to justify/explain in order to

exhibit their " astrological prowess " vis-a-vis our festivals and

muhurtas etc. that I get into a direct confrontatio with them!

 

You will recall that the topic of Bhagwan Rama's horoscope was

started actually by Shri Kedarnath ji --- " prakrutiprem " ---on the

Vedic_research_institue forum instead of this

() forum where it should have actually been

started---and I had tried to put the records staraight there. I had

not started that topic, just as I have not started the topic of the

dates of the Mbh war. But as and when predictive gimmicks are tried

to be justified on the basis of thos " records " in the epics or

Puranas etc., those records have to be put straight--only to the

extent of the portion that is relevant to the topic at hand---

nothing more and nothing less!

It is as simple as that.

With regards,

AKK

 

 

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Kaul ji,

> ==>

> > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after

2nd

> > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to

Valmiki

> > much prior to that period!

> <==

> OK. That means that you agree to the fact that large scale

> re-casting of ramayana is a clear possibility around 2nd Century

BCE.

> And the following words of yours clarifies it.

> ==>

> > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --

plagiarisms

> > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the

astronomical

> > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due

credits!

> > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> > present version of the Surya Sidhanta!

> <==

> Good that we agree on many points.

> ==>

> > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu "

and " Varuna "

> > and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in

his

> > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the

worst

> > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara

Hora

> > Shastram---all the versions available currently!

> <==

> That is why the question - Why can't you accept the same to be

true

> for Ramayana?!! An impartial person must be simply able to do that!

> But yes, you want to discard astrology, and then too preserve

Hinduism

> by preserving all those irrelevant rituals and baseless

beliefs. Is

> that not charlatanism?

> ==>

> > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables!

> <==

> Answer me sincerely - why can't I tell the same to you? It is

> clearly what the discussion on Ramayana reveals. )

> ==>

> > You (and me as well!) are no authority on history!

> <==

> Agree - and I am not after history - except some glimpses of it -

> here and there where ever necessary.

> ==>

> > Even there we find at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas --

 

> > the most prominent

> > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> > versions in South India, perhaps the most prominent one

being " Kamba

> > Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that

work,

> > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we

have

> > Ramayanas in several forms!

> <==

> But what is the importance of several ramayanas here?! We are

just

> talking about Ramayana that is ascribed to Valmiki - right? Now

about

> the most prominent Ramayana in south - your statement is utterly

> wrong. South is not that simple. In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma

> Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat

Ezhuttachan; In

> Tamil nadu one of them is Kamba Ramayana I believe (but not sure -

i

> am not an authority on the same) - but there could be some other

works

> as well. (By the way Kambar wrote that Ramayana at the Krishna

temple

> in my native village) In several other states in South 'Adhyatma

> Ramayana' I believe. But the simple fact is that - south is so vast

> with varying cultures and languages of AP,Karnataka, Kerala,

> Tamilnadu, and the Tulu language and culture of Western cost. Every

> state is a knowledge house - actually the believed to be lost

Sanskrit

> works are coming to light now a days by re-writing the ancient

> Sanskrit works from Southern Regional scripts to Devanagari

script.

> ==>

> > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> > astronomical points alone in this forum.

> <==

> Thanks for the advice.

> ==>

> > pl. go through the Manusmriti!

> <==

> Lol....) I know what it is - are you starting a new

controversy?!!

> ==>

> > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue which

> > is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> <==

> We will haply do that - then again don't come in-between with

> Valmiki (or any other) Ramayana or such references. ) Do you

> remember - it is YOU who started it all. ) If you don't remember

> read

/message/3495

> So the lesson to remember is - don't put your hand in the frying

pan!

> Or if you does please have the patience to wait till it gets fried

> enough! Lol..... ) And now you comes out with the advice – don't

> discuss Valmiki Ramyana – if not laugh, what can I do?!! ) Don't

> commit the same with Manusmriti – it is ok, in astrology forum we

can

> safely ignore it.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

>

> , " Avtar Krishen

Kaul "

> <jyotirved@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sreenadhji,

> > Namaskar!

> > <Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > Ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only south

> > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,

> > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -

not

> > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world.>

> >

> > You are confusing the issues unnecessarily!

> >

> > The fact rmains that there has been a historial personality like

> > Shri Ram prior to Shri Krishen as it is mentioned in several

works

> > including the Mbh.

> >

> > Irrespecitve of the fact whether Kaliyuga started in 3102 BCE or

is

> > yet to start, Shri Krishen had incarnated at least --- if worst

coms

> > to worst!---prior to one thousand BCE. Obviously, Shri Ram had

> > incarnated much before Him.

> >

> > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after

2nd

> > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to

Valmiki

> > much prior to that period!

> >

> > Now comes the point of redactions in the Ramayana!

> >

> > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --

plagiarisms

> > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the

astronomical

> > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due

credits!

> > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> > present version of the Surya Sidhanta! Maya the mlechha did not

> > disclose his original name that he was a Greek stooge sent to

> > confuse Hindus by making them astro adicts!

> >

> > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu "

and " Varuna "

> > and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in

his

> > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the

worst

> > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara

Hora

> > Shastram---all the versions available currently!

> >

> > Uttarakalamrita of some god-forsaken Kalidasa is being claimed

to

> > have been written by Maha-kavi Kalidasa and so on!

> >

> > In spite of such glaring fake products jyotishis are running

after

> > them and vying with one another to be called as " Varahamahira "

when

> > actually he was the " greatest charlatan of the last two

millennia " !

> >

> > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables! You

> > first clear the mental cobwebs of " jyotishis " about all such

> > astrological and " astronomical " works by " stalwats " since you

are

> > supposed to be an authority about those books/tpics/points. You

> > (and me as well!) are no authority on history! Even there we

find

> > at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas -- the most

prominent

> > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> > versions in South India, perhaps the most promnent one

being " Kamba

> > Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that

work,

> > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we

have

> > Ramayanas in several forms!

> >

> > There is a work " Raghuvamasham " by Kalidasa, and it is sheer

beauty

> > just for the poetry itself!

> >

> > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> > astronomical points alone in this forum. If you want to discuss

the

> > originality or otherwise of the Valmiki Ramayana, then you have

to

> > discuss other works also, whether they are from South India or

from

> > North. For that purpose, you may create a different forum and

have

> > a thorough discussion! Mention the purpose of that forum in

> > the " frontspiece " there. I will ge glad to join you there also

and

> > try to sift the grain from the chaf! But right now you are

treading

> > on too many toes unnecessarily and this is not going to serve

any

> > purpose!

> >

> > (About the reality of Valmiki Rishi, pl. go through Adyatma

Ramayana!

> > About the real qualities/qualifications--or lack of them!--of

> > Brahmins, pl. go through the Manusmriti!)

> > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue whch

> > is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> > With regards,

> > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> >

> >

> > , " Sreenadh "

> > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but

NOT

> > > written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many -

> > especially

> > > south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by

many

> > like -

> > > * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to

Bhakri)

> > and

> > > * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)

> > > - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > > ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only

south

> > > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus,

buddists,

> > > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -

not

> > > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is

a

> > fact

> > > is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies -

and

> > > one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of

> > course

> > > many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in

this

> > > group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in

Ramayana –

> > many

> > > of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both

sides of

> > > the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or

> > > against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we are dealing

with

> > > such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical

> > astrology

> > > then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are

> > approaching

> > > the subject sincerely.

> > > Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for

the

> > advice.

> > > Love,

> > > Sreenadh

> > >

> > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > > >

> > > > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and

NOT a

> > > > divine one...<<

> > > >

> > > > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason

to

> > hurt

> > > > some peoples religious feelings...

> > > >

> > > > Finn

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Shri Sreeenadh ji,

Namaskar!

<In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma

Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat Ezhuttachan;>

 

In the Adyatmaramayana of the Gita Press edition, following is the

planetary postion at the time of Bhagwan Rama:

 

" madhumasse site pakshe navmyam karkate shubhe

punarvasu sahite uchasthe grahapanchake

mesham pooshani samprapte pushpavrishti samakule

aviraseej jagan nathah parmatma sanatanah " (1/3/14-15)

 

A running translation of these shlokas is

" In the month of Madhu, shukla paksha --bright half--in navmi tithi

and punarvasu nakshara, when five planets were exalted, the sun was

in Mesha, the Eternal Lord of the worlds, Parmatma, incarnated.... "

 

 

1. Here the sun has specifically been put in Mesha but at the same

time it is Madhu masa -- which is an astronomical impossibility!

 

2. Five planets are exalted but there is no mention that any planet

is in its own rashi.

 

3. There is no menion of Karkata lagna or the Moon in Karkata, but

if the Sun is in Mesha and it is Navmi tithi, it means that even if

the sun is in 1 degree of Mesha the Moon has to be at a distance of

more than 96 degrees from the same. Thus the Moon will be in

Karkata 7 degrees to Karkata 20-20. But then Punarvasu nakshatra

ranges from Mithuna 20 degrees to Karkata 3-20. Thus it is again an

astronomical impossibility.

 

In short, whichever way you look at it, whether it is the Valmiki

Ramayana or the Adyatma Ramayana, the astronomical Rashi position of

the planets cannot be justifed at all!

With regards,

AKK

 

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Kaul ji,

> ==>

> > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after

2nd

> > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to

Valmiki

> > much prior to that period!

> <==

> OK. That means that you agree to the fact that large scale

> re-casting of ramayana is a clear possibility around 2nd Century

BCE.

> And the following words of yours clarifies it.

> ==>

> > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --

plagiarisms

> > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the

astronomical

> > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due

credits!

> > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> > present version of the Surya Sidhanta!

> <==

> Good that we agree on many points.

> ==>

> > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu "

and " Varuna "

> > and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in

his

> > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the

worst

> > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara

Hora

> > Shastram---all the versions available currently!

> <==

> That is why the question - Why can't you accept the same to be

true

> for Ramayana?!! An impartial person must be simply able to do that!

> But yes, you want to discard astrology, and then too preserve

Hinduism

> by preserving all those irrelevant rituals and baseless

beliefs. Is

> that not charlatanism?

> ==>

> > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables!

> <==

> Answer me sincerely - why can't I tell the same to you? It is

> clearly what the discussion on Ramayana reveals. )

> ==>

> > You (and me as well!) are no authority on history!

> <==

> Agree - and I am not after history - except some glimpses of it -

> here and there where ever necessary.

> ==>

> > Even there we find at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas --

 

> > the most prominent

> > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> > versions in South India, perhaps the most prominent one

being " Kamba

> > Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that

work,

> > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we

have

> > Ramayanas in several forms!

> <==

> But what is the importance of several ramayanas here?! We are

just

> talking about Ramayana that is ascribed to Valmiki - right? Now

about

> the most prominent Ramayana in south - your statement is utterly

> wrong. South is not that simple. In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma

> Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat

Ezhuttachan; In

> Tamil nadu one of them is Kamba Ramayana I believe (but not sure -

i

> am not an authority on the same) - but there could be some other

works

> as well. (By the way Kambar wrote that Ramayana at the Krishna

temple

> in my native village) In several other states in South 'Adhyatma

> Ramayana' I believe. But the simple fact is that - south is so vast

> with varying cultures and languages of AP,Karnataka, Kerala,

> Tamilnadu, and the Tulu language and culture of Western cost. Every

> state is a knowledge house - actually the believed to be lost

Sanskrit

> works are coming to light now a days by re-writing the ancient

> Sanskrit works from Southern Regional scripts to Devanagari

script.

> ==>

> > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> > astronomical points alone in this forum.

> <==

> Thanks for the advice.

> ==>

> > pl. go through the Manusmriti!

> <==

> Lol....) I know what it is - are you starting a new

controversy?!!

> ==>

> > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue which

> > is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> <==

> We will haply do that - then again don't come in-between with

> Valmiki (or any other) Ramayana or such references. ) Do you

> remember - it is YOU who started it all. ) If you don't remember

> read

/message/3495

> So the lesson to remember is - don't put your hand in the frying

pan!

> Or if you does please have the patience to wait till it gets fried

> enough! Lol..... ) And now you comes out with the advice – don't

> discuss Valmiki Ramyana – if not laugh, what can I do?!! ) Don't

> commit the same with Manusmriti – it is ok, in astrology forum we

can

> safely ignore it.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

>

> , " Avtar Krishen

Kaul "

> <jyotirved@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sreenadhji,

> > Namaskar!

> > <Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > Ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only south

> > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,

> > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -

not

> > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world.>

> >

> > You are confusing the issues unnecessarily!

> >

> > The fact rmains that there has been a historial personality like

> > Shri Ram prior to Shri Krishen as it is mentioned in several

works

> > including the Mbh.

> >

> > Irrespecitve of the fact whether Kaliyuga started in 3102 BCE or

is

> > yet to start, Shri Krishen had incarnated at least --- if worst

coms

> > to worst!---prior to one thousand BCE. Obviously, Shri Ram had

> > incarnated much before Him.

> >

> > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after

2nd

> > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to

Valmiki

> > much prior to that period!

> >

> > Now comes the point of redactions in the Ramayana!

> >

> > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --

plagiarisms

> > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the

astronomical

> > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due

credits!

> > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> > present version of the Surya Sidhanta! Maya the mlechha did not

> > disclose his original name that he was a Greek stooge sent to

> > confuse Hindus by making them astro adicts!

> >

> > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu "

and " Varuna "

> > and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in

his

> > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the

worst

> > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara

Hora

> > Shastram---all the versions available currently!

> >

> > Uttarakalamrita of some god-forsaken Kalidasa is being claimed

to

> > have been written by Maha-kavi Kalidasa and so on!

> >

> > In spite of such glaring fake products jyotishis are running

after

> > them and vying with one another to be called as " Varahamahira "

when

> > actually he was the " greatest charlatan of the last two

millennia " !

> >

> > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables! You

> > first clear the mental cobwebs of " jyotishis " about all such

> > astrological and " astronomical " works by " stalwats " since you

are

> > supposed to be an authority about those books/tpics/points. You

> > (and me as well!) are no authority on history! Even there we

find

> > at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas -- the most

prominent

> > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> > versions in South India, perhaps the most promnent one

being " Kamba

> > Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that

work,

> > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we

have

> > Ramayanas in several forms!

> >

> > There is a work " Raghuvamasham " by Kalidasa, and it is sheer

beauty

> > just for the poetry itself!

> >

> > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> > astronomical points alone in this forum. If you want to discuss

the

> > originality or otherwise of the Valmiki Ramayana, then you have

to

> > discuss other works also, whether they are from South India or

from

> > North. For that purpose, you may create a different forum and

have

> > a thorough discussion! Mention the purpose of that forum in

> > the " frontspiece " there. I will ge glad to join you there also

and

> > try to sift the grain from the chaf! But right now you are

treading

> > on too many toes unnecessarily and this is not going to serve

any

> > purpose!

> >

> > (About the reality of Valmiki Rishi, pl. go through Adyatma

Ramayana!

> > About the real qualities/qualifications--or lack of them!--of

> > Brahmins, pl. go through the Manusmriti!)

> > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue whch

> > is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> > With regards,

> > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> >

> >

> > , " Sreenadh "

> > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but

NOT

> > > written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many -

> > especially

> > > south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by

many

> > like -

> > > * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to

Bhakri)

> > and

> > > * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)

> > > - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > > ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only

south

> > > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus,

buddists,

> > > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -

not

> > > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is

a

> > fact

> > > is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies -

and

> > > one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of

> > course

> > > many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in

this

> > > group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in

Ramayana –

> > many

> > > of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both

sides of

> > > the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or

> > > against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we are dealing

with

> > > such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical

> > astrology

> > > then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are

> > approaching

> > > the subject sincerely.

> > > Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for

the

> > advice.

> > > Love,

> > > Sreenadh

> > >

> > > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > > >

> > > > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and

NOT a

> > > > divine one...<<

> > > >

> > > > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason

to

> > hurt

> > > > some peoples religious feelings...

> > > >

> > > > Finn

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Kaul,

Your post does not deserve a decent reply after the approch you

have shown. I request you to stop all postings on 'Valmiki'(sic)

Ramayana.

Regards,

Sreenadh

 

, " Avtar Krishen Kaul "

<jyotirved wrote:

>

> Shri Sreeenadh ji,

> Namaskar!

> <In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma

> Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat Ezhuttachan;>

>

> In the Adyatmaramayana of the Gita Press edition, following is the

> planetary postion at the time of Bhagwan Rama:

>

> " madhumasse site pakshe navmyam karkate shubhe

> punarvasu sahite uchasthe grahapanchake

> mesham pooshani samprapte pushpavrishti samakule

> aviraseej jagan nathah parmatma sanatanah " (1/3/14-15)

>

> A running translation of these shlokas is

> " In the month of Madhu, shukla paksha --bright half--in navmi tithi

> and punarvasu nakshara, when five planets were exalted, the sun was

> in Mesha, the Eternal Lord of the worlds, Parmatma, incarnated.... "

>

>

> 1. Here the sun has specifically been put in Mesha but at the same

> time it is Madhu masa -- which is an astronomical impossibility!

>

> 2. Five planets are exalted but there is no mention that any planet

> is in its own rashi.

>

> 3. There is no menion of Karkata lagna or the Moon in Karkata, but

> if the Sun is in Mesha and it is Navmi tithi, it means that even if

> the sun is in 1 degree of Mesha the Moon has to be at a distance of

> more than 96 degrees from the same. Thus the Moon will be in

> Karkata 7 degrees to Karkata 20-20. But then Punarvasu nakshatra

> ranges from Mithuna 20 degrees to Karkata 3-20. Thus it is again an

> astronomical impossibility.

>

> In short, whichever way you look at it, whether it is the Valmiki

> Ramayana or the Adyatma Ramayana, the astronomical Rashi position of

> the planets cannot be justifed at all!

> With regards,

> AKK

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Kaul ji,

> > ==>

> > > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after

> 2nd

> > > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to

> Valmiki

> > > much prior to that period!

> > <==

> > OK. That means that you agree to the fact that large scale

> > re-casting of ramayana is a clear possibility around 2nd Century

> BCE.

> > And the following words of yours clarifies it.

> > ==>

> > > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --

> plagiarisms

> > > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the

> astronomical

> > > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due

> credits!

> > > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> > > present version of the Surya Sidhanta!

> > <==

> > Good that we agree on many points.

> > ==>

> > > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu "

> and " Varuna "

> > > and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in

> his

> > > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the

> worst

> > > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara

> Hora

> > > Shastram---all the versions available currently!

> > <==

> > That is why the question - Why can't you accept the same to be

> true

> > for Ramayana?!! An impartial person must be simply able to do that!

> > But yes, you want to discard astrology, and then too preserve

> Hinduism

> > by preserving all those irrelevant rituals and baseless

> beliefs. Is

> > that not charlatanism?

> > ==>

> > > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> > > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables!

> > <==

> > Answer me sincerely - why can't I tell the same to you? It is

> > clearly what the discussion on Ramayana reveals. )

> > ==>

> > > You (and me as well!) are no authority on history!

> > <==

> > Agree - and I am not after history - except some glimpses of it -

> > here and there where ever necessary.

> > ==>

> > > Even there we find at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas --

>

> > > the most prominent

> > > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> > > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> > > versions in South India, perhaps the most prominent one

> being " Kamba

> > > Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that

> work,

> > > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we

> have

> > > Ramayanas in several forms!

> > <==

> > But what is the importance of several ramayanas here?! We are

> just

> > talking about Ramayana that is ascribed to Valmiki - right? Now

> about

> > the most prominent Ramayana in south - your statement is utterly

> > wrong. South is not that simple. In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma

> > Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat

> Ezhuttachan; In

> > Tamil nadu one of them is Kamba Ramayana I believe (but not sure -

> i

> > am not an authority on the same) - but there could be some other

> works

> > as well. (By the way Kambar wrote that Ramayana at the Krishna

> temple

> > in my native village) In several other states in South 'Adhyatma

> > Ramayana' I believe. But the simple fact is that - south is so vast

> > with varying cultures and languages of AP,Karnataka, Kerala,

> > Tamilnadu, and the Tulu language and culture of Western cost. Every

> > state is a knowledge house - actually the believed to be lost

> Sanskrit

> > works are coming to light now a days by re-writing the ancient

> > Sanskrit works from Southern Regional scripts to Devanagari

> script.

> > ==>

> > > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> > > astronomical points alone in this forum.

> > <==

> > Thanks for the advice.

> > ==>

> > > pl. go through the Manusmriti!

> > <==

> > Lol....) I know what it is - are you starting a new

> controversy?!!

> > ==>

> > > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue which

> > > is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> > <==

> > We will haply do that - then again don't come in-between with

> > Valmiki (or any other) Ramayana or such references. ) Do you

> > remember - it is YOU who started it all. ) If you don't remember

> > read

> /message/3495

> > So the lesson to remember is - don't put your hand in the frying

> pan!

> > Or if you does please have the patience to wait till it gets fried

> > enough! Lol..... ) And now you comes out with the advice – don't

> > discuss Valmiki Ramyana – if not laugh, what can I do?!! ) Don't

> > commit the same with Manusmriti – it is ok, in astrology forum we

> can

> > safely ignore it.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> >

> > , " Avtar Krishen

> Kaul "

> > <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Sreenadhji,

> > > Namaskar!

> > > <Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > > Ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only south

> > > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,

> > > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -

> not

> > > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world.>

> > >

> > > You are confusing the issues unnecessarily!

> > >

> > > The fact rmains that there has been a historial personality like

> > > Shri Ram prior to Shri Krishen as it is mentioned in several

> works

> > > including the Mbh.

> > >

> > > Irrespecitve of the fact whether Kaliyuga started in 3102 BCE or

> is

> > > yet to start, Shri Krishen had incarnated at least --- if worst

> coms

> > > to worst!---prior to one thousand BCE. Obviously, Shri Ram had

> > > incarnated much before Him.

> > >

> > > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after

> 2nd

> > > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to

> Valmiki

> > > much prior to that period!

> > >

> > > Now comes the point of redactions in the Ramayana!

> > >

> > > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --

> plagiarisms

> > > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the

> astronomical

> > > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due

> credits!

> > > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> > > present version of the Surya Sidhanta! Maya the mlechha did not

> > > disclose his original name that he was a Greek stooge sent to

> > > confuse Hindus by making them astro adicts!

> > >

> > > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu "

> and " Varuna "

> > > and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in

> his

> > > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the

> worst

> > > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara

> Hora

> > > Shastram---all the versions available currently!

> > >

> > > Uttarakalamrita of some god-forsaken Kalidasa is being claimed

> to

> > > have been written by Maha-kavi Kalidasa and so on!

> > >

> > > In spite of such glaring fake products jyotishis are running

> after

> > > them and vying with one another to be called as " Varahamahira "

> when

> > > actually he was the " greatest charlatan of the last two

> millennia " !

> > >

> > > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> > > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables! You

> > > first clear the mental cobwebs of " jyotishis " about all such

> > > astrological and " astronomical " works by " stalwats " since you

> are

> > > supposed to be an authority about those books/tpics/points. You

> > > (and me as well!) are no authority on history! Even there we

> find

> > > at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas -- the most

> prominent

> > > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> > > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> > > versions in South India, perhaps the most promnent one

> being " Kamba

> > > Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that

> work,

> > > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we

> have

> > > Ramayanas in several forms!

> > >

> > > There is a work " Raghuvamasham " by Kalidasa, and it is sheer

> beauty

> > > just for the poetry itself!

> > >

> > > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> > > astronomical points alone in this forum. If you want to discuss

> the

> > > originality or otherwise of the Valmiki Ramayana, then you have

> to

> > > discuss other works also, whether they are from South India or

> from

> > > North. For that purpose, you may create a different forum and

> have

> > > a thorough discussion! Mention the purpose of that forum in

> > > the " frontspiece " there. I will ge glad to join you there also

> and

> > > try to sift the grain from the chaf! But right now you are

> treading

> > > on too many toes unnecessarily and this is not going to serve

> any

> > > purpose!

> > >

> > > (About the reality of Valmiki Rishi, pl. go through Adyatma

> Ramayana!

> > > About the real qualities/qualifications--or lack of them!--of

> > > Brahmins, pl. go through the Manusmriti!)

> > > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue whch

> > > is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> > > With regards,

> > > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> > >

> > >

> > > , " Sreenadh "

> > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but

> NOT

> > > > written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many -

> > > especially

> > > > south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by

> many

> > > like -

> > > > * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to

> Bhakri)

> > > and

> > > > * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)

> > > > - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > > > ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only

> south

> > > > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus,

> buddists,

> > > > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -

> not

> > > > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is

> a

> > > fact

> > > > is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies -

> and

> > > > one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of

> > > course

> > > > many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in

> this

> > > > group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in

> Ramayana –

> > > many

> > > > of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both

> sides of

> > > > the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or

> > > > against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we are dealing

> with

> > > > such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical

> > > astrology

> > > > then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are

> > > approaching

> > > > the subject sincerely.

> > > > Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for

> the

> > > advice.

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > , " Finn Wandahl "

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

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > > > >

> > > > > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and

> NOT a

> > > > > divine one...<<

> > > > >

> > > > > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason

> to

> > > hurt

> > > > > some peoples religious feelings...

> > > > >

> > > > > Finn

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

dear moderator,

 

I am a silent viewer of this forum and there is too much non

astrological posts especiallyn from ak Kaulji and once he steps in all

the astrological discussions gets diverted to something else..i request

the moderator to ban him from this group…it is completely non

astrological content and astrological bashing in his mails…and even

sreenadh ji is going his way and the earlier astrological discussions

are missing for long… .His mails are always cross postings and

irrevelent to the content of this grp atleast .

 

i hope u will take neccessarry actions .And releive us from this

burden of reading this type of nauseating mails.

 

 

 

regrds M varma

 

 

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Kaul,

> Your post does not deserve a decent reply after the approch you

> have shown. I request you to stop all postings on 'Valmiki'(sic)

> Ramayana.

> Regards,

> Sreenadh

>

> , " Avtar Krishen Kaul "

> jyotirved@ wrote:

> >

> > Shri Sreeenadh ji,

> > Namaskar!

> > <In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma

> > Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat Ezhuttachan;>

> >

> > In the Adyatmaramayana of the Gita Press edition, following is the

> > planetary postion at the time of Bhagwan Rama:

> >

> > " madhumasse site pakshe navmyam karkate shubhe

> > punarvasu sahite uchasthe grahapanchake

> > mesham pooshani samprapte pushpavrishti samakule

> > aviraseej jagan nathah parmatma sanatanah " (1/3/14-15)

> >

> > A running translation of these shlokas is

> > " In the month of Madhu, shukla paksha --bright half--in navmi tithi

> > and punarvasu nakshara, when five planets were exalted, the sun was

> > in Mesha, the Eternal Lord of the worlds, Parmatma, incarnated.... "

> >

> >

> > 1. Here the sun has specifically been put in Mesha but at the same

> > time it is Madhu masa -- which is an astronomical impossibility!

> >

> > 2. Five planets are exalted but there is no mention that any planet

> > is in its own rashi.

> >

> > 3. There is no menion of Karkata lagna or the Moon in Karkata, but

> > if the Sun is in Mesha and it is Navmi tithi, it means that even if

> > the sun is in 1 degree of Mesha the Moon has to be at a distance of

> > more than 96 degrees from the same. Thus the Moon will be in

> > Karkata 7 degrees to Karkata 20-20. But then Punarvasu nakshatra

> > ranges from Mithuna 20 degrees to Karkata 3-20. Thus it is again an

> > astronomical impossibility.

> >

> > In short, whichever way you look at it, whether it is the Valmiki

> > Ramayana or the Adyatma Ramayana, the astronomical Rashi position of

> > the planets cannot be justifed at all!

> > With regards,

> > AKK

> >

> > , " Sreenadh "

> > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Kaul ji,

> > > ==>

> > > > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after

> > 2nd

> > > > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to

> > Valmiki

> > > > much prior to that period!

> > > <==

> > > OK. That means that you agree to the fact that large scale

> > > re-casting of ramayana is a clear possibility around 2nd Century

> > BCE.

> > > And the following words of yours clarifies it.

> > > ==>

> > > > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --

> > plagiarisms

> > > > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the

> > astronomical

> > > > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due

> > credits!

> > > > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> > > > present version of the Surya Sidhanta!

> > > <==

> > > Good that we agree on many points.

> > > ==>

> > > > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu "

> > and " Varuna "

> > > > and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in

> > his

> > > > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the

> > worst

> > > > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara

> > Hora

> > > > Shastram---all the versions available currently!

> > > <==

> > > That is why the question - Why can't you accept the same to be

> > true

> > > for Ramayana?!! An impartial person must be simply able to do

that!

> > > But yes, you want to discard astrology, and then too preserve

> > Hinduism

> > > by preserving all those irrelevant rituals and baseless

> > beliefs. Is

> > > that not charlatanism?

> > > ==>

> > > > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> > > > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables!

> > > <==

> > > Answer me sincerely - why can't I tell the same to you? It is

> > > clearly what the discussion on Ramayana reveals. )

> > > ==>

> > > > You (and me as well!) are no authority on history!

> > > <==

> > > Agree - and I am not after history - except some glimpses of it -

> > > here and there where ever necessary.

> > > ==>

> > > > Even there we find at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas --

> >

> > > > the most prominent

> > > > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> > > > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> > > > versions in South India, perhaps the most prominent one

> > being " Kamba

> > > > Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that

> > work,

> > > > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we

> > have

> > > > Ramayanas in several forms!

> > > <==

> > > But what is the importance of several ramayanas here?! We are

> > just

> > > talking about Ramayana that is ascribed to Valmiki - right? Now

> > about

> > > the most prominent Ramayana in south - your statement is utterly

> > > wrong. South is not that simple. In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma

> > > Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat

> > Ezhuttachan; In

> > > Tamil nadu one of them is Kamba Ramayana I believe (but not sure -

> > i

> > > am not an authority on the same) - but there could be some other

> > works

> > > as well. (By the way Kambar wrote that Ramayana at the Krishna

> > temple

> > > in my native village) In several other states in South 'Adhyatma

> > > Ramayana' I believe. But the simple fact is that - south is so

vast

> > > with varying cultures and languages of AP,Karnataka, Kerala,

> > > Tamilnadu, and the Tulu language and culture of Western cost.

Every

> > > state is a knowledge house - actually the believed to be lost

> > Sanskrit

> > > works are coming to light now a days by re-writing the ancient

> > > Sanskrit works from Southern Regional scripts to Devanagari

> > script.

> > > ==>

> > > > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> > > > astronomical points alone in this forum.

> > > <==

> > > Thanks for the advice.

> > > ==>

> > > > pl. go through the Manusmriti!

> > > <==

> > > Lol....) I know what it is - are you starting a new

> > controversy?!!

> > > ==>

> > > > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue which

> > > > is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> > > <==

> > > We will haply do that - then again don't come in-between with

> > > Valmiki (or any other) Ramayana or such references. ) Do you

> > > remember - it is YOU who started it all. ) If you don't remember

> > > read

> > /message/3495

> > > So the lesson to remember is - don't put your hand in the frying

> > pan!

> > > Or if you does please have the patience to wait till it gets fried

> > > enough! Lol..... ) And now you comes out with the advice –

don't

> > > discuss Valmiki Ramyana – if not laugh, what can I do?!! )

Don't

> > > commit the same with Manusmriti – it is ok, in astrology forum

we

> > can

> > > safely ignore it.

> > > Love,

> > > Sreenadh

> > >

> > >

> > > , " Avtar Krishen

> > Kaul "

> > > <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Sreenadhji,

> > > > Namaskar!

> > > > <Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > > > Ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only

south

> > > > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,

> > > > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -

> > not

> > > > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world.>

> > > >

> > > > You are confusing the issues unnecessarily!

> > > >

> > > > The fact rmains that there has been a historial personality like

> > > > Shri Ram prior to Shri Krishen as it is mentioned in several

> > works

> > > > including the Mbh.

> > > >

> > > > Irrespecitve of the fact whether Kaliyuga started in 3102 BCE or

> > is

> > > > yet to start, Shri Krishen had incarnated at least --- if worst

> > coms

> > > > to worst!---prior to one thousand BCE. Obviously, Shri Ram had

> > > > incarnated much before Him.

> > > >

> > > > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after

> > 2nd

> > > > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to

> > Valmiki

> > > > much prior to that period!

> > > >

> > > > Now comes the point of redactions in the Ramayana!

> > > >

> > > > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --

> > plagiarisms

> > > > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the

> > astronomical

> > > > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due

> > credits!

> > > > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the

> > > > present version of the Surya Sidhanta! Maya the mlechha did not

> > > > disclose his original name that he was a Greek stooge sent to

> > > > confuse Hindus by making them astro adicts!

> > > >

> > > > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like " Brighu "

> > and " Varuna "

> > > > and " Aruna " and even " Ravana-samhita " and everybody knows in

> > his

> > > > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the

> > worst

> > > > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara

> > Hora

> > > > Shastram---all the versions available currently!

> > > >

> > > > Uttarakalamrita of some god-forsaken Kalidasa is being claimed

> > to

> > > > have been written by Maha-kavi Kalidasa and so on!

> > > >

> > > > In spite of such glaring fake products jyotishis are running

> > after

> > > > them and vying with one another to be called as " Varahamahira "

> > when

> > > > actually he was the " greatest charlatan of the last two

> > millennia " !

> > > >

> > > > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity

> > > > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables! You

> > > > first clear the mental cobwebs of " jyotishis " about all such

> > > > astrological and " astronomical " works by " stalwats " since you

> > are

> > > > supposed to be an authority about those books/tpics/points. You

> > > > (and me as well!) are no authority on history! Even there we

> > find

> > > > at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas -- the most

> > prominent

> > > > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,

> > > > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few

> > > > versions in South India, perhaps the most promnent one

> > being " Kamba

> > > > Ramayana " -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that

> > work,

> > > > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we

> > have

> > > > Ramayanas in several forms!

> > > >

> > > > There is a work " Raghuvamasham " by Kalidasa, and it is sheer

> > beauty

> > > > just for the poetry itself!

> > > >

> > > > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and

> > > > astronomical points alone in this forum. If you want to discuss

> > the

> > > > originality or otherwise of the Valmiki Ramayana, then you have

> > to

> > > > discuss other works also, whether they are from South India or

> > from

> > > > North. For that purpose, you may create a different forum and

> > have

> > > > a thorough discussion! Mention the purpose of that forum in

> > > > the " frontspiece " there. I will ge glad to join you there also

> > and

> > > > try to sift the grain from the chaf! But right now you are

> > treading

> > > > on too many toes unnecessarily and this is not going to serve

> > any

> > > > purpose!

> > > >

> > > > (About the reality of Valmiki Rishi, pl. go through Adyatma

> > Ramayana!

> > > > About the real qualities/qualifications--or lack of them!--of

> > > > Brahmins, pl. go through the Manusmriti!)

> > > > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue whch

> > > > is " ancient Indian astrology " (or the lack of it!).

> > > > With regards,

> > > > Avtar Krishen Kaul

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " Sreenadh "

> > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > > Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but

> > NOT

> > > > > written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many -

> > > > especially

> > > > > south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by

> > many

> > > > like -

> > > > > * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to

> > Bhakri)

> > > > and

> > > > > * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)

> > > > > - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit

> > > > > ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only

> > south

> > > > > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus,

> > buddists,

> > > > > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -

> > not

> > > > > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is

> > a

> > > > fact

> > > > > is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies

-

> > and

> > > > > one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of

> > > > course

> > > > > many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in

> > this

> > > > > group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in

> > Ramayana –

> > > > many

> > > > > of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both

> > sides of

> > > > > the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or

> > > > > against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we are

dealing

> > with

> > > > > such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical

> > > > astrology

> > > > > then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are

> > > > approaching

> > > > > the subject sincerely.

> > > > > Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for

> > the

> > > > advice.

> > > > > Love,

> > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Finn

Wandahl "

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

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Sreenadh,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and

> > NOT a

> > > > > > divine one...<<

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason

> > to

> > > > hurt

> > > > > > some peoples religious feelings...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Finn

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Moderator and other senior members of this group,

Please discuss some Jyotish topic only.No arguments and happy and knowledgeable discussions.

With Regards,

Ramadas Rao.

 

 

 

From: maheswara_varmaDate: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 17:26:41 +0000 Re: Horoscope of Lord Rama - To Kaul ji, Kishor ji, Finn ji

 

 

 

dear moderator,I am a silent viewer of this forum and there is too much nonastrological posts especiallyn from ak Kaulji and once he steps in allthe astrological discussions gets diverted to something else..i requestthe moderator to ban him from this group…it is completely nonastrological content and astrological bashing in his mails…and evensreenadh ji is going his way and the earlier astrological discussionsare missing for long… .His mails are always cross postings andirrevelent to the content of this grp atleast .i hope u will take neccessarry actions .And releive us from thisburden of reading this type of nauseating mails.regrds M varma , "Sreenadh"<sreesog wrote:>> Dear Kaul,> Your post does not deserve a decent reply after the approch you> have shown. I request you to stop all postings on 'Valmiki'(sic)> Ramayana.> Regards,> Sreenadh>> , "Avtar Krishen Kaul"> jyotirved@ wrote:> >> > Shri Sreeenadh ji,> > Namaskar!> > <In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma> > Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat Ezhuttachan;>> >> > In the Adyatmaramayana of the Gita Press edition, following is the> > planetary postion at the time of Bhagwan Rama:> >> > "madhumasse site pakshe navmyam karkate shubhe> > punarvasu sahite uchasthe grahapanchake> > mesham pooshani samprapte pushpavrishti samakule> > aviraseej jagan nathah parmatma sanatanah" (1/3/14-15)> >> > A running translation of these shlokas is> > "In the month of Madhu, shukla paksha --bright half--in navmi tithi> > and punarvasu nakshara, when five planets were exalted, the sun was> > in Mesha, the Eternal Lord of the worlds, Parmatma, incarnated...."> >> >> > 1. Here the sun has specifically been put in Mesha but at the same> > time it is Madhu masa -- which is an astronomical impossibility!> >> > 2. Five planets are exalted but there is no mention that any planet> > is in its own rashi.> >> > 3. There is no menion of Karkata lagna or the Moon in Karkata, but> > if the Sun is in Mesha and it is Navmi tithi, it means that even if> > the sun is in 1 degree of Mesha the Moon has to be at a distance of> > more than 96 degrees from the same. Thus the Moon will be in> > Karkata 7 degrees to Karkata 20-20. But then Punarvasu nakshatra> > ranges from Mithuna 20 degrees to Karkata 3-20. Thus it is again an> > astronomical impossibility.> >> > In short, whichever way you look at it, whether it is the Valmiki> > Ramayana or the Adyatma Ramayana, the astronomical Rashi position of> > the planets cannot be justifed at all!> > With regards,> > AKK> >> > , "Sreenadh"> > <sreesog@> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Kaul ji,> > > ==>> > > > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after> > 2nd> > > > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to> > Valmiki> > > > much prior to that period!> > > <==> > > OK. That means that you agree to the fact that large scale> > > re-casting of ramayana is a clear possibility around 2nd Century> > BCE.> > > And the following words of yours clarifies it. > > > ==>> > > > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --> > plagiarisms> > > > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the> > astronomical> > > > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due> > credits!> > > > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the> > > > present version of the Surya Sidhanta!> > > <==> > > Good that we agree on many points. > > > ==>> > > > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like "Brighu"> > and "Varuna"> > > > and "Aruna" and even "Ravana-samhita" and everybody knows in> > his> > > > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the> > worst> > > > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara> > Hora> > > > Shastram---all the versions available currently!> > > <==> > > That is why the question - Why can't you accept the same to be> > true> > > for Ramayana?!! An impartial person must be simply able to dothat!> > > But yes, you want to discard astrology, and then too preserve> > Hinduism> > > by preserving all those irrelevant rituals and baseless> > beliefs. Is> > > that not charlatanism? > > > ==>> > > > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity> > > > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables!> > > <==> > > Answer me sincerely - why can't I tell the same to you? It is> > > clearly what the discussion on Ramayana reveals. )> > > ==>> > > > You (and me as well!) are no authority on history!> > > <==> > > Agree - and I am not after history - except some glimpses of it -> > > here and there where ever necessary. > > > ==>> > > > Even there we find at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas --> >> > > > the most prominent> > > > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,> > > > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few> > > > versions in South India, perhaps the most prominent one> > being "Kamba> > > > Ramayana" -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that> > work,> > > > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we> > have> > > > Ramayanas in several forms!> > > <==> > > But what is the importance of several ramayanas here?! We are> > just> > > talking about Ramayana that is ascribed to Valmiki - right? Now> > about> > > the most prominent Ramayana in south - your statement is utterly> > > wrong. South is not that simple. In Kerala it is 'Adhyatma> > > Ramayana' (independent translation) written by 'Tunjat> > Ezhuttachan; In> > > Tamil nadu one of them is Kamba Ramayana I believe (but not sure -> > i> > > am not an authority on the same) - but there could be some other> > works> > > as well. (By the way Kambar wrote that Ramayana at the Krishna> > temple> > > in my native village) In several other states in South 'Adhyatma> > > Ramayana' I believe. But the simple fact is that - south is sovast> > > with varying cultures and languages of AP,Karnataka, Kerala,> > > Tamilnadu, and the Tulu language and culture of Western cost.Every> > > state is a knowledge house - actually the believed to be lost> > Sanskrit> > > works are coming to light now a days by re-writing the ancient> > > Sanskrit works from Southern Regional scripts to Devanagari> > script.> > > ==>> > > > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and> > > > astronomical points alone in this forum.> > > <==> > > Thanks for the advice. > > > ==>> > > > pl. go through the Manusmriti!> > > <==> > > Lol....) I know what it is - are you starting a new> > controversy?!!> > > ==>> > > > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue which> > > > is "ancient Indian astrology" (or the lack of it!).> > > <==> > > We will haply do that - then again don't come in-between with> > > Valmiki (or any other) Ramayana or such references. ) Do you> > > remember - it is YOU who started it all. ) If you don't remember> > > read> > /message/3495> > > So the lesson to remember is - don't put your hand in the frying> > pan!> > > Or if you does please have the patience to wait till it gets fried> > > enough! Lol..... ) And now you comes out with the advice –don't> > > discuss Valmiki Ramyana – if not laugh, what can I do?!! )Don't> > > commit the same with Manusmriti – it is ok, in astrology forumwe> > can> > > safely ignore it. > > > Love,> > > Sreenadh> > >> > >> > > , "Avtar Krishen> > Kaul"> > > <jyotirved@> wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Sreenadhji,> > > > Namaskar!> > > > <Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit> > > > Ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not onlysouth> > > > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus, buddists,> > > > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -> > not> > > > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world.>> > > >> > > > You are confusing the issues unnecessarily!> > > >> > > > The fact rmains that there has been a historial personality like> > > > Shri Ram prior to Shri Krishen as it is mentioned in several> > works> > > > including the Mbh.> > > >> > > > Irrespecitve of the fact whether Kaliyuga started in 3102 BCE or> > is> > > > yet to start, Shri Krishen had incarnated at least --- if worst> > coms> > > > to worst!---prior to one thousand BCE. Obviously, Shri Ram had> > > > incarnated much before Him.> > > >> > > > Thus the presumption that the Valmiki Ramayana was written after> > 2nd> > > > century BCE cannot be correct since we have references to> > Valmiki> > > > much prior to that period!> > > >> > > > Now comes the point of redactions in the Ramayana!> > > >> > > > There have been redactions in the astronomical works --> > plagiarisms> > > > galore! The Vishnudharmotarapurana has purloined the> > astronomical> > > > portion of Brahmasphuta Sidhanta without giving any due> > credits!> > > > Similarly, a lot of cunfusion is there as to who has written the> > > > present version of the Surya Sidhanta! Maya the mlechha did not> > > > disclose his original name that he was a Greek stooge sent to> > > > confuse Hindus by making them astro adicts!> > > >> > > > Then We are having thousands of Samhitas like "Brighu"> > and "Varuna"> > > > and "Aruna" and even "Ravana-samhita" and everybody knows in> > his> > > > heart of hearts that they are fake works, concoctions of the> > worst> > > > order! Same is the case with the much taunted Brihat Parashara> > Hora> > > > Shastram---all the versions available currently!> > > >> > > > Uttarakalamrita of some god-forsaken Kalidasa is being claimed> > to> > > > have been written by Maha-kavi Kalidasa and so on!> > > >> > > > In spite of such glaring fake products jyotishis are running> > after> > > > them and vying with one another to be called as "Varahamahira"> > when> > > > actually he was the "greatest charlatan of the last two> > millennia"!> > > >> > > > As such, why are you just after the Valmiki Ramayana? Charity> > > > begins at home and so does the clearing of Augean stables! You> > > > first clear the mental cobwebs of "jyotishis" about all such> > > > astrological and "astronomical" works by "stalwats" since you> > are> > > > supposed to be an authority about those books/tpics/points. You> > > > (and me as well!) are no authority on history! Even there we> > find> > > > at least a dozen versions of the Ramayanas -- the most> > prominent> > > > ones being Adyatma Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana, Barvai Ramayana,> > > > Tulsi Ramayana and so on. I also learn that there are a few> > > > versions in South India, perhaps the most promnent one> > being "Kamba> > > > Ramayana" -- I may be wrong in naming as well spelling of that> > work,> > > > but the fact remains that in every part of Bharatavarsha, we> > have> > > > Ramayanas in several forms!> > > >> > > > There is a work "Raghuvamasham" by Kalidasa, and it is sheer> > beauty> > > > just for the poetry itself!> > > >> > > > As such, please concentrate yourself on astrological and> > > > astronomical points alone in this forum. If you want to discuss> > the> > > > originality or otherwise of the Valmiki Ramayana, then you have> > to> > > > discuss other works also, whether they are from South India or> > from> > > > North. For that purpose, you may create a different forum and> > have> > > > a thorough discussion! Mention the purpose of that forum in> > > > the "frontspiece" there. I will ge glad to join you there also> > and> > > > try to sift the grain from the chaf! But right now you are> > treading> > > > on too many toes unnecessarily and this is not going to serve> > any> > > > purpose!> > > >> > > > (About the reality of Valmiki Rishi, pl. go through Adyatma> > Ramayana!> > > > About the real qualities/qualifications--or lack of them!--of> > > > Brahmins, pl. go through the Manusmriti!)> > > > Right now, you are just digressing from the main issue whch> > > > is "ancient Indian astrology" (or the lack of it!).> > > > With regards,> > > > Avtar Krishen Kaul> > > >> > > >> > > > , "Sreenadh"> > > > <sreesog@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Dear Finn ji,> > > > > Calling Ramayana available today ascribed to 'valmiki' (but> > NOT> > > > > written by him) as divine also hurts the feelings of many -> > > > especially> > > > > south indians - and that was why this text was re-written by> > many> > > > like -> > > > > * Tulasidas in North (to recast it giving importance to> > Bhakri)> > > > and> > > > > * Adhyatma Ramayana in South (-do-)> > > > > - and many more. Why it became necessary? Because the Sanskrit> > > > > ramayana ascribed to valmiki hurts the feelings of not only> > south> > > > > indians but also north indians - or better all hindus,> > buddists,> > > > > jains, tantrics - since it deals with many rituals and ideas -> > not> > > > > considered as ethical or even sane in today's world. A fact is> > a> > > > fact> > > > > is a fact. Of course it is a great source for further studies-> > and> > > > > one of the unique texts we have - that is another matter. Of> > > > course> > > > > many of these things should can be avoided being discussed in> > this> > > > > group – but some how when we discuss the astrology in> > Ramayana –> > > > many> > > > > of these points comes up. Therefore let us understand both> > sides of> > > > > the coin and bear with some of the criticisms in support of or> > > > > against. Both of them are sure to surface – if we aredealing> > with> > > > > such a subject. Even while we deal with nirayana or tropical> > > > astrology> > > > > then too we cannot avoid some such controversies if we are> > > > approaching> > > > > the subject sincerely.> > > > > Note: But I will try to keep your advice in mind. Thanks for> > the> > > > advice.> > > > > Love,> > > > > Sreenadh> > > > >> > > > > , "FinnWandahl"> > > > > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > > Dear Sreenadh,> > > > > >> > > > > > >>...and that is why Ramayana is a mere literary text, and> > NOT a> > > > > > divine one...<<> > > > > >> > > > > > Please, this statement is uncalled for! There is no reason> > to> > > > hurt> > > > > > some peoples religious feelings...> > > > > >> > > > > > Finn> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >> Get news, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Check it out!

[Guest guest]

dear kaul,

 

I was wondering why no one has posted this so far. I haver seen it sometime ago after Finn has discussed about GargSamhitha but did not post the same since it is self defeating. However, I have posted it today morning may (may be 1 hour ago) in another forum- i hv not seen your post by then of course.

 

I have mentioned that the author of A R was not worried of the details since he was telling the story in general and the basic purpose of AR is different.

 

You would notice that Rama was carried for 10 months whether as it 12 months as per Valmiki Ramayana.

 

 

regards,

Kishroe patnaik

98492 70729

[Guest guest]

Shri Kishore Patnaik ji,

Namaskar!

<I was wondering why no one has posted this so far. I haver seen it

sometime ago after Finn has discussed about GargSamhitha but did not

post the same since it is self defeating.>

 

When we are discussing something of an era about which all we have

is just the piecemeal information, willy-nilly we have to take all

the other relevant pieces of information into account, whether we

like it or not!

 

Adyatma Ramayana is my favourite about " adyatma " ---especially its

Ramagita -- where it says

" yah sevate mam agunam gunat param hrida kada va yadi va gunatmakam

so aham sva pad anchit renubih sprishan, punati loka tritayam yatha

ravih "

 

Much of the A R appears to me a condensation of the contents of

Yogavasishtha!

 

Whether the planetary positions in it have been implanted by someone

else as an afterthought or whether they have been given by the

original author --- is a moot point. One thig is certain. Krishna

Cwaipayana Veda-Vyasa could not have given it since he has not

committed any such faux pas anywhere else.

With regards,

A K Kaul

, " kishore patnaik "

<kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

>

> dear kaul,

>

> I was wondering why no one has posted this so far. I haver seen it

sometime ago after Finn has discussed about GargSamhitha but did not

post the same since it is self defeating. However, I have posted it

today morning may (may be 1 hour ago) in another forum- i hv not

seen your post by then of course.

>

> I have mentioned that the author of A R was not worried of the

details since

> he was telling the story in general and the basic purpose of AR is

> different.

>

> You would notice that Rama was carried for 10 months whether as it

12 months

> as per Valmiki Ramayana.

>

>

> regards,

> Kishroe patnaik

> 98492 70729

>