Horoscope of Lord Rama - Appreciating the contributions of All

[Guest guest]

Dear Varma ji,

I could see your frustration in not seeing real practically useful

astrological discussions for long. But in the mist of arguments we

shouldn't mis to see the facts. Individually we all would be like the

blind men who saw the elephant. But collectively the different

perspectives helps us to see the complete elephant in a coherent way.

For example take this Rama's horoscope discussion.

* Kishore patnaik ji: was absolutely right in stating that both the

placement of planets in own house and exaltation should be considered

in counting the 5 planets in " Swa+Uccha " .

* Krishnan Kaul ji: was absolutely right in stating that texts like

Valmiki Ramayana always refers to 'Tropical Zodiac'

* I was absolutely right in stating that much interpolation or even

complete re-writing of ancient Valmiki Ramayana happened in between BC

200 and AD 200.

* Finn ji: Heavily contributed with his intuitive questions and

counter arguments.

And every thing together helped us in locating the horoscope as the

Tropical horoscope of 14 March 157 BC, a chart description

interpolated into Valmiki Ramayana after 157 BC. And the puzzle meets

with a possible logical solution.

This itself is the benefit of such discussions - and we cannot fail

to see the contribution of all in helping us to reach such conclusions.

So all of as are part of a happy family and will remain so - even

though we will try to concentrate more on practical Nirayana

astrological discussion itself from now onwards.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, " maheswara_varma "

<maheswara_varma wrote:

>

>

> 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

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>