Contextual meaning of the word Kuleera in Ramayana - To Rao ji & Goal ji

[Guest guest]

Dear Rao ji & Goal ji,

I could see that both of you are of the opinian that " Kuleera "

means " Cancer Sign " as used in Valmiki Ramayana. Interesting! Let us

for argument sake accept that it means Cancer sign itself - in

Valmiki Ramayana. If so please clarify my following doubt. The sloka

given in Valmiki Ramayana is " Sarpe Jatastu Saumitri Kuleera abhudite

Ravo " - as per your meaning the sloka would get transilated

as " Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born in Aslesha Nakshatra when Sun

was in Cancer " ! Now the questions -

* Do you mean to say that Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born 4 months

after the birth of Rama and Bharata? Or

* Do you think that either the poet or the interpolator was foolish

enough to believe that Sun will move 4 signs in a single day (if it

is assumed that rama and brothers took birth in cosequtive days)

Please answer - I sincerely believe that you will have a clear

solution to suggest for this problem.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, Gopal Goel

<gkgoel1937 wrote:

>

> Dear Friends,

> Mr. Rao is a great scholar , obviously he is right

> Dictionary meaning is to guide us , ultimate meaning should depend

on context.

> Sloka on the birth of Lakshaman's says -ravoa- this points out to

two possibilities:

> 1 , Sun is with rising sign Cancer.

> 2 Sign Cancer was rising and Sun was placed in most prominent

position ,i.e NOON

> As namakaran sanskar of all the four brothers was performed

simultaneously after 11thday of the birth of Lord RAM.

> Lakshaman and Satrughan was born in Noon in Ashlesha Nakshatra

when Cancer was rising.

> Regards.

>

> G.K.GOEL

> Ph: 09350311433

> Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> NEW DELHI-110 076

> INDIA

>

>

>

>

> HosabettuRamadas Rao <ramadasrao

>

> Monday, 12 November, 2007 2:50:13 AM

> RE: Re: Nirukti of the

word 'Lagna' - To Finn ji

>

> Dear Finn Ji,

> As per my knowledge you are correct.As per Brihajjataka, Yavana

Jataka etc.Kuleera means Karkataka Rashi.

> karkaH kuLIraakrutirambusa msthovakshaHprad esho

vihitaschadhaatuH. ......This shloka is from Yavana Jataka.Meaning

karkataka Rashi is like the shape of KulIraakruti which is in

water,kalapurusha' s chest ( vaksha sthala ) portion,indicative of

Dhatu sign or Rashi,also indicative of well,river and watery land.

> I hope this helps.

> With Regards,

> Ramadas Rao.

>

>

>

>

>

> ancient_indian_ astrology

> sreesog

> Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:12:21 +0000

> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Nirukti of the

word 'Lagna' - To Finn ji

>

>

> Dear Kaul ji,

> Let us consider your major arguments -

> ==>

> > to interpret Kuleera as Capricorn is also far fetched, to

> > say the least, since all the astrological texts describe it as

> > Karkata!

> <==

> That is simply your ignorance - many major dictionaries and

> Nikhandus deals with in detail - and clarifies it well that the word

> 'Kuleera' could mean 'Capricorn'. To convince you, I will provide a

> details quotes and references from them in the next post.

> ==>

> > If you are using " Lagna " for signs, then you cannot help placing

> > five planets of Bhagwan Rama in Karkata, since this is what

> > the ninth sholka of Canto 18 says, " nakshatre aditi daivatye

> > svochsamstheshu panchasu graheshu karkate lagne vakpatav induna

> > saha "

> <==

> This too is simply ignorance. The sloka bit means " (Rama took birth)

> in Punarvasu Nakshatra, while 5 planets where in own house or

> exaltation, when Jupiter was with Moon in Cancer sign " . Two things

> should be noted here -

> 1) To denote Cancer sign the word Karkata is used (and NOT Kuleera)

> 2) There too the word " Lagna " means " Sign " itself. Note that

> " karkate lagne vakpatav induna saha " means " In Cancer SIGN Jupitor

was

> with Moon "

> ==>

> > Secondly, we cannot overlook the fact that " Adyatma Ramayana " ,

which

> > you says was written in Kerala, contains the following shlokas

> <==

> There is more than one ignorance in your statements. Let see what

> they are -

> 1) Adhyatma Ramayana is NOT a text written in Kerala. It is - " an

> ancient Sanskrit work extolling the spiritual virtues of the story

of

> Ramayana. It comprises around 4200 verses, is embedded in

Brahm & #257;nda

> Purana and is considered to be authored by Ved Vyasa " - wikipedia.

> (http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Adhyatma_ Ramayana)

> 2) What is popular in Kerala is an INDIPENDED TRANSILATION of

> Adyatma Ramayana written by Tunjattu Ramanujan Ezhuttacchan who is

> known as the 'father of malayalam language' a great scholar.

> 3) We are NOT discussing Adhyatma Ramayana but VALMIKI RAMAYANA - so

> don't bring in irrelevant quotes in between. Note that while Valmiki

> Ramayana does not mention Madhu masa etc Adhayata Ramayana does it.

> Note that while Valmiki Ramayana tells us that the birth took place

in

> the 12th (Nakshatra) Month from the end date of Putra kameshti,

> Adhyatma Ramayana tells us that it happened at the 10th month. So

with

> this much inconsistencies between these two texts - Adhyatma

Ramayana

> quote is NOT worth considering while discussing " Astrology in

Valmiki

> Ramayana " . It is clear that you are bringing in the Adhyatma

ramayana

> quote only because it mentions your pet " Madhu Masa " in it - but

that

> is irrelevant to the current context. Please try to depend ONLY ON

> references from Valmiki Ramayana alone while discussing the same.

> 4) I am not interested in your habit and inconsistent nature in

> studying subject and introducing diversions. So I don't have any

time

> to waste after the quote and inconsistencies you presented regarding

> the Adhyatma Ramayana quote. Again it simply means that I have

wasted

> enough time on the ignorance of " Tropical Calendarvalas " .

> Note: So learn to be sincere and be truthful - and if clarity comes

> in from some where learn to welcome it †" and if possible drop the

> fanatism and use of bad words. You are dragging me to the same

> direction †" `I know only to deal with bad with bad and good with

good'

> †" so the end result would be the group becoming a mud house and I

> don't want it. So please avoid name calling here onwards and me too

> will never resort to it. Let us keep the group clean and sane.

People

> has already started complaining about the insane useless direction

in

> which this group is going - both you and me are culprits for the

same.

> Please know it as a fact.

> Regards,

> Sreenadh

>

> ancient_indian_ astrology, " Avtar Krishen

Kaul "

> <jyotirved@ ..> wrote:

> >

> > Shri Sreenadh ji,

> > Namaskar!

> > You are talking of an event of second century BCE. The Surya

> > Sidhanta, which gives the mothodology of calculating " lagna " was

> > very much in vogue then. When you are using the word Lagna in the

> > context of planetary positions vis-a-vis some horoscope/birth

chart,

> > it is unimaginable that instead of the common interpretation of

the

> > word Lagna i.e. the sign rising at a particular time,

> > the " astrologer " concerned would have resorted to some other

meaning

> > of that word! He could very well have used the word " rashi "

instead

> > of Lagna then.

> > Secondly, to interpet Kuleera as Capricorn is also far fetched,

to

> > say the least, since all the astrological texts describe it as

> > Karkata!

> > Then you are also ascribing a " misprint " or some problem

> > with " Sandhi " for the word " abyudyete ravav " and interpreted it

as

> > the description of Mars in Capricorn! That also is far fetched!

> >

> > If you are using " Lagna " for signs, then you cannot help placing

> > five planets of Bhagwan Rama in Karkata, since this is what the

> > ninth sholka of Canto 18 says, " nakshatre aditi daivatye

> > svochsamstheshu panchasu graheshu karkate lagne vakpatav induna

> > saha " Here you can club the words as " panchasu graheshu karkate

> > lagne, vakpatav induna saha " and interpret them as " five planets

> > were in Karkata rashi, which included the Moon and Jupiter " . You

> > cannot interpret " lagna " as sign in one place and at the same

time

> > as lagna i.e. aschendant in another place in one and the same

> > chapter.

> >

> > The maximum difficulty that arises out of this hypothesis is that

in

> > second century BCE, there was no methodology of calculating

planets

> > correctly, whether it was India or any other country! India, on

the

> > other hand, was saddled with the Surya Sidhanta, which is

> > fundamentally the most incorrect work. So it is just a

possibility

> > that the astrologer concerned could have calculated the planetary

> > positions as per the Surya Sidhanta and then implanted them in

the

> > Valmiki Ramayana! Those calculatons can give very surprising

> > results!

> >

> > Secondly, we cannot overlok the fact that " Adyatma Ramayana " ,

which

> > you says was written in Kerala, contains the following shlokas

> > " 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. Though 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 19 degrees. 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

> >

> > ancient_indian_ astrology, " Sreenadh "

> > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > The root (dhatu) for the word 'Lagna' is 'Lag' which means

> > > join/conjunct/ mix/combine. 'Lagati' or 'Lagitam' means " the

one

> > that

> > > joins/conjuncts/ mixes/combines " . There are many words that

sprung

> > from

> > > this root. Look at the following word -

> > > " Lagna MandalaH " - it means the same as " Rasi Chakra " and means

> > > 'Zodiac'.

> > > Mandala = Chakra = Circle

> > > Lagna = Rasi = Sign

> > > Lagna Mandala means 'Sign Circle' and 'Rasi Chakra' also

> > means 'Sign

> > > Circle' or in other words both are other names for the

Ecliptic,

> > the

> > > zodiac circle. The word 'Lagna Mandala' you can find in any

> > standard

> > > Sanskrit dictionary. Thus it is evident that the word 'Lagna'

can

> > > means 'Sign'. Now coming to Nirukti, the word 'Lagna' has the

> > > following Nirukti -

> > > 'Lagati GrahaiH iti Lagna' meaning 'the one which

> > > join/conjunct/ mix/combine with Planets is called Lagna';

certainly

> > the

> > > word lagna here refers to 'Sign' because it is when the planets

> > joins

> > > (traverse through) signs that the results originate. Thus every

> > sign

> > > means 'Lagna'.

> > > Another Nirukti for the word Lagna is 'Lagati Phalai iti Lagna'

> > > meaning 'the one which join/conjuct/ mix/combine (or in other

words

> > > shows) with the results is called Lagna'; here the word 'Lagna'

can

> > > refer either to 'Sign' or to 'Asc'.

> > > Later the the word 'Lagna' got a better and clear definition

> > such as

> > > 'Raseenam Udayo Lagna' meaning the 'the rising sign is called

> > Lagna'.

> > > Note that here also the word lagna is essentially associated

with

> > the

> > > word 'Sign', but still it is due to importance to the

word 'rising'

> > > that it got translated as 'Asc'. Of course since the at the

> > horizon,

> > > the sky and the earth joins and so the word 'Lagna' is apt here

too

> > > and that is why the translation of this word as 'Ascendant'

> > acceptable.

> > > Note that when used interchangeably with the words Arudha (as

> > done

> > > in Prasnamarga) , the word 'Lagna' loses all its association

with

> > > 'rising sign' even today, and resort to the old meaning 'Sign'!

> > > Further there are many Lagnas such as 'Ghati Lagna', 'Hora

Lagna',

> > > 'Bhava Lagna', 'Sree Lagna', 'Arudha Lagna' etc some of which

are

> > NOT

> > > AT ALL related to 'rising' or 'horizon' in any way. Therefore

in

> > such

> > > contexts to translating the word 'Lagna' as 'Asc' becomes

> > erroneous.

> > > Considering all these points it becomes clear that accepting the

> > > meaning 'Sign' for the word 'Lagna' in 'Valmiki Ramayana'

context

> > is a

> > > truly acceptable argument, well supported by Nirukti and

> > Dictionaries.

> > > Hope this helps.

> > > Love,

> > > Sreenadh

> > >

> > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " Sreenadh "

> > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > 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

> > > >

> > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " Avtar

Krishen

> > Kaul "

> > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology@ .

com, " 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

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology@ .

com, " 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

> > > > > > > --- In

> > ancient_indian_ astrology, " 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

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology@ .

com, " 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-descripti

ons

> > 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

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

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

> > ancient_indian_ astrology, " 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

> > > > > > > > > >

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

> > ancient_indian_ astrology, " 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

> > >

> >

Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows

Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!

>

>

>

> Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know

how, go to

http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Mr.. Sreenadh,

You become exited too soon. Why are you using such words like foolish etc. Please do not loose your cool and temper and that too for proving

something which you believe is right and others are wrong.

For us lord Rama is incarnation of GOD, AND IT DOES NOT MATTER WHEN WAS HE APPEARED ON THIS EARTH.VALMIKI RAMAYAN GIVES

US GRATE STRENGTH AND TEACHING.THE RAMA OF VALMIKI RAMAYANA IS A GREAT IDEAL FOR US GIVE INSPIRATION IN OUR DAY TO DAY

LIFE.

If you also view Lord Shri Rama in the same light, some worthwhile discussion is possible among ourselves,otherwise at least I do not wish to join such discussions.

In astrology ,Kuleer means only cancer . Ravao is appearing separately in the Sloka. This may have two indications:

1. Sign Cancer was rising with Sun

2 .Cancer was rising with Sun in dignity i.e. at Noon time

As namkaran sanskar of all the four brothers had taken place simultaneously after the appearance of LORD RAMA ON THE EARTH, THE LATTER MEANING ARE MORE APPROPRIATE

AND LOGICAL.

Kindly advise,

 

G.K.GOELPh: 09350311433Add: L-409, SARITA VIHARNEW DELHI-110 076INDIA

Sreenadh <sreesog Sent: Tuesday, 13 November, 2007 12:59:08 PM Re: Contextual meaning of the word "Kuleera" in Ramayana - To Rao ji & Goal ji

 

Dear Rao ji & Goal ji,I could see that both of you are of the opinian that "Kuleera" means "Cancer Sign" as used in Valmiki Ramayana. Interesting! Let us for argument sake accept that it means Cancer sign itself - in Valmiki Ramayana. If so please clarify my following doubt. The sloka given in Valmiki Ramayana is "Sarpe Jatastu Saumitri Kuleera abhudite Ravo" - as per your meaning the sloka would get transilated as "Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born in Aslesha Nakshatra when Sun was in Cancer"! Now the questions -* Do you mean to say that Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born 4 months after the birth of Rama and Bharata? Or* Do you think that either the poet or the interpolator was foolish enough to believe that Sun will move 4 signs in a single day (if it is assumed that rama and brothers took birth in cosequtive days) Please answer - I sincerely believe that you will have a clear solution to

suggest for this problem. Love,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, Gopal Goel <gkgoel1937@ ....> wrote:>> Dear Friends,> Mr. Rao is a great scholar , obviously he is right> Dictionary meaning is to guide us , ultimate meaning should depend on context.> Sloka on the birth of Lakshaman's says -ravoa- this points out to two possibilities:> 1 , Sun is with rising sign Cancer.> 2 Sign Cancer was rising and Sun was placed in most prominent position ,i.e NOON> As namakaran sanskar of all the four brothers was performed simultaneously after 11thday of the birth of Lord RAM.> Lakshaman and Satrughan was born in Noon in Ashlesha Nakshatra when Cancer was rising.>

Regards.> > G.K.GOEL> Ph: 09350311433> Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR> NEW DELHI-110 076> INDIA > > > > > HosabettuRamadas Rao <ramadasrao@ ...>> ancient_indian_ astrology> Monday, 12 November, 2007 2:50:13 AM> RE: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Nirukti of the word 'Lagna' - To Finn ji> > Dear Finn Ji,> As per my knowledge you are correct.As per Brihajjataka, Yavana Jataka etc.Kuleera means Karkataka Rashi.> karkaH kuLIraakrutirambusa msthovakshaHprad esho vihitaschadhaatuH. ......This shloka is from Yavana Jataka.Meaning karkataka Rashi is like the shape of KulIraakruti which is in

water,kalapurusha' s chest ( vaksha sthala ) portion,indicative of Dhatu sign or Rashi,also indicative of well,river and watery land.> I hope this helps.> With Regards,> Ramadas Rao.> > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology> sreesog > Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:12:21 +0000> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Nirukti of the word 'Lagna' - To Finn ji> > > Dear Kaul ji,> Let us consider your major arguments -> ==>> > to interpret Kuleera as Capricorn is also far fetched, to > > say the least, since all the astrological texts describe it as > > Karkata!> <==> That is simply your ignorance - many major dictionaries and> Nikhandus deals with in detail - and clarifies it well that the word> 'Kuleera' could mean 'Capricorn'. To

convince you, I will provide a> details quotes and references from them in the next post. > ==>> > If you are using "Lagna" for signs, then you cannot help placing > > five planets of Bhagwan Rama in Karkata, since this is what> > the ninth sholka of Canto 18 says, "nakshatre aditi daivatye > > svochsamstheshu panchasu graheshu karkate lagne vakpatav induna > > saha" > <==> This too is simply ignorance. The sloka bit means "(Rama took birth)> in Punarvasu Nakshatra, while 5 planets where in own house or> exaltation, when Jupiter was with Moon in Cancer sign". Two things> should be noted here -> 1) To denote Cancer sign the word Karkata is used (and NOT Kuleera)> 2) There too the word "Lagna" means "Sign" itself. Note that> "karkate lagne vakpatav induna saha" means "In Cancer SIGN Jupitor was> with Moon">

==>> > Secondly, we cannot overlook the fact that "Adyatma Ramayana", which > > you says was written in Kerala, contains the following shlokas> <== > There is more than one ignorance in your statements. Let see what> they are - > 1) Adhyatma Ramayana is NOT a text written in Kerala. It is - "an> ancient Sanskrit work extolling the spiritual virtues of the story of> Ramayana. It comprises around 4200 verses, is embedded in Brahm & #257;nda> Purana and is considered to be authored by Ved Vyasa" - wikipedia.> (http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Adhyatma_ Ramayana)> 2) What is popular in Kerala is an INDIPENDED TRANSILATION of> Adyatma Ramayana written by Tunjattu Ramanujan Ezhuttacchan who is> known as the 'father of malayalam language' a great scholar. > 3) We are NOT

discussing Adhyatma Ramayana but VALMIKI RAMAYANA - so> don't bring in irrelevant quotes in between. Note that while Valmiki> Ramayana does not mention Madhu masa etc Adhayata Ramayana does it.> Note that while Valmiki Ramayana tells us that the birth took place in> the 12th (Nakshatra) Month from the end date of Putra kameshti,> Adhyatma Ramayana tells us that it happened at the 10th month. So with> this much inconsistencies between these two texts - Adhyatma Ramayana> quote is NOT worth considering while discussing "Astrology in Valmiki> Ramayana". It is clear that you are bringing in the Adhyatma ramayana> quote only because it mentions your pet "Madhu Masa" in it - but that> is irrelevant to the current context. Please try to depend ONLY ON> references from Valmiki Ramayana alone while discussing the same. > 4) I am not interested in your

habit and inconsistent nature in> studying subject and introducing diversions. So I don't have any time> to waste after the quote and inconsistencies you presented regarding> the Adhyatma Ramayana quote. Again it simply means that I have wasted> enough time on the ignorance of "Tropical Calendarvalas" . > Note: So learn to be sincere and be truthful - and if clarity comes> in from some where learn to welcome it â€" and if possible drop the> fanatism and use of bad words. You are dragging me to the same> direction â€" `I know only to deal with bad with bad and good with good'> â€" so the end result would be the group becoming a mud house and I> don't want it. So please avoid name calling here onwards and me too> will never resort to it. Let us keep the group clean and sane. People> has already started complaining about the insane useless direction

in> which this group is going - both you and me are culprits for the same.> Please know it as a fact. > Regards,> Sreenadh> > ancient_indian_ astrology, "Avtar Krishen Kaul"> <jyotirved@ ..> wrote:> >> > Shri Sreenadh ji,> > Namaskar!> > You are talking of an event of second century BCE. The Surya > > Sidhanta, which gives the mothodology of calculating "lagna" was > > very much in vogue then. When you are using the word Lagna in the > > context of planetary positions vis-a-vis some horoscope/birth chart, > > it is unimaginable that instead of the common interpretation of the > > word Lagna i.e. the sign rising at a particular time, > > the "astrologer" concerned would have resorted to some other meaning > > of that word! He could very well

have used the word "rashi" instead > > of Lagna then.> > Secondly, to interpet Kuleera as Capricorn is also far fetched, to > > say the least, since all the astrological texts describe it as > > Karkata!> > Then you are also ascribing a "misprint"or some problem > > with "Sandhi" for the word "abyudyete ravav" and interpreted it as > > the description of Mars in Capricorn! That also is far fetched!> > > > If you are using "Lagna" for signs, then you cannot help placing > > five planets of Bhagwan Rama in Karkata, since this is what the > > ninth sholka of Canto 18 says, "nakshatre aditi daivatye > > svochsamstheshu panchasu graheshu karkate lagne vakpatav induna > > saha" Here you can club the words as "panchasu graheshu karkate > > lagne, vakpatav induna saha" and interpret them as "five planets

> > were in Karkata rashi, which included the Moon and Jupiter". You > > cannot interpret "lagna" as sign in one place and at the same time > > as lagna i.e. aschendant in another place in one and the same > > chapter.> > > > The maximum difficulty that arises out of this hypothesis is that in > > second century BCE, there was no methodology of calculating planets > > correctly, whether it was India or any other country! India, on the > > other hand, was saddled with the Surya Sidhanta, which is > > fundamentally the most incorrect work. So it is just a possibility > > that the astrologer concerned could have calculated the planetary > > positions as per the Surya Sidhanta and then implanted them in the > > Valmiki Ramayana! Those calculatons can give very surprising > > results!> >

> > Secondly, we cannot overlok the fact that "Adyatma Ramayana", which > > you says was written in Kerala, contains the following shlokas> > "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. Though 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 19 degrees. 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> > > > --- In

ancient_indian_ astrology, "Sreenadh" > > <sreesog@> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Finn ji,> > > The root (dhatu) for the word 'Lagna' is 'Lag' which means> > > join/conjunct/ mix/combine. 'Lagati' or 'Lagitam' means "the one > > that> > > joins/conjuncts/ mixes/combines" . There are many words that sprung > > from> > > this root. Look at the following word -> > > "Lagna MandalaH" - it means the same as "Rasi Chakra" and means> > > 'Zodiac'. > > > Mandala = Chakra = Circle> > > Lagna = Rasi = Sign> > > Lagna Mandala means 'Sign Circle' and 'Rasi Chakra' also > > means 'Sign> > > Circle' or in other words both are other names for the Ecliptic, > > the> > > zodiac circle. The word 'Lagna Mandala' you can find in

any > > standard> > > Sanskrit dictionary. Thus it is evident that the word 'Lagna' can> > > means 'Sign'. Now coming to Nirukti, the word 'Lagna' has the> > > following Nirukti -> > > 'Lagati GrahaiH iti Lagna' meaning 'the one which> > > join/conjunct/ mix/combine with Planets is called Lagna'; certainly > > the> > > word lagna here refers to 'Sign' because it is when the planets > > joins> > > (traverse through) signs that the results originate. Thus every > > sign> > > means 'Lagna'. > > > Another Nirukti for the word Lagna is 'Lagati Phalai iti Lagna'> > > meaning 'the one which join/conjuct/ mix/combine (or in other words> > > shows) with the results is called Lagna'; here the word 'Lagna' can> > > refer either to 'Sign' or to 'Asc'.

> > > Later the the word 'Lagna' got a better and clear definition > > such as> > > 'Raseenam Udayo Lagna' meaning the 'the rising sign is called > > Lagna'.> > > Note that here also the word lagna is essentially associated with > > the> > > word 'Sign', but still it is due to importance to the word 'rising'> > > that it got translated as 'Asc'.. Of course since the at the > > horizon,> > > the sky and the earth joins and so the word 'Lagna' is apt here too> > > and that is why the translation of this word as 'Ascendant' > > acceptable. > > > Note that when used interchangeably with the words Arudha (as > > done> > > in Prasnamarga) , the word 'Lagna' loses all its association with> > > 'rising sign' even today, and resort to the old meaning

'Sign'!> > > Further there are many Lagnas such as 'Ghati Lagna', 'Hora Lagna',> > > 'Bhava Lagna', 'Sree Lagna', 'Arudha Lagna' etc some of which are > > NOT> > > AT ALL related to 'rising' or 'horizon' in any way. Therefore in > > such> > > contexts to translating the word 'Lagna' as 'Asc' becomes > > erroneous. > > > Considering all these points it becomes clear that accepting the> > > meaning 'Sign' for the word 'Lagna' in 'Valmiki Ramayana' context > > is a> > > truly acceptable argument, well supported by Nirukti and > > Dictionaries.> > > Hope this helps. > > > Love,> > > Sreenadh> > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, "Sreenadh"> > > <sreesog@> wrote:> > > >>

> > > 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> > > > > >

> > ancient_indian_ astrology, "Avtar Krishen > > Kaul"> > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, "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> > > > > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, "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> > > > > > > --- In

> > ancient_indian_ astrology, "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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, "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-descripti ons > > 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> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, "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> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, "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> > >> >> > > > > > > Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's

easy! Try it! > > > > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know how, go to http://help. / l/in// mail/mail/ tools/tools- 08.html>

Why delete messages? Unlimited storage is just a click away.

[Guest guest]

Dear Goel ji,

==>

> Why are you using such words like foolish etc. Please do not loose

> your cool and temper and that too ....

<==

I was astonished to see these statements!!! Read carefully the

statement of me which you are talking against!

==>

> Do you think that either the poet or the interpolator was foolish

> enough to believe that Sun will move 4 signs in a single day

> (if it is assumed that rama and brothers took birth in consecutive

> days)

<==

Foolish is a simple word without anything wrong associated with and

I was not addressing anyone in particular but was speaking about the

subject!

Actually I don't believe that none of the possible author's of that

text cannot be that foolish, they should be intelligent enough to see

this simple fact. (i.e. Sun cannot move 4 signs in a single day)

Valmiki : He was a great scholar, and he will never commit this

mistake.

Some other poet: If some one could write beautiful poetical

scholarly book like Ramayana, he is never going to commit this

mistake.

Interpolator: If someone could write such a so genuinely looking

slokas in Sanskrit, and if he was doing it with a purpose, he must be

intelligent enough to maintain the constancy.

Thus the conclusion - What ever the period of the text, THE SLOKAS

MUST BE RIGHT! I am asking you to simple possibility. The mistake

SHOULD BE in our part in understanding it and interpreting it.

Possibility -1 (Me)

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

If Lagna means Sign and Kuleera means then, " " Sarpe Jatastu Saumitri

Kuleera abhuditaaravo " - get translated as " Lekhmana and Satrukhna

were born in Aslesha Nakshatra when Mars was in Capricorn Sign " - and

every pieces of the puzzle fall in right places & for sure we start

appreciating the intelligence and knowledge of the poet. See this as

a fact.

Possibility -2 (You and Rao ji)

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

If Kuleera means Capricorn then, " " Sarpe Jatastu Saumitri Kuleera

abhudite ravo " - get translated as " Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born

in Aslesha Nakshatra when Sun was in Cancer Sign " . I failed to see,

how it coherently integrates the pieces of the puzzle, without making

us question the intelligence and knowledge of the poet. Please

correct me if I am wrong.

That was why my doubt -

==>

> * Do you mean to say that Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born 4 months

> after the birth of Rama and Bharata? Or

> * Do you think that either the poet or the interpolator was foolish

> enough to believe that Sun will move 4 signs in a single day (if it

> is assumed that rama and brothers took birth in consecutive days)

<==

I was simply asking you to clarify your view - regarding this

issue. And I thought that you have an answer to this question. And

that is why I said - " I sincerely believe that you will have a clear

solution to suggest for this problem " .

 

I don't believe, I have committed any sin or mistake in my earlier

mail! Actually your previous mail didn't addressed this question -

and you were hastily making the statement - " Why are you using such

words like foolish etc. Please do not loose your cool and temper and

that too .... " Who is losing temper?!! Dear Goal ji, what is this? I

respect you and we are doing simple academic discussion - let us

sincerely look into the possibilities.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, Gopal Goel

<gkgoel1937 wrote:

>

> Dear Mr.. Sreenadh,

> You become exited too soon. Why are you using such words like

foolish etc. Please do not loose your cool and temper and that too

for proving

> something which you believe is right and others are wrong.

> For us lord Rama is incarnation of GOD, AND IT DOES NOT MATTER

WHEN WAS HE APPEARED ON THIS EARTH.VALMIKI RAMAYAN GIVES

> US GRATE STRENGTH AND TEACHING.THE RAMA OF VALMIKI RAMAYANA IS A

GREAT IDEAL FOR US GIVE INSPIRATION IN OUR DAY TO DAY

> LIFE.

> If you also view Lord Shri Rama in the same light, some worthwhile

discussion is possible among ourselves,otherwise at least I do not

wish to join such discussions.

> In astrology ,Kuleer means only cancer . Ravao is appearing

separately in the Sloka. This may have two indications:

> 1. Sign Cancer was rising with Sun

> 2 .Cancer was rising with Sun in dignity i.e. at Noon time

> As namkaran sanskar of all the four brothers had taken place

simultaneously after the appearance of LORD RAMA ON THE EARTH, THE

LATTER MEANING ARE MORE APPROPRIATE

> AND LOGICAL.

> Kindly advise,

>

>

>

> G.K.GOEL

> Ph: 09350311433

> Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> NEW DELHI-110 076

> INDIA

>

>

>

>

> Sreenadh <sreesog

>

> Tuesday, 13 November, 2007 12:59:08 PM

> Re: Contextual meaning of the

word " Kuleera " in Ramayana - To Rao ji & Goal ji

>

> Dear Rao ji & Goal ji,

> I could see that both of you are of the opinian that " Kuleera "

> means " Cancer Sign " as used in Valmiki Ramayana. Interesting! Let

us

> for argument sake accept that it means Cancer sign itself - in

> Valmiki Ramayana. If so please clarify my following doubt. The

sloka

> given in Valmiki Ramayana is " Sarpe Jatastu Saumitri Kuleera

abhudite

> Ravo " - as per your meaning the sloka would get transilated

> as " Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born in Aslesha Nakshatra when Sun

> was in Cancer " ! Now the questions -

> * Do you mean to say that Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born 4 months

> after the birth of Rama and Bharata? Or

> * Do you think that either the poet or the interpolator was foolish

> enough to believe that Sun will move 4 signs in a single day (if it

> is assumed that rama and brothers took birth in cosequtive days)

> Please answer - I sincerely believe that you will have a clear

> solution to suggest for this problem.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> ancient_indian_ astrology, Gopal Goel

> <gkgoel1937@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Friends,

> > Mr. Rao is a great scholar , obviously he is right

> > Dictionary meaning is to guide us , ultimate meaning should

depend

> on context.

> > Sloka on the birth of Lakshaman's says -ravoa- this points out to

> two possibilities:

> > 1 , Sun is with rising sign Cancer.

> > 2 Sign Cancer was rising and Sun was placed in most prominent

> position ,i.e NOON

> > As namakaran sanskar of all the four brothers was performed

> simultaneously after 11thday of the birth of Lord RAM.

> > Lakshaman and Satrughan was born in Noon in Ashlesha Nakshatra

> when Cancer was rising.

> > Regards.

> >

> > G.K.GOEL

> > Ph: 09350311433

> > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > INDIA

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > HosabettuRamadas Rao <ramadasrao@ ...>

> > ancient_indian_ astrology

> > Monday, 12 November, 2007 2:50:13 AM

> > RE: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Nirukti of the

> word 'Lagna' - To Finn ji

> >

> > Dear Finn Ji,

> > As per my knowledge you are correct.As per Brihajjataka, Yavana

> Jataka etc.Kuleera means Karkataka Rashi.

> > karkaH kuLIraakrutirambusa msthovakshaHprad esho

> vihitaschadhaatuH. ......This shloka is from Yavana Jataka.Meaning

> karkataka Rashi is like the shape of KulIraakruti which is in

> water,kalapurusha' s chest ( vaksha sthala ) portion,indicative of

> Dhatu sign or Rashi,also indicative of well,river and watery land.

> > I hope this helps.

> > With Regards,

> > Ramadas Rao.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ancient_indian_ astrology

> > sreesog

> > Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:12:21 +0000

> > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Nirukti of the

> word 'Lagna' - To Finn ji

> >

> >

> > Dear Kaul ji,

> > Let us consider your major arguments -

> > ==>

> > > to interpret Kuleera as Capricorn is also far fetched, to

> > > say the least, since all the astrological texts describe it as

> > > Karkata!

> > <==

> > That is simply your ignorance - many major dictionaries and

> > Nikhandus deals with in detail - and clarifies it well that the

word

> > 'Kuleera' could mean 'Capricorn'. To convince you, I will provide

a

> > details quotes and references from them in the next post.

> > ==>

> > > If you are using " Lagna " for signs, then you cannot help

placing

> > > five planets of Bhagwan Rama in Karkata, since this is what

> > > the ninth sholka of Canto 18 says, " nakshatre aditi daivatye

> > > svochsamstheshu panchasu graheshu karkate lagne vakpatav induna

> > > saha "

> > <==

> > This too is simply ignorance. The sloka bit means " (Rama took

birth)

> > in Punarvasu Nakshatra, while 5 planets where in own house or

> > exaltation, when Jupiter was with Moon in Cancer sign " . Two things

> > should be noted here -

> > 1) To denote Cancer sign the word Karkata is used (and NOT

Kuleera)

> > 2) There too the word " Lagna " means " Sign " itself. Note that

> > " karkate lagne vakpatav induna saha " means " In Cancer SIGN

Jupitor

> was

> > with Moon "

> > ==>

> > > Secondly, we cannot overlook the fact that " Adyatma Ramayana " ,

> which

> > > you says was written in Kerala, contains the following shlokas

> > <==

> > There is more than one ignorance in your statements. Let see what

> > they are -

> > 1) Adhyatma Ramayana is NOT a text written in Kerala. It is - " an

> > ancient Sanskrit work extolling the spiritual virtues of the

story

> of

> > Ramayana. It comprises around 4200 verses, is embedded in

> Brahm & #257;nda

> > Purana and is considered to be authored by Ved Vyasa " - wikipedia.

> > (http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Adhyatma_ Ramayana)

> > 2) What is popular in Kerala is an INDIPENDED TRANSILATION of

> > Adyatma Ramayana written by Tunjattu Ramanujan Ezhuttacchan who is

> > known as the 'father of malayalam language' a great scholar.

> > 3) We are NOT discussing Adhyatma Ramayana but VALMIKI RAMAYANA -

so

> > don't bring in irrelevant quotes in between. Note that while

Valmiki

> > Ramayana does not mention Madhu masa etc Adhayata Ramayana does

it.

> > Note that while Valmiki Ramayana tells us that the birth took

place

> in

> > the 12th (Nakshatra) Month from the end date of Putra kameshti,

> > Adhyatma Ramayana tells us that it happened at the 10th month. So

> with

> > this much inconsistencies between these two texts - Adhyatma

> Ramayana

> > quote is NOT worth considering while discussing " Astrology in

> Valmiki

> > Ramayana " . It is clear that you are bringing in the Adhyatma

> ramayana

> > quote only because it mentions your pet " Madhu Masa " in it - but

> that

> > is irrelevant to the current context. Please try to depend ONLY ON

> > references from Valmiki Ramayana alone while discussing the same.

> > 4) I am not interested in your habit and inconsistent nature in

> > studying subject and introducing diversions. So I don't have any

> time

> > to waste after the quote and inconsistencies you presented

regarding

> > the Adhyatma Ramayana quote. Again it simply means that I have

> wasted

> > enough time on the ignorance of " Tropical Calendarvalas " .

> > Note: So learn to be sincere and be truthful - and if clarity

comes

> > in from some where learn to welcome it †" and if possible

drop the

> > fanatism and use of bad words. You are dragging me to the same

> > direction †" `I know only to deal with bad with bad and good

with

> good'

> > †" so the end result would be the group becoming a mud house

and I

> > don't want it. So please avoid name calling here onwards and me

too

> > will never resort to it. Let us keep the group clean and sane.

> People

> > has already started complaining about the insane useless

direction

> in

> > which this group is going - both you and me are culprits for the

> same.

> > Please know it as a fact.

> > Regards,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > ancient_indian_ astrology, " Avtar

Krishen

> Kaul "

> > <jyotirved@ ..> wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Sreenadh ji,

> > > Namaskar!

> > > You are talking of an event of second century BCE. The Surya

> > > Sidhanta, which gives the mothodology of calculating " lagna "

was

> > > very much in vogue then. When you are using the word Lagna in

the

> > > context of planetary positions vis-a-vis some horoscope/birth

> chart,

> > > it is unimaginable that instead of the common interpretation of

> the

> > > word Lagna i.e. the sign rising at a particular time,

> > > the " astrologer " concerned would have resorted to some other

> meaning

> > > of that word! He could very well have used the word " rashi "

> instead

> > > of Lagna then.

> > > Secondly, to interpet Kuleera as Capricorn is also far fetched,

> to

> > > say the least, since all the astrological texts describe it as

> > > Karkata!

> > > Then you are also ascribing a " misprint " or some problem

> > > with " Sandhi " for the word " abyudyete ravav " and interpreted it

> as

> > > the description of Mars in Capricorn! That also is far fetched!

> > >

> > > If you are using " Lagna " for signs, then you cannot help

placing

> > > five planets of Bhagwan Rama in Karkata, since this is what the

> > > ninth sholka of Canto 18 says, " nakshatre aditi daivatye

> > > svochsamstheshu panchasu graheshu karkate lagne vakpatav induna

> > > saha " Here you can club the words as " panchasu graheshu karkate

> > > lagne, vakpatav induna saha " and interpret them as " five

planets

> > > were in Karkata rashi, which included the Moon and Jupiter " .

You

> > > cannot interpret " lagna " as sign in one place and at the same

> time

> > > as lagna i.e. aschendant in another place in one and the same

> > > chapter.

> > >

> > > The maximum difficulty that arises out of this hypothesis is

that

> in

> > > second century BCE, there was no methodology of calculating

> planets

> > > correctly, whether it was India or any other country! India, on

> the

> > > other hand, was saddled with the Surya Sidhanta, which is

> > > fundamentally the most incorrect work. So it is just a

> possibility

> > > that the astrologer concerned could have calculated the

planetary

> > > positions as per the Surya Sidhanta and then implanted them in

> the

> > > Valmiki Ramayana! Those calculatons can give very surprising

> > > results!

> > >

> > > Secondly, we cannot overlok the fact that " Adyatma Ramayana " ,

> which

> > > you says was written in Kerala, contains the following shlokas

> > > " 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. Though 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 19 degrees. 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

> > >

> > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " Sreenadh "

> > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Finn ji,

> > > > The root (dhatu) for the word 'Lagna' is 'Lag' which means

> > > > join/conjunct/ mix/combine. 'Lagati' or 'Lagitam' means " the

> one

> > > that

> > > > joins/conjuncts/ mixes/combines " . There are many words that

> sprung

> > > from

> > > > this root. Look at the following word -

> > > > " Lagna MandalaH " - it means the same as " Rasi Chakra " and

means

> > > > 'Zodiac'.

> > > > Mandala = Chakra = Circle

> > > > Lagna = Rasi = Sign

> > > > Lagna Mandala means 'Sign Circle' and 'Rasi Chakra' also

> > > means 'Sign

> > > > Circle' or in other words both are other names for the

> Ecliptic,

> > > the

> > > > zodiac circle. The word 'Lagna Mandala' you can find in any

> > > standard

> > > > Sanskrit dictionary. Thus it is evident that the word 'Lagna'

> can

> > > > means 'Sign'. Now coming to Nirukti, the word 'Lagna' has the

> > > > following Nirukti -

> > > > 'Lagati GrahaiH iti Lagna' meaning 'the one which

> > > > join/conjunct/ mix/combine with Planets is called Lagna';

> certainly

> > > the

> > > > word lagna here refers to 'Sign' because it is when the

planets

> > > joins

> > > > (traverse through) signs that the results originate. Thus

every

> > > sign

> > > > means 'Lagna'.

> > > > Another Nirukti for the word Lagna is 'Lagati Phalai iti

Lagna'

> > > > meaning 'the one which join/conjuct/ mix/combine (or in other

> words

> > > > shows) with the results is called Lagna'; here the

word 'Lagna'

> can

> > > > refer either to 'Sign' or to 'Asc'.

> > > > Later the the word 'Lagna' got a better and clear definition

> > > such as

> > > > 'Raseenam Udayo Lagna' meaning the 'the rising sign is called

> > > Lagna'.

> > > > Note that here also the word lagna is essentially associated

> with

> > > the

> > > > word 'Sign', but still it is due to importance to the

> word 'rising'

> > > > that it got translated as 'Asc'. Of course since the at the

> > > horizon,

> > > > the sky and the earth joins and so the word 'Lagna' is apt

here

> too

> > > > and that is why the translation of this word as 'Ascendant'

> > > acceptable.

> > > > Note that when used interchangeably with the words Arudha (as

> > > done

> > > > in Prasnamarga) , the word 'Lagna' loses all its association

> with

> > > > 'rising sign' even today, and resort to the old

meaning 'Sign'!

> > > > Further there are many Lagnas such as 'Ghati Lagna', 'Hora

> Lagna',

> > > > 'Bhava Lagna', 'Sree Lagna', 'Arudha Lagna' etc some of which

> are

> > > NOT

> > > > AT ALL related to 'rising' or 'horizon' in any way. Therefore

> in

> > > such

> > > > contexts to translating the word 'Lagna' as 'Asc' becomes

> > > erroneous..

> > > > Considering all these points it becomes clear that accepting

the

> > > > meaning 'Sign' for the word 'Lagna' in 'Valmiki Ramayana'

> context

> > > is a

> > > > truly acceptable argument, well supported by Nirukti and

> > > Dictionaries.

> > > > Hope this helps.

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " Sreenadh "

> > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > 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

> > > > >

> > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " Avtar

> Krishen

> > > Kaul "

> > > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology@ .

> com, " 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

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology@ .

> com, " 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

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

> > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " 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

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology@ .

> com, " 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-

descripti

> ons

> > > 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

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

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

> > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " 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

> > > > > > > > > > >

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

> > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " 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

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows

> Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!

> >

> >

> >

> > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know

> how, go to

> http://help. / l/in// mail/mail/ tools/tools-

08.html

> 5, 50, 500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox. Go

to http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html

>