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

[Guest guest]

dear ramadas rao

I also support u ,we shud not question anything ,there shud not be any yukti chinta ,let every thing be in comfortable level for some of us .And we shud extent it to further why we shud see horoscope ,its also all what supposed to happen will happen will happen and let us be with semetic religions which says we hav no right to unravel god s mysteries.

so no tention ,let every guru has such stupid sisyas .Truth is horrible to hear .

esp when some one is comfortable with existing things

 

 

rgds Vijaya Raghavan guruvayur .

 

, HosabettuRamadas Rao <ramadasrao wrote:>> > Dear Goel Ji,> I support your views.We the normal human beings are not allowed to question about the birth of such Avatars of Lord Vishnu.All the informations are carried over from generation to generation and there is no written Palm leaf Granthas of that time carried over to this Kali Yuga.In the Shlokas given, there may be many things missing and some ancient scholar might have contributed to complete such missing Shlokas,so as per me, we can not question such things.Here our duty is to analyse the charts and not the secret of birth of Avatars of Lord Vishnu.> I hope everybody will agree with me.> With Regards,> Ramadas Rao.> > > : gkgoel1937: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:06:31 +0530Re: Re: Contextual meaning of the word "Kuleera" in Ramayana - To Rao ji & Goal ji> > > > > > > > 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 sreesogTo: : 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> > > > 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> > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > _______________> News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!> http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx>

[Guest guest]

dear ramadas rao .

I dont know but i see a mail from some other group the same rama jataka was discussed by one param guru of sjc and he used all the systems and arudha and he explained all events in rams life .May like a post mortem .

and their he dont mentioned being rama born is treta yuga the planetary movement r not applicable or we humans has no rite ot discuss ramayana or rams chart .AS its devine we shud refrain from reading rams chart>then y he discussed it .

he was eger to justify his results .

So i dont know what is ur point .

Now when a mistake happened ,from all param gurus and instead of justifying u shud atleast thank when some one tries to see the truth

even if truth is bad in begining it will help u a lot other wise big winds will come ,read indian history and see how mighty empire got crumpled

or world history .Otherwise we cannot answer our own children questions and being aggreesive and young they wont giv that much sanctity what we try to say .

If u blv god ,what ever is his name ,he is truth .

its not some text ,some launage ,or some name .ultimately

dont hide behind yugas ,then i must ask u then why the hell this text used all things applicable to modern indian astrology .

he can say that this is not applicable in kaliyuga.

And Valmiki says one chart and adhytma ramayana says a differrent view ,but stick with common tread.

what ever may be yuga total degrees cannot be more than 360 in zodiac

and too much speed or less speed .

then Y the sage ( or inte polater used ,swa ucha like this ) if its not applicable to astrology and then why he was eger to giv ucha status to most of the planets ?

U know why i am asking this questions ,as i am a astrologer myself ,also seeker of truth and actual events which may happen or will happen ,it becomes my duty or i can say prime duty as astrology is finaly the scince of real happenings .

I am not a academician or a hobbyist ,but who lives in devine town ship called guruvayur and will be grilled by each and every moment by customers who may be knowing each other since generations .

So jyothisha is finaly results .i cannot say u shud blv it other wise u will be cursed or its our blf .

here my customers includes muslims who forms majority in number and then christians and hindus .

So u think and try to see from from my reading glass also

 

regrds Vijaya raghavan guruvayur .

 

 

 

 

, HosabettuRamadas Rao <ramadasrao wrote:>> > Dear Sreenadh Ji,> I have a small query regarding your main question itself.At present which in which Yuga we are living and what about the planetary movements and their acceleration in Treta Yuga ? How many thosands of years have passed from Treta Yuga to the present Kali Yuga ? Do you think that all the planets have the same movements or acceleration in the present Yuga also ?? Do you have any reference regarding such planetary movements during Krita Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?Because I have no idea of planetary movements in those great Yugas.> Regards,> Ramadas Rao.> > > : sreesog: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:51:01 +0000 Re: Contextual meaning of the word "Kuleera" in Ramayana - To Rao ji & Goal ji> > > > > 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 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> > > > > > 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> > > > > > > > > > > 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> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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> >> > > > > > 5, 50, 500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox. Go to http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html> > > > > > > > _______________> Discover the new Windows Vista> http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista & mkt=en-US & form=QBRE>

[Guest guest]

Dear Ramdas ji,

==>

At present which in which Yuga we are living and what about the

planetary movements and their acceleration in Treta Yuga ?

<==

Understand clearly that if not associated with precession seconds

or if not a mere mathematical hypothesis to solve the rhythm of solar

system riddle - the Yuga number lose all its significance. The

ancient sages were far more intelligent and better that the illogical

people who believe that the Yuga numbers represent Solar years,

millions of years!!! If not in tune with and complementary to our

current understanding of human history, archeology and evolution (of

solar system, earth, life on earth) all such ideas become irrelevant.

So one should try to understand ancient concepts in tune with out

current knowledge and understanding. I hope that clarifies my stand

point. Now let us approach your question in another perspective.

If those planetary movement in 'Treta Yuga' is not applicable to our

current astrology then, we should even avoid discussing or even

considering it as astrology at all. If it is so, then why some so

called guru of gurus is using such planetary positions to prove his

new born instant coffee like pet theories?

To quote a member who wrote in some other forum -

==>

> Pt.XXXXXX was using mercury in Taurus .The other

> planetary positions are same . And he discuses various dasas like

> even Moola dasa and arudhas and even the life of sri ramji is

> detail with this data .So much exalted planets and the avtara hood

> of lord ram and his excile to forest and the curses he got ,even

> how it was fructified tru a servant maid the hunchback

> Mandara,and things like that and Venus exalted was showing the

> greatness of seetha ji and mars exalted as 5th lord was showing

> the Valiant sons and Venus was in 12th from arudha lagna was

> showing the marital problems he faced .This was the line of

> discussions generally i think .......

<==

Hope you will have an answer.

==>

> How many thousands of years have passed from Treta Yuga to the

> present Kali Yuga ? Do you think that all the planets have the same

> movements or acceleration in the present Yuga also ?? Do you have

> any reference regarding such planetary movements during Krita

> Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?

<==

I believe it is clear that all these questions become irrelevant in

then light of clarifications given above.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, HosabettuRamadas Rao

<ramadasrao wrote:

>

>

> Dear Sreenadh Ji,

> I have a small query regarding your main question itself.At present

which in which Yuga we are living and what about the planetary

movements and their acceleration in Treta Yuga ? How many thosands of

years have passed from Treta Yuga to the present Kali Yuga ? Do you

think that all the planets have the same movements or acceleration in

the present Yuga also ?? Do you have any reference regarding such

planetary movements during Krita Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?

Because I have no idea of planetary movements in those great Yugas.

> Regards,

> Ramadas Rao.

>

>

> : sreesog: Tue, 13 Nov 2007

13:51:01 +0000 Re: Contextual

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

>

>

>

>

> 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--- In

, 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@>> To:

> 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> > --- In

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> > > > --- In

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@

. com, " 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@

. com, " 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> > > > > > > > > > >

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> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

. com, " 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> >> > > > > > 5, 50,

500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox. Go to

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

_______________

> Discover the new Windows Vista

> http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista & mkt=en-

US & form=QBRE

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Rao ji,

How many " generations to generations " the info must have passed

through and came to us - Do you mean to say that even the " Pralaya "

(Total destruction total destruction of the solar system and

universe) didn't affect and prevented the knowledge of rama's

horoscope described in Ramayana, passing through and reaching to

us? If so, it must be so greatly important and relevant to our

ages too - otherwise why should the god decided to hand it over to

us - directly by the wish of god? Do you also mean to say that

even in 'Treta Yuga' (millions of years earlier before several

Pralayas and total destruction of the solar system and universe), it

was 'Sanskrit language' which was in use? Is it that god too use the

same language? May be Finn may disagree and argue that it is

Danish or English and I think it must be Malayalam.

==>

> In the Shlokas given, there may be many things missing and some

> ancient scholar might have contributed to complete such missing

> Shlokas..

<==

How the scholar of 'this Yuga' came to knows that preciously what

slokas are missing? And if knew everything about the text and if

he wrote that text in 'this Yuga' it should be considered as text of

this Yuga - I believe. Further if he didn't know about

the 'version of Ramayana' that was available in Treta Yuga, and if he

was modifying it with his own intelligence it should be termed

as 'corrupting an old text' or as 'interpolation' - I believe and NOT

as " contributed to complete such missing Shlokas " ; I hope it is

better to call a culprit a culprit itself.

==>

> Here our duty is to analyze the charts and not the secret of birth

> of Avatars of Lord Vishnu.

<==

If GOD presented to us the chart of avatars with his own will, it

must be for us to study, analyze, and apply our logic and

intelligence itself! It is he (GOD) who gave us the logic and

intelligence as well friend! Why you are forgetting that?! God must

be clearly knowing - why he gave something to us, what we have (e.g.

logic) at our disposal, and what we will do with that. So my

advice is that 'God knows his business well' and we small brains

shouldn't worry about that - but instead proceed with what our

limited intelligence permits.

I hope that clarifies the doubts.

==>

> I hope everybody will agree with me.

<==

That is a very high expectation - But I sincerely pray to Lord Rama

that everybody should agree with Ramdas ji - after seeing, how hard

he is trying to save the irrational - from skipping through the

fingers. At least the effort should be appreciated. But you see

the problem with people is that - they usually in support of things

that are logical!! But of course there would be many people who will

leave behind logic as well; or may be every body does it at one time

or the other. Me too have an opinion against this 'always supporting

the logical' - but what to do - this thing called 'logic' is so

important in daily life and we cannot leave without it. Any that is

my bit of thoughts on the issue.

Love and regards,

Sreeandh

 

, HosabettuRamadas Rao

<ramadasrao wrote:

>

>

> Dear Goel Ji,

> I support your views.We the normal human beings are not allowed to

question about the birth of such Avatars of Lord Vishnu.All the

informations are carried over from generation to generation and there

is no written Palm leaf Granthas of that time carried over to this

Kali Yuga.In the Shlokas given, there may be many things missing and

some ancient scholar might have contributed to complete such missing

Shlokas,so as per me, we can not question such things.Here our duty

is to analyse the charts and not the secret of birth of Avatars of

Lord Vishnu.

> I hope everybody will agree with me.

> With Regards,

> Ramadas Rao.

>

>

> : gkgoel1937: Tue, 13 Nov 2007

14:06:31 +0530Re: Re: Contextual

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

>

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 <sreesogTo:

: 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.> > > > > > To:

ancient_indian_ astrology> sreesog (AT) (DOT)

com> 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> > --- In

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> > > > > > > > ---

In ancient_indian_ astrology, " Avtar Krishen > >

Kaul " > > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > --- In

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

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@ .

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> > > > > > > > > > > >

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

. com, " 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.

>

_______________

> News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get

it now!

> http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Raghavan ji,

I appreciate your sincerity in expressing what you feel right. But

let us please avoid the use of words such as 'Stupid', 'Fooling' etc

from here onwards as Arjun ji suggested - since " such words

discourage other members from further participation " , as Arjun ji

puts it. Let us all listen to his mature voice and let us be a bit

more companionate in reactions.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, " lion_draco1983 "

<lion_draco1983 wrote:

>

>

> dear ramadas rao

>

> I also support u ,we shud not question anything ,there shud not

be

> any yukti chinta ,let every thing be in comfortable level for some

of us

> .And we shud extent it to further why we shud see horoscope ,its

also

> all what supposed to happen will happen will happen and let us be

with

> semetic religions which says we hav no right to unravel god s

mysteries.

>

> so no tention ,let every guru has such stupid sisyas .Truth is

horrible

> to hear .

>

> esp when some one is comfortable with existing things

>

>

>

>

>

> rgds Vijaya Raghavan guruvayur .

>

>

>

>

> , HosabettuRamadas

Rao

> <ramadasrao@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Dear Goel Ji,

> > I support your views.We the normal human beings are not allowed to

> question about the birth of such Avatars of Lord Vishnu.All the

> informations are carried over from generation to generation and

there is

> no written Palm leaf Granthas of that time carried over to this Kali

> Yuga.In the Shlokas given, there may be many things missing and some

> ancient scholar might have contributed to complete such missing

> Shlokas,so as per me, we can not question such things.Here our duty

is

> to analyse the charts and not the secret of birth of Avatars of Lord

> Vishnu.

> > I hope everybody will agree with me.

> > With Regards,

> > Ramadas Rao.

> >

> >

> > @: gkgoel1937@: Tue, 13 Nov 2007

> 14:06:31 +0530Re: Re: Contextual

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > 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:

> @: 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@

> . com, 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> Subject:

> [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@

> . com, " 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> > > > > > --- In

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

> 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@

> . 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> > > > > > > > >

> > >

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

> . com, " 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>

> >

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > _______________

> > News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com.

Get it

> now!

> > http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Raghavan ji,

==>

> even if truth is bad in beginning it will help u a lot other wise

> big winds will come ,read indian history and see how mighty empire

> got crumpled or world history .Otherwise we cannot answer our own

> children questions and being aggressive and young they wont giv

> that much sanctity what we try to say .

<==

Beautifully said!

==>

> I am not a academician or a hobbyist ,but who lives in divine town

> ship called guruvayur and will be grilled by each and every moment

> by customers who may be knowing each other since generations .

> So jyothisha is finaly results .

<==

I agree with you - if we cannot sincerely and correctly arrive at

results with what ever bits and pieces of astrology we know, and

without taking any help from the native, depending on natal or

prashna chart alone - what we are going to do all the theories we may

learn?!! If the derivations do not match with really - what use they

have at all! I can understand your concern because I was a

professional astrologer for long, and I know how much it pains -

* When someone comes to us, ask us to predict without giving any

details. We are at hell and agony if the prediction (whether past or

future) fails, and much appreciation will follow it turns to be

correct. And really the people of Kerala are really notorious - in

not disclosing the details before the astrologer - since they believe

that it is the duty of the astrologer to see and tell the details

from the chart itself! Yes, it really pains when predictions goes

wrong, and our own scriptures defy us, and it gives much happiness

when they become useful and show us the right direction.

* Molding, shadowing, white washing, theorizing will not be of any

help to a real astrologer who has to deal with clients, and who

cannot resort to mere Upayas. The only thing that could be of help is

the working principles - whether from scriptures or from tradition -

which really match with actual results. Yes truly, results matters.

Even astrologers like Fin ji knows it well and that is why the

statement " An astrologer is only as good as his last prediction " .

And that is why all these fights against shadowing, white washing,

not working theories, self proclaimed guruships that demand respect

for nothing, and so on.

I feel the resonance of your thoughts and thanks for sharing them.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, " lion_draco1983 "

<lion_draco1983 wrote:

>

>

> dear ramadas rao .

>

> I dont know but i see a mail from some other group the same rama

> jataka was discussed by one param guru of sjc and he used all the

> systems and arudha and he explained all events in rams life .May

like a

> post mortem .

>

> and their he dont mentioned being rama born is treta yuga the

planetary

> movement r not applicable or we humans has no rite ot discuss

ramayana

> or rams chart .AS its devine we shud refrain from reading rams

> chart>then y he discussed it .

>

> he was eger to justify his results .

>

> So i dont know what is ur point .

>

> Now when a mistake happened ,from all param gurus and instead of

> justifying u shud atleast thank when some one tries to see the truth

>

> even if truth is bad in begining it will help u a lot other wise big

> winds will come ,read indian history and see how mighty empire got

> crumpled

>

> or world history .Otherwise we cannot answer our own children

questions

> and being aggreesive and young they wont giv that much sanctity

what we

> try to say .

>

> If u blv god ,what ever is his name ,he is truth .

>

> its not some text ,some launage ,or some name .ultimately

>

> dont hide behind yugas ,then i must ask u then why the hell this

text

> used all things applicable to modern indian astrology .

>

> he can say that this is not applicable in kaliyuga.

>

> And Valmiki says one chart and adhytma ramayana says a differrent

view

> ,but stick with common tread.

>

> what ever may be yuga total degrees cannot be more than 360 in

zodiac

>

> and too much speed or less speed .

>

> then Y the sage ( or inte polater used ,swa ucha like this ) if its

not

> applicable to astrology and then why he was eger to giv ucha status

to

> most of the planets ?

>

> U know why i am asking this questions ,as i am a astrologer

myself ,also

> seeker of truth and actual events which may happen or will

happen ,it

> becomes my duty or i can say prime duty as astrology is finaly the

> scince of real happenings .

>

> I am not a academician or a hobbyist ,but who lives in devine town

ship

> called guruvayur and will be grilled by each and every moment by

> customers who may be knowing each other since generations .

>

> So jyothisha is finaly results .i cannot say u shud blv it other

wise u

> will be cursed or its our blf .

>

> here my customers includes muslims who forms majority in number and

then

> christians and hindus .

>

> So u think and try to see from from my reading glass also

>

>

>

> regrds Vijaya raghavan guruvayur .

>

>

>

>

, HosabettuRamadas

Rao

> <ramadasrao@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Dear Sreenadh Ji,

> > I have a small query regarding your main question itself.At

present

> which in which Yuga we are living and what about the planetary

movements

> and their acceleration in Treta Yuga ? How many thosands of years

have

> passed from Treta Yuga to the present Kali Yuga ? Do you think that

all

> the planets have the same movements or acceleration in the present

Yuga

> also ?? Do you have any reference regarding such planetary movements

> during Krita Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?Because I have no

idea

> of planetary movements in those great Yugas.

> > Regards,

> > Ramadas Rao.

> >

> >

> > @: sreesog@: Tue, 13 Nov 2007

> 13:51:01 +0000 Re: Contextual

meaning

> of the word " Kuleera " in Ramayana - To Rao ji & Goal ji

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > 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--- In

> , 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@> 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,>

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

[Guest guest]

Dear Ramdas ji,

You don't seem to have paid much attention to, or read the debates

on Rama's chart going on in this group at all! If you had you should

have well understood that the chart given in Ramayana is - note it and

don't miss it again -

Rama's chart

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

* The Tropical Chart for 14th Marth Nov 157 BC (If you are using

JHora put -156 Gregorian calendar for the year)

The planatry details are as follows -

* Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra

* Moon in Cancer (Own sign)

* Jupitor in Cancer (Exalted)

* Sun in Pisces

* Mercury in Pisces (Debilitated)

* Satrun in Aquarius (Own sign)

* Mars in Capricorn (Exalted)

* Venus in Taurus (Own Sign)

* Lagna - Not mentioned.

Note that 3 planets are in own sing and 2 planets exalted. Thus the

statement 5 planets are either in own sign or exalted becomes true.

Bharata's Chart

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

* Planetary position - same as above.

* Nakshatra - Pushya

* Lagna - Not given

Lakshmana and Satrukhna

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

* Planetary position - same as above.

* Nakshatra - Aslesha

* Lagna - Not given

Note that all the conditions mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana gets

satisfied. Note that the charts match perfectly well with the

description given in Valmiki Ramayana.

Hope this helps.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, HosabettuRamadas Rao

<ramadasrao wrote:

>

>

> Dear Sreenadh Ji,

> You have not understood what I wrote.Ok, simply Lord Rama " s chart as

depicted by Mahasrhi Valmiki, can we arrive at the chart,date of birth

etc.?

> With Regards,

> Ramadas Rao

>

>

> : sreesog: Wed, 14 Nov 2007

04:50:39 +0000 Re: Contextual

meaning of the word " Kuleera " in Ramayana - To Rao ji

>

>

>

>

> Dear Ramdas ji,==>At present which in which Yuga we are living and

what about the planetary movements and their acceleration in Treta

Yuga ?<==Understand clearly that if not associated with precession

seconds or if not a mere mathematical hypothesis to solve the rhythm

of solar system riddle - the Yuga number lose all its significance.

The ancient sages were far more intelligent and better that the

illogical people who believe that the Yuga numbers represent Solar

years, millions of years!!! If not in tune with and complementary to

our current understanding of human history, archeology and evolution

(of solar system, earth, life on earth) all such ideas become

irrelevant. So one should try to understand ancient concepts in tune

with out current knowledge and understanding. I hope that clarifies my

stand point. Now let us approach your question in another

perspective.If those planetary movement in 'Treta Yuga' is not

applicable to our current astrology then, we should even avoid

discussing or even considering it as astrology at all. If it is so,

then why some so called guru of gurus is using such planetary

positions to prove his new born instant coffee like pet theories? To

quote a member who wrote in some other forum - ==>> Pt.XXXXXX was

using mercury in Taurus .The other > planetary positions are same .

And he discuses various dasas like > even Moola dasa and arudhas and

even the life of sri ramji is > detail with this data .So much exalted

planets and the avtara hood > of lord ram and his excile to forest and

the curses he got ,even > how it was fructified tru a servant maid the

hunchback > Mandara,and things like that and Venus exalted was showing

the> greatness of seetha ji and mars exalted as 5th lord was showing >

the Valiant sons and Venus was in 12th from arudha lagna was > showing

the marital problems he faced .This was the line of > discussions

generally i think .......<==Hope you will have an answer. ==>> How

many thousands of years have passed from Treta Yuga to the > present

Kali Yuga ? Do you think that all the planets have the same >

movements or acceleration in the present Yuga also ?? Do you have >

any reference regarding such planetary movements during Krita >

Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?<==I believe it is clear that all

these questions become irrelevant in then light of clarifications

given above. :)Love,Sreenadh--- In

, HosabettuRamadas Rao

<ramadasrao@> wrote:>> > Dear Sreenadh Ji,> I have a small query

regarding your main question itself.At present which in which Yuga we

are living and what about the planetary movements and their

acceleration in Treta Yuga ? How many thosands of years have passed

from Treta Yuga to the present Kali Yuga ? Do you think that all the

planets have the same movements or acceleration in the present Yuga

also ?? Do you have any reference regarding such planetary movements

during Krita Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?Because I have no idea

of planetary movements in those great Yugas.> Regards,> Ramadas Rao.>

> > @: sreesog@: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:51:01

+0000 Re: Contextual meaning of the

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

, 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 > > > > ----- Original Message

----> Sreenadh <sreesog@>> To:

> 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 > > > > > > > > -----

Original Message ----> > 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.> > > > > > > > > > > > To:

ancient_indian_ astrology> > sreesog (AT) (DOT)

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

[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> > > > --- In

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

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

ancient_indian_ astrology, " Avtar > Krishen > > >

Kaul " > > > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > > --- In

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> > > >

> > > > > > > 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> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

com, " 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> >> > > > > > 5, 50, 500, 5000 -

Store N number of mails in your inbox. Go to

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

> > > > > >

________> Discover

the new Windows Vista>

http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista & mkt=en-US & form=QBRE>

_______________

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

Live Spaces. It's easy!

>

http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create & wx_url=/friends.aspx & mkt=\

en-us

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenadh,

 

Mr. Ramadas Rao asked the relevant question: Can we arrive at the

chart, date of birth etc.? The most correct answer to this question

must be: No, we cannot.

 

We are dealing with a kind of vague, self-contradictive, mythological

description of a chart. The explanation is obscure. For all we know,

the reason for the five exalted planets may simply be the fact that

everything is five-fold according to Vedanta belief.

 

Had anyone wanted us to see this chart, then surely they would have

given the proper details of such a chart in the text itself. For some

reason they didn't.

 

Very friendly,

Finn Wandahl

 

 

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Ramdas ji,

> You don't seem to have paid much attention to, or read the debates

> on Rama's chart going on in this group at all! If you had you should

> have well understood that the chart given in Ramayana is - note it and

> don't miss it again -

> Rama's chart

> ============

> * The Tropical Chart for 14th Marth Nov 157 BC (If you are using

> JHora put -156 Gregorian calendar for the year)

> The planatry details are as follows -

> * Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra

> * Moon in Cancer (Own sign)

> * Jupitor in Cancer (Exalted)

> * Sun in Pisces

> * Mercury in Pisces (Debilitated)

> * Satrun in Aquarius (Own sign)

> * Mars in Capricorn (Exalted)

> * Venus in Taurus (Own Sign)

> * Lagna - Not mentioned.

> Note that 3 planets are in own sing and 2 planets exalted. Thus the

> statement 5 planets are either in own sign or exalted becomes true.

> Bharata's Chart

> ===============

> * Planetary position - same as above.

> * Nakshatra - Pushya

> * Lagna - Not given

> Lakshmana and Satrukhna

> =======================

> * Planetary position - same as above.

> * Nakshatra - Aslesha

> * Lagna - Not given

> Note that all the conditions mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana gets

> satisfied. Note that the charts match perfectly well with the

> description given in Valmiki Ramayana.

> Hope this helps.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , HosabettuRamadas Rao

> <ramadasrao@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Dear Sreenadh Ji,

> > You have not understood what I wrote.Ok, simply Lord Rama " s chart as

> depicted by Mahasrhi Valmiki, can we arrive at the chart,date of birth

> etc.?

> > With Regards,

> > Ramadas Rao

> >

> >

> > @: sreesog@: Wed, 14 Nov 2007

> 04:50:39 +0000 Re: Contextual

> meaning of the word " Kuleera " in Ramayana - To Rao ji

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Dear Ramdas ji,==>At present which in which Yuga we are living and

> what about the planetary movements and their acceleration in Treta

> Yuga ?<==Understand clearly that if not associated with precession

> seconds or if not a mere mathematical hypothesis to solve the rhythm

> of solar system riddle - the Yuga number lose all its significance.

> The ancient sages were far more intelligent and better that the

> illogical people who believe that the Yuga numbers represent Solar

> years, millions of years!!! If not in tune with and complementary to

> our current understanding of human history, archeology and evolution

> (of solar system, earth, life on earth) all such ideas become

> irrelevant. So one should try to understand ancient concepts in tune

> with out current knowledge and understanding. I hope that clarifies my

> stand point. Now let us approach your question in another

> perspective.If those planetary movement in 'Treta Yuga' is not

> applicable to our current astrology then, we should even avoid

> discussing or even considering it as astrology at all. If it is so,

> then why some so called guru of gurus is using such planetary

> positions to prove his new born instant coffee like pet theories? To

> quote a member who wrote in some other forum - ==>> Pt.XXXXXX was

> using mercury in Taurus .The other > planetary positions are same .

> And he discuses various dasas like > even Moola dasa and arudhas and

> even the life of sri ramji is > detail with this data .So much exalted

> planets and the avtara hood > of lord ram and his excile to forest and

> the curses he got ,even > how it was fructified tru a servant maid the

> hunchback > Mandara,and things like that and Venus exalted was showing

> the> greatness of seetha ji and mars exalted as 5th lord was showing >

> the Valiant sons and Venus was in 12th from arudha lagna was > showing

> the marital problems he faced .This was the line of > discussions

> generally i think .......<==Hope you will have an answer. ==>> How

> many thousands of years have passed from Treta Yuga to the > present

> Kali Yuga ? Do you think that all the planets have the same >

> movements or acceleration in the present Yuga also ?? Do you have >

> any reference regarding such planetary movements during Krita >

> Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?<==I believe it is clear that all

> these questions become irrelevant in then light of clarifications

> given above. :)Love,Sreenadh--- In

> , HosabettuRamadas Rao

> <ramadasrao@> wrote:>> > Dear Sreenadh Ji,> I have a small query

> regarding your main question itself.At present which in which Yuga we

> are living and what about the planetary movements and their

> acceleration in Treta Yuga ? How many thosands of years have passed

> from Treta Yuga to the present Kali Yuga ? Do you think that all the

> planets have the same movements or acceleration in the present Yuga

> also ?? Do you have any reference regarding such planetary movements

> during Krita Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?Because I have no idea

> of planetary movements in those great Yugas.> Regards,> Ramadas Rao.>

> > > @: sreesog@: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:51:01

> +0000 Re: Contextual meaning of the

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

> , 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 > > > > ----- Original Message

> ----> Sreenadh <sreesog@>> To:

> > 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 > > > > > > > > -----

> Original Message ----> > 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.> > > > > > > > > > > > To:

> ancient_indian_ astrology> > sreesog (AT) (DOT)

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

> [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> > > > --- In

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

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

> ancient_indian_ astrology, " Avtar > Krishen > > >

> Kaul " > > > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > > --- In

> 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> > > >

> > > > > > > > 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> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

> com, " 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> >> > > > > > 5, 50, 500, 5000 -

> Store N number of mails in your inbox. Go to

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

> > > > > > >

> ________> Discover

> the new Windows Vista>

> http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista & mkt=en-US & form=QBRE>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > _______________

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

> Live Spaces. It's easy!

> >

>

http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create & wx_url=/friends.aspx & mkt=\

en-us

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenadh Ji,

But I have another source which says the birth of Shri Rama has occured in a different birth and time.I am reproducing that information source for your information.

*Was Lord Ram Really Born?* We Indians are the products of one of the oldest civilisations. We need tobe really proud of our ancient history and cultural heritage. However,during the British Rule, we developed an inferiority complex, whichadversely affected our quest to unearth facts relating to our glorious past.But our young and educated men and women, born and brought up in independentIndia, are capable of unearthing the true facts and are confident enough toevaluate these objectively. Shri Ram being most basic to Indian "ethos", it is necessary to know who isShri Ram? Was he really born? If yes, when and where? As is believed bycrores of people did he really put his feet on the Indian territory fromNorth to South, reducing the sufferings of mankind and ensuring victory ofgood over evil? Let us take a look at historical facts: The story of Shri Ram's life was first narrated by Maharishi Valmiki in theRamayana, which was written after Shri Ram was crowned as the king ofAyodhya. Maharishi Valmiki was a great astronomer as he has made sequentialastronomical references on important dates related to the life of Shri Ramindicating the location of planets vis-a-vis zodiac constellations and theother stars (nakshatras). Needless to add that similar position of planetsand nakshatras is not repeated in thousands of years. By entering theprecise details of the planetary configuration of the important events inthe life of Shri Ram as given in the Valmiki Ramayan in the software named"Planetarium" corresponding exact dates of these events according to theEnglish calendar can be known. Mr Pushkar Bhatnagar of the Indian Revenue Service had acquired thissoftware from the US. It is used to predict the solar/lunar eclipses anddistance and location of other planets from earth. He entered the relevantdetails about the planetary positions narrated by Maharishi Valmiki andobtained very interesting and convincing results, which almost determine theimportant dates starting from the birth of Shri Ram to the date of hiscoming back to Ayodhya after 14 years of exile. Maharishi Valmiki has recorded in Bal Kaand sarga 19 and shloka eight andnine (1/18/8,9) that Shri Ram was born on ninth tithi of Chaitra month whenthe position of different planets vis-a-vis zodiac constellations andnakshatras (visible stars) were: i) Sun in Aries; ii) Saturn in Libra; iii)Jupiter in Cancer; iv) Venus in Pisces; v) Mars in Capricorn; vi) Lunarmonth of Chaitra; vii) Ninth day after no moon; viii) Lagna as Cancer(cancer was rising in the east); ix) Moon on the Punarvasu (Geminiconstellation & Pllux star); x) Day time (around noon). This data, was fed into the software. The results indicated that this wasexactly the location of planets/stars in the noon of January 10, 5114 BC.Thus Shri Ram was born on January 10, 5114 BC (7121 years back). As per theIndian calendar it was the ninth day of Shukla Paksha in Chaitra month andthe time was around 12 to 1 noontime. This is exactly the time and date whenRam Navmi is celebrated all over India. Shri Ram was born in Ayodhya. This fact can be ascertained from severalbooks written by Indian and foreign authors before and after the birth ofChrist - Valmiki Ramayan, Tulsi Ramayan, Kalidasa's Raghuvansam, Baudh andJain literature, etc. These books have narrated in great detail thelocation, rich architecture and beauty of Ayodhya which had many palaces andtemples built all over the kingdom. Ayodhya was located on the banks of theSaryu river with Ganga and Panchal Pradesh on one side and Mithila on theother side. Normally 7,000 years is a very long period during whichearthquakes, storms, floods and foreign invasions change the course ofrivers, destroy the towns/buildings and alter the territories. Therefore,the task of unearthing the facts is monumental. The present Ayodhya hasshrunk in size and the rivers have changed their course about 40 kmnorth/south. Shri Ram went out of Ayodhya in his childhood (13th year as per ValmikiRamayan) with Rishi Vishwamitra who lived in Tapovan (Sidhhashram). Fromthere he went to Mithila, King Janaka's kingdom. Here he married Sita afterbreaking Shiv Dhanusha. Researchers have gone along the route adopted byShri Ram as narrated in the Valmiki Ramayan and found 23 places which havememorials that commemorate the events related to the life of Shri Ram. Theseinclude Shringi Ashram, Ramghat, Tadka Van, Sidhhashram, Gautamashram,Janakpur (now in Nepal), Sita Kund, etc. Memorials are built for great menand not for fictitious characters. Date of exile of Shri Ram: It is mentioned in Valmiki Ramayan's AyodhyaKand (2/4/18) that Dashratha wanted to make Shri Ram the king because Sun,Mars and Rahu had surrounded his nakshatra, and normally under suchplanetary configuration the king dies or becomes a victim of conspiracies.Dashratha's zodiac sign was Pisces and his nakshatra was Rewati. Thisplanetary configuration was prevailing on the January 5, 5089 BC, and it wason this day that Shri Ram left Ayodhya for 14 years of exile. Thus, he was25 years old at that time (5114-5089). There are several shlokas in ValmikiRamayan which indicate that Shri Ram was 25-years-old when he left Ayodhyafor exile. Valmiki Ramayan refers to the solar eclipse at the time of war withKhardushan in later half of 13th year of Shri Ram's exile. It is alsomentioned it was amavasya day and Mars was in the middle. When this data wasentered, the software indicated that there was a solar eclipse on October 7,5077 BC, (amavasya day) which could be seen from Panchvati. The planetaryconfiguration was also the same - Mars was in the middle, on one side wereVenus and Mercury and on the other side were Sun and Saturn. On the basis ofplanetary configurations described in various other chapters, the date onwhich Ravana was killed works out to be December 4, 5076 BC, and Shri Ramcompleted 14 years of exile on January 2, 5075 BC, and that day was alsoNavami of Shukla Paksha in Chaitra month. Thus Shri Ram had come back toAyodhya at the age of 39 (5114-5075). A colleague, Dr Ram Avtar, researched on places visited by Shri Ram duringhis exile, and sequentially moved to the places stated as visited by ShriRam in the Valmiki Ramayan, starting from Ayodhya he went right uptoRameshwaram. He found 195 places which still have the memorials connected tothe events narrated in the Ramayana relating to the life of Shri Ram andSita. These include Tamsa Tal (Mandah), Shringverpur (Singraur), BhardwajAshram (situated near Allahabad), Atri Ashram, Markandaya Ashram (Markundi),Chitrakoot, Pamakuti (on banks of Godavari), Panchvati, Sita Sarovar, RamKund in Triambakeshwar near Nasik, Shabari Ashram, Kishkindha (villageAnnagorai), Dhanushkoti and Rameshwar temple. (The writer is a Commissioner of Income Tax posted at Delhi. The articlewill conclude on the Oped page on Monday) In Valmiki Ramayan it is mentioned that Shri Ram's army constructed abridge over the sea between Rameshwaram and Lanka. After crossing thisbridge, Shri Ram's army had defeated Ravana. Recently, NASA put pictures(reproduced here) on the Internet of a man-made bridge, the ruins of whichare lying submerged in Palk Strait between Rameshwaram and Sri Lanka.Recently the Sri Lankan Government had expressed the desire to develop SitaVatika as a tourist spot. Sri Lankans believe this was Ashok Vatika whereRavana had kept Sita as a prisoner (in 5076 BC). Indian history has recorded that Shri Ram belonged to the Suryavansh and hewas the 64th ruler of this dynasty. The names and other relevant particularsof previous 63 kings are listed in Ayodhya Ka Itihas written about 80 yearsago by Rai Bahadur Sita Ram. Professor Subhash Kak of Lousiana University,in his book, The Astronomical Code of the Rig Veda, has also listed 63ancestors of Shri Ram who ruled over Ayodhya. Sri Ram's ancestors have beentraced out as: Shri Ram, King Dashratha, King Aja, King Raghu, King Dilipand so on. From Kashmir to Kanyakumari and from Bengal to Gujarat,everywhere people believe in the reality of Shri Ram's existence,particularly in the tribal areas of Himachal, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh andthe North-East. Most of the festivals celebrated in these areas revolvearound the events in the life of Shri Ram and Shri Krishna. The events and places related to the life of Shri Ram and Sita are truecultural and social heritage of every Indian irrespective of caste andcreed. Therefore, it is common heritage. After all, Shri Ram belonged to theperiod when Prophet Mohammed or Jesus Christ were not born and Muslim orChristian faiths were unknown to the world. The words Hindu (resident ofHindustan) and Indian (resident of India) were synonymous. India was alsoknown as Bharat (land of knowledge) and Aryavarta (where Aryans live) andHindustan (land of "Hindus" - derived from word Indus). During Ram Rajya, the evils of caste system based on birth werenon-existent. In fact, Maharishi Valmiki is stated to be of shudra class(scheduled caste), still Sita lived with him as his adopted daughter aftershe was banished from Ayodhya. Luv and Kush grew in his ashram as hisdisciples. We need to be proud of the fact that Valmiki was perhaps thefirst great astronomer and that his study of planetary configurations hasstood the test of times. Even the latest computer softwares havecorroborated his astronomical calculations, which proves that he did notcommit any error. Shabari is stated to be belonging to the Bheel tribe. Shri Ram's army,which succeeded in defeating Ravana, was formed by various tribals fromCentral and South India. The facts, events and all other details relating tothe life of Shri Ram are the common heritage of all the Indians includingscheduled castes, scheduled tribes, Muslims, Christians, etc. Prophet Mohammad was born 1,400 years ago. Jesus Christ was born 2,000 yearsback. Gautam Buddha was born 2,600 years back, whereas Ram was born 7,000years back. Hence, discovering the details relating to Shri Ram's life wouldbe lot more difficult as destruction caused by floods, earthquakes andinvasions etc., would be far greater. But, should that stop our quest forlearning more about our cultural heritage? As Indians, let us all take pride in the fact that the Indian civilisationis the most ancient civilisation today. It is certainly more than 10,000years old. Therefore, let us reject the story of Aryan invasion in India in1,500 BC as motivated implantation. In fact Max Mueller, who was the creatorof this theory had himself rejected it. Let us admit that during the BritishRule, we were educated in the schools based on Macaulay school of thinkingwhich believed that everything Indian was inferior and that entire "Indianliterature was not worth even one book rack in England". If there weresimilarities in certain features of Indian people and people from CentralEurope, then automatic inference drawn was that the Aryans coming fromEurope invaded India and settled here. No one dared of thinking in any otherway. Therefore, there is urgency for the historians and all otherintellectuals to stop reducing Indian history to myth. There is need togather, dig out, search, unearth and analyse all the evidences, which wouldthrow more light on ancient Indian civilisation and culture. There is need for the print and the electronic media to take note of thesefacts and create atmosphere which would motivate our young and educatedyouth to carry out research and unearth true facts about the ancient Indiancivilisation and wisdom and would also encourage them to put across theresults of their research before the people fearlessly and with a sense ofpride! There is no need of great austerities or penances to worship the LordRamacandra, for He accepts even a small service offered by His devotee. ThusHe is satisfied, and as soon as He is satisfied, the devotee is successful.Indeed, Lord Sri Ramacandra brought all the devotees of Ayodhya back home,back to Godhead. (Spoken by Hanuman in Srimad bhagvatam)With best Regards,Ramadas Rao.

 

 

 

From: sreesogDate: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:02:03 +0000 Re: Contextual meaning of the word "Kuleera" in Ramayana - To Rao ji

 

 

 

Dear Ramdas ji,You don't seem to have paid much attention to, or read the debateson Rama's chart going on in this group at all! If you had you shouldhave well understood that the chart given in Ramayana is - note it anddon't miss it again -Rama's chart============* The Tropical Chart for 14th Marth Nov 157 BC (If you are usingJHora put -156 Gregorian calendar for the year)The planatry details are as follows -* Navami Tithi and Punarvasu Nakshatra* Moon in Cancer (Own sign)* Jupitor in Cancer (Exalted)* Sun in Pisces * Mercury in Pisces (Debilitated)* Satrun in Aquarius (Own sign)* Mars in Capricorn (Exalted)* Venus in Taurus (Own Sign)* Lagna - Not mentioned. Note that 3 planets are in own sing and 2 planets exalted. Thus thestatement 5 planets are either in own sign or exalted becomes true. Bharata's Chart===============* Planetary position - same as above.* Nakshatra - Pushya * Lagna - Not givenLakshmana and Satrukhna======================= * Planetary position - same as above.* Nakshatra - Aslesha* Lagna - Not givenNote that all the conditions mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana getssatisfied. Note that the charts match perfectly well with thedescription given in Valmiki Ramayana. Hope this helps.Love,Sreenadh , HosabettuRamadas Rao<ramadasrao wrote:>> > Dear Sreenadh Ji,> You have not understood what I wrote.Ok, simply Lord Rama"s chart asdepicted by Mahasrhi Valmiki, can we arrive at the chart,date of birthetc.?> With Regards,> Ramadas Rao> > > : sreesog: Wed, 14 Nov 200704:50:39 +0000 Re: Contextualmeaning of the word "Kuleera" in Ramayana - To Rao ji> > > > > Dear Ramdas ji,==>At present which in which Yuga we are living andwhat about the planetary movements and their acceleration in TretaYuga ?<==Understand clearly that if not associated with precessionseconds or if not a mere mathematical hypothesis to solve the rhythmof solar system riddle - the Yuga number lose all its significance.The ancient sages were far more intelligent and better that theillogical people who believe that the Yuga numbers represent Solaryears, millions of years!!! If not in tune with and complementary toour current understanding of human history, archeology and evolution(of solar system, earth, life on earth) all such ideas becomeirrelevant. So one should try to understand ancient concepts in tunewith out current knowledge and understanding. I hope that clarifies mystand point. Now let us approach your question in anotherperspective.If those planetary movement in 'Treta Yuga' is notapplicable to our current astrology then, we should even avoiddiscussing or even considering it as astrology at all. If it is so,then why some so called guru of gurus is using such planetarypositions to prove his new born instant coffee like pet theories? Toquote a member who wrote in some other forum - ==>> Pt.XXXXXX wasusing mercury in Taurus .The other > planetary positions are same .And he discuses various dasas like > even Moola dasa and arudhas andeven the life of sri ramji is > detail with this data .So much exaltedplanets and the avtara hood > of lord ram and his excile to forest andthe curses he got ,even > how it was fructified tru a servant maid thehunchback > Mandara,and things like that and Venus exalted was showingthe> greatness of seetha ji and mars exalted as 5th lord was showing >the Valiant sons and Venus was in 12th from arudha lagna was > showingthe marital problems he faced .This was the line of > discussionsgenerally i think .......<==Hope you will have an answer. ==>> Howmany thousands of years have passed from Treta Yuga to the > presentKali Yuga ? Do you think that all the planets have the same >movements or acceleration in the present Yuga also ?? Do you have >any reference regarding such planetary movements during Krita >Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?<==I believe it is clear that allthese questions become irrelevant in then light of clarificationsgiven above. :)Love,Sreenadh--- In , HosabettuRamadas Rao<ramadasrao@> wrote:>> > Dear Sreenadh Ji,> I have a small queryregarding your main question itself.At present which in which Yuga weare living and what about the planetary movements and theiracceleration in Treta Yuga ? How many thosands of years have passedfrom Treta Yuga to the present Kali Yuga ? Do you think that all theplanets have the same movements or acceleration in the present Yugaalso ?? Do you have any reference regarding such planetary movementsduring Krita Yuga,Treta Yuga, Dwapara Yuga etc.?Because I have no ideaof planetary movements in those great Yugas.> Regards,> Ramadas Rao.>> > @: sreesog@: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:51:01+0000 Re: Contextual meaning of theword "Kuleera" in Ramayana - To Rao ji & Goal ji> > > > > Dear Goelji,==>> Why are you using such words like foolish etc. Please do notloose > your cool and temper and that too ....<==I was astonished tosee these statements!!! Read carefully the statement of me which youare talking against! ==>> Do you think that either the poet or theinterpolator was foolish > enough to believe that Sun will move 4signs in a single day > (if it is assumed that rama and brothers tookbirth in consecutive > days) <== Foolish is a simple word withoutanything wrong associated with and I was not addressing anyone inparticular but was speaking about the subject! Actually I don'tbelieve that none of the possible author's of that text cannot be thatfoolish, they should be intelligent enough to see this simple fact.(i.e. Sun cannot move 4 signs in a single day) Valmiki : He was agreat scholar, and he will never commit this mistake.Some other poet:If some one could write beautiful poetical scholarly book likeRamayana, he is never going to commit this mistake.Interpolator: Ifsomeone could write such a so genuinely looking slokas in Sanskrit,and if he was doing it with a purpose, he must be intelligent enoughto maintain the constancy. Thus the conclusion - What ever the periodof the text, THE SLOKAS MUST BE RIGHT! I am asking you to simplepossibility. The mistake SHOULD BE in our part in understanding it andinterpreting it. Possibility -1 (Me)==================If Lagna meansSign and Kuleera means then, ""Sarpe Jatastu Saumitri Kuleeraabhuditaaravo" - get translated as "Lekhmana and Satrukhna were bornin Aslesha Nakshatra when Mars was in Capricorn Sign" - and everypieces of the puzzle fall in right places & for sure we startappreciating the intelligence and knowledge of the poet. See this as afact.Possibility -2 (You and Rao ji)===============================IfKuleera means Capricorn then, ""Sarpe Jatastu Saumitri Kuleeraabhudite ravo" - get translated as "Lekhmana and Satrukhna were bornin Aslesha Nakshatra when Sun was in Cancer Sign". I failed to see,how it coherently integrates the pieces of the puzzle, without makingus question the intelligence and knowledge of the poet. Please correctme if I am wrong. That was why my doubt - ==>> * Do you mean to saythat Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born 4 months > after the birth ofRama and Bharata? Or> * Do you think that either the poet or theinterpolator was foolish > enough to believe that Sun will move 4signs in a single day (if it > is assumed that rama and brothers tookbirth in consecutive days)<==I was simply asking you to clarify yourview - regarding this issue. And I thought that you have an answer tothis question. And that is why I said - "I sincerely believe that youwill have a clear solution to suggest for this problem". I don'tbelieve, I have committed any sin or mistake in my earlier mail!Actually your previous mail didn't addressed this question - and youwere hastily making the statement - "Why are you using such words likefoolish etc. Please do not loose your cool and temper and that too...." Who is losing temper?!! Dear Goal ji, what is this? I respectyou and we are doing simple academic discussion - let us sincerelylook into the possibilities.Love and regards,Sreenadh--- In , Gopal Goel <gkgoel1937@>wrote:>> Dear Mr.. Sreenadh,> You become exited too soon. Why are youusing such words like foolish etc. Please do not loose your cool andtemper and that too for proving > something which you believe is rightand others are wrong.> For us lord Rama is incarnation of GOD, AND ITDOES NOT MATTER WHEN WAS HE APPEARED ON THIS EARTH.VALMIKI RAMAYANGIVES> US GRATE STRENGTH AND TEACHING.THE RAMA OF VALMIKI RAMAYANA ISA GREAT IDEAL FOR US GIVE INSPIRATION IN OUR DAY TO DAY > LIFE.> Ifyou also view Lord Shri Rama in the same light, some worthwhilediscussion is possible among ourselves,otherwise at least I do notwish to join such discussions.> In astrology ,Kuleer means only cancer. Ravao is appearing separately in the Sloka. This may have twoindications:> 1. Sign Cancer was rising with Sun> 2 .Cancer was risingwith Sun in dignity i.e. at Noon time> As namkaran sanskar of all thefour brothers had taken place simultaneously after the appearance ofLORD RAMA ON THE EARTH, THE LATTER MEANING ARE MORE APPROPRIATE> ANDLOGICAL.> Kindly advise,> > > > G.K.GOEL> Ph: 09350311433> Add: L-409,SARITA VIHAR> NEW DELHI-110 076> INDIA > > > > ----- Original Message----> Sreenadh <sreesog@>> > Tuesday, 13 November,2007 12:59:08 PM> Re: Contextualmeaning 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 theopinian that "Kuleera" > means "Cancer Sign" as used in ValmikiRamayana. Interesting! Let us > for argument sake accept that it meansCancer sign itself - in > Valmiki Ramayana. If so please clarify myfollowing doubt. The sloka > given in Valmiki Ramayana is "SarpeJatastu Saumitri Kuleera abhudite > Ravo" - as per your meaning thesloka would get transilated > as "Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born inAslesha Nakshatra when Sun > was in Cancer"! Now the questions -> * Doyou mean to say that Lekhmana and Satrukhna were born 4 months > afterthe birth of Rama and Bharata? Or> * Do you think that either the poetor the interpolator was foolish > enough to believe that Sun will move4 signs in a single day (if it > is assumed that rama and brotherstook birth in cosequtive days) > Please answer - I sincerely believethat you will have a clear > solution to suggest for this problem. >Love,> Sreenadh> > ancient_indian_ astrology,Gopal Goel > <gkgoel1937@ ...> wrote:> >> > Dear Friends,> > Mr. Raois a great scholar , obviously he is right> > Dictionary meaning is toguide us , ultimate meaning should depend > on context.> > Sloka onthe birth of Lakshaman's says -ravoa- this points out to > twopossibilities:> > 1 , Sun is with rising sign Cancer.> > 2 Sign Cancerwas 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.> > Lakshamanand Satrughan was born in Noon in Ashlesha Nakshatra > when Cancer wasrising.> > Regards.> > > > G.K.GOEL> > Ph: 09350311433> > Add: L-409,SARITA VIHAR> > NEW DELHI-110 076> > INDIA > > > > > > > > -----Original Message ----> > HosabettuRamadas Rao <ramadasrao@ ...>>> ancient_indian_ astrology> > Monday, 12November, 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.> > karkaHkuLIraakrutirambusa msthovakshaHprad esho > vihitaschadhaatuH.......This shloka is from Yavana Jataka.Meaning > karkataka Rashi islike the shape of KulIraakruti which is in > water,kalapurusha' schest ( vaksha sthala ) portion,indicative of > Dhatu sign orRashi,also indicative of well,river and watery land.> > I hope thishelps.> > With Regards,> > Ramadas Rao.> > > > > > > > > > > > To:ancient_indian_ astrology> > sreesog > > Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:12:21 +0000> > Subject:[ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Nirukti of the > word 'Lagna' - ToFinn ji> > > > > > Dear Kaul ji,> > Let us consider your majorarguments -> > ==>> > > to interpret Kuleera as Capricorn is also farfetched, to > > > say the least, since all the astrological textsdescribe it as > > > Karkata!> > <==> > That is simply your ignorance- many major dictionaries and> > Nikhandus deals with in detail - andclarifies it well that the word> > 'Kuleera' could mean 'Capricorn'.To convince you, I will provide a> > details quotes and referencesfrom them in the next post. > > ==>> > > If you are using "Lagna" forsigns, then you cannot help placing > > > five planets of Bhagwan Ramain Karkata, since this is what> > > the ninth sholka of Canto 18 says,"nakshatre aditi daivatye > > > svochsamstheshu panchasu graheshukarkate lagne vakpatav induna > > > saha" > > <==> > This too issimply ignorance. The sloka bit means "(Rama took birth)> > inPunarvasu 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 isused (and NOT Kuleera)> > 2) There too the word "Lagna" means "Sign"itself. Note that> > "karkate lagne vakpatav induna saha" means "InCancer SIGN Jupitor > was> > with Moon"> > ==>> > > Secondly, wecannot overlook the fact that "Adyatma Ramayana", > which > > > yousays 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 virtuesof the story > of> > Ramayana. It comprises around 4200 verses, isembedded in > Brahm & #257;nda> > Purana and is considered to beauthored by Ved Vyasa" - wikipedia.> > (http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Adhyatma_ Ramayana)> > 2) What is popular in Kerala is an INDIPENDEDTRANSILATION of> > Adyatma Ramayana written by Tunjattu RamanujanEzhuttacchan who is> > known as the 'father of malayalam language' agreat scholar. > > 3) We are NOT discussing Adhyatma Ramayana butVALMIKI RAMAYANA - so> > don't bring in irrelevant quotes in between.Note that while Valmiki> > Ramayana does not mention Madhu masa etcAdhayata Ramayana does it.> > Note that while Valmiki Ramayana tellsus that the birth took place > in> > the 12th (Nakshatra) Month fromthe end date of Putra kameshti,> > Adhyatma Ramayana tells us that ithappened at the 10th month. So > with> > this much inconsistenciesbetween these two texts - Adhyatma > Ramayana> > quote is NOT worthconsidering while discussing "Astrology in > Valmiki> > Ramayana". Itis clear that you are bringing in the Adhyatma > ramayana> > quoteonly 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 presentedregarding> > the Adhyatma Ramayana quote. Again it simply means that Ihave > wasted> > enough time on the ignorance of "TropicalCalendarvalas" . > > 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 aredragging me to the same> > direction â€" `I know only to deal withbad with bad and good with > good'> > â€" so the end result wouldbe the group becoming a mud house and I> > don't want it. So pleaseavoid name calling here onwards and me too> > will never resort to it.Let us keep the group clean and sane. > People> > has already startedcomplaining about the insane useless direction > in> > which thisgroup is going - both you and me are culprits for the > same.> >Please know it as a fact. > > Regards,> > Sreenadh> > > > --- Inancient_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 commoninterpretation of > the > > > word Lagna i.e. the sign rising at aparticular time, > > > the "astrologer" concerned would have resortedto some other > meaning > > > of that word! He could very well haveused the word "rashi" > instead > > > of Lagna then.> > > Secondly, tointerpet Kuleera as Capricorn is also far fetched, > to > > > say theleast, 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 thishypothesis is that > in > > > second century BCE, there was nomethodology of calculating > planets > > > correctly, whether it wasIndia or any other country! India, on > the > > > other hand, wassaddled with the Surya Sidhanta, which is > > > fundamentally the mostincorrect work. So it is just a > possibility > > > that theastrologer 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 "AdyatmaRamayana", > which > > > you says was written in Kerala, contains thefollowing shlokas> > > "madhumasse site pakshe navmyam karkate shubhe>> > punarvasu sahite uchasthe grahapanchake> > > mesham pooshanisamprapte pushpavrishti samakule aviraseej jagan > > > nathah parmatmasanatanah" (1/3/14-15)> > > > > > A running translation of theseshlokas is> > > "In the month of Madhu, shukla paksha --brighthalf--in navmi > tithi > > > and punarvasu nakshara, when five planetswere exalted, the sun > was > > > in Mesha, the Eternal Lord of theworlds, Parmatma, > incarnated.. .."> > > > > > > > > 1. Here the sunhas specifically been put in Mesha but at the > same > > > time it isMadhu 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 ofKarkata lagna or the Moon in > > > Karkata, but if the Sun is in Meshaand it is Navmi tithi, it > means > > > that even if the sun is in 1degree of Mesha the Moon has to be > at a > > > distance of more than96 degrees from the same. Thus the Moon > will > > > be in Karkata 7degrees to Karkata 19 degrees. But then Punarvasu > > > nakshatraranges from Mithuna 20 degrees to Karkata 3-20. Thus it > > > is againan astronomical impossibility.> > > > > > In short, whichever way youlook at it, whether it is the Valmiki > > > Ramayana or the AdyatmaRamayana, the astronomical Rashi position > > > of the planets cannotbe justifed at all!> > > With regards,> > > AKK> > > > > > --- Inancient_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 namesfor the > Ecliptic, > > > the> > > > zodiac circle. The word 'LagnaMandala' you can find in any > > > standard> > > > Sanskritdictionary. 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 onewhich> > > > join/conjunct/ mix/combine with Planets is called Lagna';> certainly > > > the> > > > word lagna here refers to 'Sign' becauseit is when the planets > > > joins> > > > (traverse through) signsthat the results originate. Thus every > > > sign> > > > means'Lagna'. > > > > Another Nirukti for the word Lagna is 'Lagati Phalaiiti Lagna'> > > > meaning 'the one which join/conjuct/ mix/combine (orin other > words> > > > shows) with the results is called Lagna'; herethe 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 iscalled > > > Lagna'.> > > > Note that here also the word lagna isessentially associated > with > > > the> > > > word 'Sign', but stillit is due to importance to the > word 'rising'> > > > that it gottranslated 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 thewords Arudha (as > > > done> > > > in Prasnamarga) , the word 'Lagna'loses all its association > with> > > > 'rising sign' even today, andresort to the old meaning 'Sign'!> > > > Further there are many Lagnassuch as 'Ghati Lagna', 'Hora > Lagna',> > > > 'Bhava Lagna', 'SreeLagna', 'Arudha Lagna' etc some of which > are > > > NOT> > > > AT ALLrelated 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 becomesclear that accepting the> > > > meaning 'Sign' for the word 'Lagna' in'Valmiki Ramayana' > context > > > is a> > > > truly acceptableargument, well supported by Nirukti and > > > Dictionaries.> > > >Hope this helps. > > > > Love,> > > > Sreenadh> > > > > > > > --- Inancient_indian_ astrology, "Sreenadh"> > > ><sreesog@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Dear Finn ji,> > > > > The niruktiand 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 sinceit has > > > very > > > > > > clearly been stated "kuleere abyuditeravav" i.e. when the > sun > > > was > > > > > > in Kuleera i.e.Karkata Rashi! Thus even if we take the sun > of > > > > > > BhagwanRama 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" Itcould be a simple sandhi mistake > > > of a> > > > > missing 'aa'. Andthe correct reading could be "kuleere> > > > > abyuditaraavav" ,meaning "Mars (aara) was in Capricorn > > > (Kuleera)".> > > > > Notethat 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 manyreferences from various > > > Nikhandus and> > > > > argues that themeaning 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 textprovides the > > > position> > > > > of Many other planets as well.For example it is clear from > the> > > > > description given alongwith Bharata's Nakshatra that Sun and > > > Mercury> > > > > are inPisces, 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 inconsecutive days, > and > > > also> > > > > that the poet didn't gavethe Asc of any of them - but only > the> > > > > planetary position. >> > > > Love,> > > > > Sreenadh> > > > > > > > > > --- Inancient_indian_ astrology, "Avtar > Krishen > > >Kaul"> > > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > > --- Inancient_indian_ astrology@ . > com, "Sreenadh" > > > > > ><sreesog@> wrote:> > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Sreenadh ji,> > > > > >Namaskar!> > > > > > From your curent post, it appears that both of usagree > that > > > the > > > > > > astrological references in theValmiki Ramayana are > > > concoctions > > > > > > since the planetarypositions appear to have been for a > period > > > of > > > > > >second century BCE.> > > > > > However, you have also said> > > > > >> > > > > > <4) While describing the Nakshatra of Bharata thestatement > > > given is> > > > > > "Pushye jatastu bharato MeenaLagne Prasanna Dhee" should be> > > > > > translated to "Bharata wasborn 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 thismeaning > 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 wouldbe unaware > of > > > the > > > > > > fact that lagna means a signascending at the time of > > > birth/event. > > > > > > There is aproecedure 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, Minalagne > > > > > > prasannadheeh, sarpe jatatavtu saumitri, kuleereabyudite > > > ravav"--> > > > > > 1/18/15> > > > > > > > > > > > Thusaccording 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 hasvery 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 > > > > > > Minainstead of Mesha, the sun of Lakshmana and Shatrugana > > > could not> > > > > > be in Karkata in any case. > > > > > > The names ofnakshatras 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. Theyare > > > in a > > > > > > sequence, but if the sun of Lakshamana andShatrugana is in > > > Karkata, > > > > > > who are younger by justtwo days, the sun of Shri Ram and > > > Bharata > > > > > > cannot beeither in Mina or Mesha!> > > > > > > > > > > > Thus whichever way welook at it, there certainly has been > a > > > > > > manipulation ofplanetary positions in the Valmiki Ramayana.> > > > > > With regards,>> > > > > Avtar Krishen Kaul> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear Kaul ji,>> > > > > > ==>> > > > > > > > ii) The planetary position of BhagwanRam 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 Sungadynasty - is > the > > > correct> > > > > > > argument. (And not byJyotishis). Thus the currently > > > available> > > > > > > 'BrahmanicRamayana' (Why insult sage Valmiki) is clearly > > > the work > > > >> > of> > > > > > > some 'brahmanic poet' who lived after BC 157, whotook a > > > planetary> > > > > > > position known to him and ascribedit to Rama!! > > > > > > > ==>> > > > > > > > Since 157 BC is an eraof recorded history without any > > > > > > obscurity, we > > > > > >> > do not have any such records that a divine incarnation > > > cameinto > > > > > > > > existence then, especially since it is after theBudha-> > > Avtar and > > > > > > > > after the advent of Maya themlechha into India!> > > > > > > <== > > > > > > > You are absolutelyright! 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 tocreate a long poem - that > > > fulfills his> > > > > > > purpose. Idon't have any disregard for the 'Brahmnic > poet' > > > who > > > > >> knew> > > > > > > what he was doing - but I feel pity for the peoplewho > > > mistook to> > > > > > > represent actual history, andbelieve that Monkey men > with a > > > tail> > > > > > > lived inrecent 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 whenall > we > > > had at > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > point of timei.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 notthat important - since the poet who > > > wrote> > > > > > > Ramyanais not that accurate in describing the charts - > not > > > that > > >> > > he is> > > > > > > not giving any longitudes but only describesa planetary > > > position > > > > > > of> > > > > > > BC 157. Hegives the position of ALL THE PLANETS and > > > mentions > > > > > >that> > > > > > > it was Punarvasu Nakshatra and that the Tithi wasNavami. > No > > > great> > > > > > > astronomical knowledge isnecessory to mention this much, > and> > > > > > > therefore anysoftware will do. Further JHora most of > the > > > > > > peoplein> > > > > > > this group is having and they can verify the planetary> > > position > > > > > > using> > > > > > > that. > > > > > > >If you are bewildered by the statement that "ALL THE > > > PLANETSARE> > > > > > > MENTIONED", then here goes the clarification:> > > >> > > 1) Thiti Navami, Nakshatra Punar vasu - clearly stated> > > > >> > 2) Ju, Ma in Cancer - clearly stated.> > > > > > > 3) 5 planets inown house or exaltation - statement not > > > clear.> > > > > > > Thencomes the interesting part -> > > > > > > 4) While describing theNakshatra 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 theSign Pisces" !! (Since Lagna > means > > > Sign - > > > > > > as> > >> > > > per the usage in Ramayana; The Sanskrit dictionaries and > > >Nirukti of> > > > > > > the word Lagna too clearly support thismeaning of the > word > > > > > > Lagna) -> > > > > > > Thus theposition of Sun and Mercury are clearly stated!> > > > > > > 5) Whiledescribing 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 becomesclear that our confusion > > > about 'Sun in> > > > > > > Cancer' wasjust because of a Sandhi problem!! - Thus the > > > position > > > > >> of> > > > > > > Mars is clearly stated! > > > > > > > 6) Thus whatremains 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 positionbeing caused > by > > > our> > > > > > > ignorance and lack of effortto understand the facts! > > > > > > > Love,> > > > > > > Sreenadh>> > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology (AT) (DOT) > com, "Avtar > > > Krishen > > > > > > Kaul"> > > > > >> <jyotirved@> wrote:> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Shri Sreenadh ji,>> > > > > > > Namaskar!> > > > > > > > <Calculate the planetaryposition 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 descriptionin > Ramayana.>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My dear Sreenadhji, youare making really a fool of > > > yourself by > > > > > > such > > > >> > > > comments!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All you are trying toprove 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) EitherBhagwan 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 laterone!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since 157 BC is an era of recrodedhistory without any > > > > > > obscurity, we > > > > > > > > do nothave 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 intoIndia!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus all you are proving withyour astrological > knowledge > > > and > > > > > > latest > > > > > >> > astronomical softwares is that some uselss and foolish > > >jyotishi > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > implanted the planetaryposition of March 14, 157 BC > into > > > the > > > > > > > > ValmikiRamayana just to make even that divine > incarnation > > > > > > > >subservient to planetary suzarinity!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Even here, you are using "J Hora" for 157 BC when all > we > > > hadat > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > point of time i.e. 157 BC by wayof astronomical bibles > > > was the > > > > > > > > Surya Sidhanta ofMaya 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 notknow even ABC of astronomy, so > much > > > so > > > > > > that > > >> > > > > he did not have any knowledge of precession either!> > > > >> > > QED/QEF> > > > > > > > With regards, > > > > > > > > AKK> > > >> > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology,"Sreenadh" > > > > > > > > <sreesog@> wrote:> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Finn ji,> > > > > > > > > Calculate theplanetary position for 14 March -156 > > > (Gregorian> > > > > > > > >Calendar); 9.15 PM approx in JHora; and you will see > > > what I > >> > > > mean. > > > > > > > > The> > > > > > > > > Horoscope matcheswell with the description in > > > Ramayana. > > > > > > > > > Let uslook at the core argument of Kaul ji -> > > > > > > > > ==>> > > > > >> > > > iii) The sun could never be in Mesha -- whether the > so > > >> > > called > > > > > > > > sayana> > > > > > > > > > or the socalled nirayana --- if it was Madhu Masa > > > i.e. the > > > > > > >> first > > > > > > > > > > month of the Vasanta Ritu at the time ofbirth of > > > Bhagwan > > > > > > Rama.> > > > > > > > > <== > > > >> > > > > I am yet to see any reference in so called Valmiki > > >Ramayana > > > > > > which> > > > > > > > > states that 'Rama's birthtook place in Madhu Masa'; > I > > > hope > > > > > > Kaul ji> > > > >> > > > will come up with relevant quote from the same > text. ;=) > >> > > > Actually > > > > > > > > if> > > > > > > > > we read throughRamayana 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, andthe original one. The Nirukta > > > defenition > > > > > > of > > > >> > > > the> > > > > > > > > word 'Lagna' itself means 'Sign (Rasi)'and not Asc, > > > even > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > the> > > >> > > > > second meaning became popular later. > > > > > > > > > Andso the conclusion - who ever made up this text -> > > was > > > > > >> > describing> > > > > > > > > a recent planetary position which waswell known to > him -> > > > > > > > > possibly > > > > > > > > a> > >> > > > > > planetary position of some king in his own period, > and >> > that is > > > > > > why> > > > > > > > > Ramayana is a mereliterary 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 furtherinvestigations 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 thehoroscopes of Rama and Krishna. > If > > > > > > possible > > > > > >> > it > > > > > > > > > > may be a good idea to compare thesehoroscope-> > > 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 ofunprocessed, non-scrutinized data > > > around, and > > > > > > we > >> > > > > > can> > > > > > > > > do much; though our studies - whetherthe conclusions > > > agree > > > > > > with> > > > > > > > > popularnotions and beliefs or not. > > > > > > > > > ==>> > > > > > > > > >The Garga Samhita gives a detailed description of > the > > > birth >> > > > > and > > > > > > > > the> > > > > > > > > > horoscopes ofboth 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 withsome new and > > > relevant > > > > > > > > information.> > > > > > >> > <==> > > > > > > > > I agree - quote and proceed. But remember onething - > > > our > > > > > > major> > > > > > > > > concern in thesediscussions is 'Astrology in Valmiki > > > > > > Ramayana' > > > > > >> > (and> > > > > > > > > not merely the horoscope of Rama), and letus not > forget > > > the > > > > > > main > > > > > > > > area> > > >> > > > > of study, while dealing with diversions. At the end > of > >> our > > > > > > study, > > > > > > > > for> > > > > > > > > suresome useful and systematic material should come > > > up. We > > >> > > > > will > > > > > > > > > preserve and present it - as abackground for further > > > > > > > > investigations> > > > > > > > >into other areas. :=)> > > > > > > > > Love,> > > > > > > > > Sreenadh> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology (AT) (DOT) > com, "Finn > > > Wandahl"> > > > > > > > ><finn.wandahl@ > wrote:> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr.Sreenadh & Mr. Kaul,> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhapsone should not draw too hasty conclusions > > > regarding > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > origin> > > > > > > > > > of the Ramayana. If someparts of it seems to be > > > confusing,> > > > > > > > > >anachronistic, interpolated or manipulated, then it > > > may > > > >> > better to> > > > > > > > > > simply wait and make furtherinvestigations into > the > > > subject.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > You have come up with some relevant questions > > >regarding > > > > > > > > Ramayana's> > > > > > > > > > description ofthe horoscopes of Rama and Krishna. > If > > > > > > possible > > > >> > > > it may> > > > > > > > > > be a good idea to compare thesehoroscope-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 descriptionfrom > Ramayana > > > with > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > one> > > >> > > > > > given in Garga Samhita? Are they similar or are > there >> > > > > > > differences?> > > > > > > > > > This may actuallyprovide 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> > > > > > > > > > > > astrologicalcombinations in the Ramayanas are > > > later day> > > > > > > > > > >> interpolations > > > > > > > > > > > <==> > > > > > > > > > > Thenwhy don't with a better spirit accept that > > > the > > > > > > whole> > > > > > > > ramayana> > > > > > > > > > > itself is a made up textcreated between 2nd BC > and > > > 2 > > > > > > AD? > > > > > > >> With the> > > > > > > > > > > numerous dereference to Buddha & Jainreligions, > > > > > > Ardhasastra > > > > > > > > (of> > > > > > > >> > > Vishnugupta) etc and other numerous facts, I > believe > > >that > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > is clear> > > > > > > > > > > thatit is a text created between 2 BC and 2nd AD > > > for > > > > > >sure - > > > > > > > > or better> > > > > > > > > > > in 2AD in Sungaperiod itself. > > > > > > > > > > > There is no wonder that theastrological > 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 beexpected from such a text that is NOT > AT > > > ALL > > > > > > > >written by> > > > > > > > > > > sage Valmiki, but possibly by somestupid > brahmins > > > of > > > > > > sunga > > > > > > > > period.>> > > > > > > > > > What else do you think can be expected from such >a > > > text?!!> > > > > > > > > > > So I will request you to betteraccept the fact > > > that - > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > whole> >> > > > > > > > > Ramayana itself is a made up text - a text > created> > > with a > > > > > > > > purpose -> > > > > > > > > > > createdbetween 2nd century BC and 2nd century > AD. > > > Even the> > > > > >> > > > > astronomical references in it is going in the > same > > > >> > direction. > > > > > > > > If there> > > > > > > > > > > WAS aValmiki Ramayana prior to the currently > > > available > > > > > >one (as> > > > > > > > > > > referenced in Mahabharata) , then thattext 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 massmurdering Buddists. It was the hall make > of > > > that > > > > > >era > > > > > > > > (BC 200> > > > > > > > > > > to AD 200), andevident 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 Animalkilling, and brahmin > > > projecting, > > > > > > Yaga> > > > > > > >> > > services, - rewrote all the good old ancient > scripts > > > and> > > > > > even > > > > > > > > tried to> > > > > > > > > > > steeland accommodate even the non-vedic > > > astrological > > > > > >signs > > > > > > > > also into> > > > > > > > > > > scripts thatpropagated 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: Ramayanais a made-up text. Not at all > > > > > > authentic. > > > > > > > >Giving it> > > > > > > > > > > importance more than a simple literarywork 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 besuch a corrupted, full of > partiality > > > and > > > > > > hatred> >> > > > > > > > > influenced, ignorant individual. Sage Valmiki was >a > > > great> > > > > > > > > > > knowledgeable sage as evident fromYoga Vasishta, > > > and > > > > > > > > ascribing the> > > > > > > >> > > authorship of a text like currently available > > > Ramayana on> > > > > > him > > > > > > > > is a> > > > > > > > > > > SIN, and aninsult of that great sage. > > > > > > > > > > > I wil better adoptthis line of thinking. > > > > > > > > > > > Love,> > > > > > > > > >> Sreenadh> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >ancient_indian_ astrology, "Avtar > > > > > > > >Krishen Kaul"> > > > > > > > > > > <jyotirved@> wrote:> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Sreenadh ji,> > > > > > > > > > >> Namaskar!> > > > > > > > > > > > <I request you to look in to thefollowing > > > argument and > > > > > > > > > > > > possibilities ->>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand Ireqeuswt all of you to > ponder > > > on the > > > > > > > > following> > > > > > > > > > > > facts, even if they are unpleasant:> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The Valmiki Ramayana issupposed to be Aadi > > > Mahakavya > > > > > > > > i.e. the > > > > >> > > > > > > very first Mahakavya (Epic) of Indian history > and > >> > > > Maharshi > > > > > > > > Valamiki > > > > > > > > > > > > isknown as Aadi Kavi.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.The Mahabharata is a much later work.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 3. Shri Rama is supposed to have incarnated > much > > >> > > earlier > > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > > > > BhagwanKrishna.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. ShriKrishna 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 PanchaSidhantika!> > > > > > > > > > > > The questions arising out of thesefacts are:> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i )How comewe find the horoscopic details of > > > Bhagwan > > > > > > Rama,> > >> > > > > > Bharata, > > > > > > > > > > > > Shatruna and evenLakshamana in the Valmiki > > > Ramayana?> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > ii) How come in spite of the best efforts of > all >> > the > > > > > > > > astronomers > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody hasbeen able to reconcile the > > > irreconcilable > > > > > > facts > >> > > > > > that if > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhagwan Rama was born inSun 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 ofthe Vasanta Ritu at the time of birth > of > > > > > > Bhagwan > > > >> > > > Rama.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > iv)Thesun of the younger brothers could never > > > have been > > > > > > in> > > > > > > > Karkata > > > > > > > > > > > > if the sun of BhagwanRama was in Mesha or even > > > Mina!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In a nutshell, the more we try to reconcile > these > >> > > > > > irreconcilable > > > > > > > > > > > > facts, the more wewill 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 fornothing > > > 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 justafter 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > MEANSTHAT HE WAS REALLY KARTUM AKARTUM ANYATHA > > > KARTUM > > > > > > > >SAMARTH AND > > > > > > > > > > > > NOT SUBJECT TO PLANETARYSUZARINITY!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And thetail-piece of all this haranguing is > that > > > it > > > > > > means> > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > that Rishis likeValmiki nad the Veda Vayasa > etc. > > > did not> > > > > > > > >believe in > > > > > > > > > > > > any pedictive gimmicks either.> > >> > > > > > > > > With regards,> > > > > > > > > > > > Avtar KrishenKaul> > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Invite your mail contactsto join your friends list with Windows > Live Spaces. It's easy! Tryit! > > > > > > > > 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 tohttp://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html> >> > > > > >________> Discoverthe new Windows Vista>http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista & mkt=en-US & form=QBRE> > > > > > > > ________> Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with WindowsLive Spaces. It's easy!>http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create & wx_url=/friends.aspx & mkt=en-us> Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more!