Fwd: To AKK [From Aareni]

[Guest guest]

hinducivilization , "aareni" <aareni wrote:

[hc] Kaul defames, commits libel (Was: Re: Astro signs...)

Dear Moderator,Thanks for your kind words. I have Responded to

Kaul several times on IC and HC and I don't like to write the same

things again and again. About Phala Jyotisha, horoscope, greek

influence etc the same stuff is recycled. I don't read many of the

posts by certain members, because I know what they like to say. It is a waste of time telling the same thing again and again. However bowing to your request I am reposting a message (giving my views about Kaul's posts) I wrote on 26 Sept, 2007.

About his opponents' views I hardly find anything solid to write

about. As far as Mr. Jai Maharaj's posts are concerned I don't respond

to his after he threatened me with libel! Not that I took it seriously,

but this made me understand his level of knowledge of Sanskrit and

Jyotisha to be unworthy of response. Those who like to discuss should

read the original books, previous posts on the subject and then

comment. At present what is happening on the list is mostly a street

fight. The loudest man thinks he has won. But the silent majority knows

that this is not true!

Here is my HC #21562:

Dear Sri Kaul and members of HC: I seem to have hurt the feelings of

Sri Kaul. If yes, I am sorry; that was not my intention at all. In

any case this would be my last post on the agenda driven posts of

"Vedic Astrology" of Sri Avatar Krishna Kaul. (AKK for short, with no

disrespect shown). What has been posted by AKK is all

`CharvitacharvaNam' and I am not interested in wasting my time going

point by point. Instead of responding crisply to the two points I had

raised he has made a overkill! I concede I am not capable of saying the

same points again and again like missionaries with an agenda to convert

the opinions of the listeners. This group is made of diverse people

with varied interests. Some overlap with mine and many do not. I am

sure this applies to other members also. I picked up selectively only

two points from the Rotary talk of AKK. That is right! Because IMHO, in

a discussion we need to do only that. I have previously appreciated his

posts when they started appearing for the first time or at least when I

first came across them. My agreement with him has been largely limited to

1) Winter solstice (UttarayaNa puNyakaala) is on December 23rd and

not on January 14th. The present day almanacs have to correct this. I have also presented epigraphic evidences that ~500 or 1000 years back it was celebrated on nearly the correct day. The

mistake seems to have started in the 19th century or thereabout. If

corrected this of course changes a few other dates like Summer solstice

and the equinoctial days, which have come down to us as part of our

common `Vedic' ancestry.

2) There are no references to Horoscopes in the whole Vedic

literature and in the Mahabharata. The single verse much cited by

astrologers in the Ramayana is most probably a later interpolation.

Differences with AKK are on the following:

3) About the knowledge of planets in the Vedas, the information is

equivocal. Sometimes it appears they knew, sometimes not. In such cases

it is better to present both the sides of the story and leave the

judgment to the members/readers. Same is the case with the twelve

Rashi divisions. To keep this post short I like to just say that RV

samhita has hymns which hint at animal like symbols in the sky. See

particularly the not well understood `Jemana' in the 10th Mandala. This

certainly does not prove that Vedic people knew Horoscopes much less

that they practiced the type of modern astrology sold on our streets

today. There are other such points but the above is sufficient.

4) The word "vedic" has been used and abused in various ways in the

English language. Previously on the IC list there was a debate on

"Vedic Mathematics" of Swami Bharati Krishna Tirtha. Some argue that it

is not Vedic because the text of the learned Swami is not found in any

Vedic literature known to us. Also there is an Indian English nuance

here. What the Swami seems to claim is that it is "Vaidika GaNita"

which makes perfect sense in Sanskrit. It is only related to Vedas in

some broad sense (Vedasya idam = vaidikam). This may be just an

emotional or spiritual connection as for an intuitive knowledge. Hence

definitions of technical words are very important before theories are

proposed or denounced. In relation to astrology

or Phala-jyotisha what I have been pointing out is that the roots are

traceable to the Vedas. There is no contradiction in my views posted on

different dates. Belief in astrology, even if its roots are in the

Vedas is a different issue. When I ask for statistical proof of

astrological predictions, it does not matter whether I believe the

predictions or not. I am not agenda driven either way. To put it more

picturesquely, I neither hunt with the hounds nor run with the hares.

5) There is a more subtle point in the above. Vedas and Vedanga as a

collection of texts are different from "Vedic culture" although

connected closely. No one can claim that all the Vedic literature was

created in one day or one year or in one generation. But in discussions

many telescope their historical perception and exhibit their myopia

in not understanding the evolution of the cultural traits over the

millennia. If the names of the planets do not appear in Samhitas in the

way we use them now, how does it prove that Vedic people did not know

the planets? To the best of my knowledge our common Vedic tradition

holds that many Vedic shakhas and texts are lost over time. This will

not mean that the culture is also forgotten and lost. It would be

living in various forms, myths, rituals, beliefs etc. And our common

culture has been varied and pluralistic. There was a time (and place)

in India when Vedas were treated to be "only Three" (Thrayee). But now

we do include AtharvaNa Veda without any reservation. I pointed out AV

Parishista names the planets, (no Rashis) gives Puja vidhana (for

remedial measures) which presupposes malefic effects of certain

planets. If AKK finds this text not to his liking and thinks it is fabricated it is his opinion. He has presented no proof or evidence for his claim other than making fervent verbal appeals

to that effect. I want HC members to independently read the text and

draw their own conclusions. The text being published in Germany does

not decrease its claim for being `Vaidika'. As is well known many

manuscripts were shipped out of India and this is one among them. Alberuni's ignorance of this text does not prove anything to me.

6) AKK has not answered my question (or I could not locate it in

his long posts) about how he claims that `Atharavan Jyuotisha' is

similar to Rik and Yajur Jyotisha which two form the Vedanga Jyotisha

text as understood today. I was not interested in asking him about the

dates he has fixed for the last two texts in his talk. The contents of

AJ are in no way comparable to the first two. That is why I had to

upload this book to the file section. AKK is fond of quoting and citing SB Dikshit. Let me quote SBD here about Atharva Jyotisha (Bharatiya Jyotish shastra Pt.I, English Transl. by RV Vaidya pp97-100).

"Let us now turn to... AJ. This consists of 14 Ch and 162 verses.

…..As we proceed further on we come across instructions about duties to

be performed on particular Muhurtas….The fourth chapter gives a list of

KaraNas (of thithis) with their names like those of our present

times……These verses discuss the auspicious……nature of planets

depending, of course on the strength of moon;….The following verse

gives names of seven days in a week calling the planets as `Lords of

days.'….After 100 verses one comes across…which is followed by 62 more

verses. This portion contains the seeds of predictional section of

astrology Jaataka… It is clear….this is not so ancient as Rk or

Yajur-J, still the consideration …that if the Meshadi Rashis would have

been in vogue ….they would have occurred in the text, leads one to

accept AJ is pretty old……This work describes a system of astrology,

very akin to and not quite different from the one which is based on 12

rashis….No doubt can be entertained…that this system of astrology

originated and …independently developed in our country.. It seems

probable that although the Hindus are said to have borrowed the 12

rashis from foreigners, they developed….already known lines of

astrology related to nakshatras".

I rest with this.

RNI--- End forwarded message ---