Date of Vedanga Jyotisha

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenadhji,Namaste,I knew that you would ask this question as to how I did cinsider that at the time of Lagadha Dhanistha enters the end-point of Dhanistha. That is why I gave the comparison of the movement of Solstice point with the movement of the nodal point of the moon ie. the Rahu. When Rahu enters Dhanistha don't we take the point at the end of the Dhanistha so also is the case of the Solstice point, as the movement of the Solstice point is like the movement of Rahu. At the time of Lagadha ie in circa. 2400 BCE Winter solstice occurred in Dhanistha at 13.33 degrees of Dhanistha and it reached Zero degree of Dhanistha in circa. 1400 BCE and then it entered Shravana. Colebrooke could not think of an earlier date for Vedanga Jyotisha as he was overpowered by the Aryan Invasion Theory which fixed the earliest date of the Vedas in

1400 BCE. But where does it say that in Lagadha's time it was in zero degree Dhanistha? If my memory serves me right Vedanga Jyotisha does not make it explicit that at that time it occurred in Zero degree of Dhanistha. You said :QuoteAt the time of Lagatha it was in Zero degree Dhanishta. UnquoteBut where does it say that in Lagadha's time it was in zero degree

Dhanistha? If my memory serves me right Vedanga Jyotisha does not make

it explicit that at that time it occurred in Zero degree of Dhanistha. Regards,Sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Sat, 3/7/09, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:Sreenadh <sreesog Re:An Important Matter Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 7:51 AM

 

Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, ==>Winter solstice occurred in Dhanistha from about 2400 BCE to about 1400

BCE. So Winter solstice started occurring from the beginning of the

Dhanistha around 2400 BCE and not in 1400 BCE as most people think.<== Currently Uttarayana beginning is approximately in 245 deg 17 min; i.e. in Sag Sign, in Mula Nakshatra 5 deg 17 min. (Equinox in 2 deg. 3 min Uttara-Bhadrapada approx). At the time of Lagatha it was in Zero degree Dhanishta. From the beginning of Dhanishta to 5 deg 17 min in Mula, going in reverse direction the Ayanadi had covered, 13.20 (Sravana) + 13.20 (Uttara-Ashadha) + 13.20 (Purva-Ashadha) +8.03 (Mula) = 58 deg 03 min. The annual speed of Ayanadi is about 50 sec per year on an average. Thus it will take (48 x 60 x60 + 03 x 60)/50 =3460 years before today (2009). This is nothing but the period around 3460 - 2009 = BCE 1451. So I wonder how you argument based on "interpreting 'Beginning of Dhanishta' as the 'End of Dhanishta' can hold"! Any way since (13 x 60 x 60)/50 = 936, it is clear that the Ayanadi stays in a Nakshatra for

about 936 years and also that Ayanadi was in Dhanishta from BCE 2387 to BCE 1451. But this does not give us freedom to interpret "Beginning of Dhanishta" as "End of Dhanishta" and demand a 1000 year shift in chronology!!Love and regarding,Sreenadh ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> > Namaste,> > You have said > > Quote Unquote> > Indian astrology> overcome this initial stage in the Vedic past itself as evident from the list> of 27 Nakshatras provided by the Vedas and the statements such as "Middle> of Aslesha (Nakshatra span)" and "Beginning of Dhanishta (Nakshatra> span)" present in Vedanga Jyotisha of Lagatha (dated BC 1400). > > Unquote> > We are all aware that the nodal points of the Moon ie.

Rahu and Ketu (or the Dragon's head and Dragon's tail) move in the direction opposite to the movement of the grahas in astrology. Similarly in astronomy the Solstice points also move in the opposite direction and in a Nakshatra the Solstice (whether Winter Solstice or the Summer solstice) occurs for 960 years. Winter solstice occurred in Dhanistha from about 2400 BCE to about 1400 BCE. So Winter solstice started occurring from the beginning of the Dhanistha around 2400 BCE and not in 1400 BCE as most people think. Earliest date for Vedanga Jyotisha's should be 2400 BCE and not 1400 BCE. Further at that time the Summer solstice occurred in the middle of Ashlesha. Garga's location of Summer solstice was almost at the beginning of Aslesha, ie at his time the Summer solstice was yet to occur in Aslesha. From the beinning of Ashlesha to the middle of Aslesha it required 960 / 2 = 480 years, ie, say> about 500 years. So Date of Garga was 2400 + 500

= 2900 BCE. We know that Bhagavad Purana was composed about two centuries before that ie. around 3100 BCE and that was the time the Rashis (Nirayana) rashis came into use. In Bhagavad Gita Lord Krishna mentions Margashirha but did not mention the seasonal months. > > Regards,> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> > --- On Fri, 3/6/09, Sreenadh sreesog wrote:> Sreenadh sreesog [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re:An Important Matter> ancient_indian_ astrology> Friday, March 6, 2009, 4:59 AM> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, > > I would love to agree with you, but still have some> concerns, which needs to be clarified. > > ===>> > > 1) It is wrong to

say rashis are non-Vedic> > > This is because the "rashis' are mentioned in the puranas including> the Bhagavat purana and the rashis came to be used only towards the end of> the Dwapara yuga ie. towards the end of the 4th Millennium BCE.> > <===> > Whether it be NIRAYANA Rashis or Nakshatras we can find support from> Vedas or connected literature (whether it be Puranas, Upanishads, Ithihasas or> what ever), so we can agree upon the argument that 'Rashis can be Vedic as> well', even though the question 'wether the vedic Rashis are Sayana or Nirayana> may still roam around for some time (and may get resolved)'. Any way for sure> it is clear that Vedic Nakshatras are NIRAYANA in nature and provided with a> fixed frame of reference in the vedic past. > > ==>> > > 2) It is wrong to say that rashis are imported

from> Babylonia.> > > This is because the rashis have been used in India in the 4th> Millennium BCE. > > <==> > Whether it be NIRAYANA Nakshatras or Rashis, since the NIRAYANA> FIXED FRAME WORK was popular even at 4th Millennium BCE in India, it is clear> that the Nirayana concept and framework are NOT imported to India from> anywhere, but was available here itself. It is thought, argued and proved> by many that the Babylonian Rashis are Tropical in nature and does not have the> NIRAYANA nature that definitely was there with both the Indian concepts of> Rashis and Nakshatras and as well as in the Hipparchus writings which the> greeks ignored. (This is a strong pointer to the fact that Hipparchus might> have borrowed much from Indian Astrlogia) > > ==>> > > 3) Your argument towards Nirayana versus

Sayana needs> revision too.> > > > > > This is because the "Rashi" by definition means a group. You> can check that in your favourite Monier-Williams. Rashis are a group> of Nakshatras. To the ancient jyotishis the twelve clusters of nakshatras in> the ecliptic appeared like different figures. For example, the Vrashabha rashi> appeared like a bull. This they did that by imagining some lines joining the> nakshatras within the rashi. It is true that an unimaginative person may not be> able to visualise the shape or form, but the nakshtras within the rashis are> very real. In olden days the jyotishis were not like the arm-chair> jyotishis of today. They determined the positions of the grahas and nakshatras> through the naked eye. They could tell which graha was in which nakshatra and> rashi. Today this system is termed as Nirayana. In olden days

the> seasons occurred in different rashis at different times due to the precession> of the earth. Madhu and Madhava etc. occurred at different nakshatras and > rashis at different times. You know that Varahamihira too indicated this.> > > > > > Further the western jyotishis concentrated their attention on> the Tropical Zodiac system and imagined the fake rashis. (Please refer to> the definition of rashi). However the Indian jyotishis did not give> up the link between their jyotish and the nakshatras and the true> rashis but they gave up observing the grahas and the nakshatras with the naked> eye. So they wanted the measure of precessional shift, called> "Ayanamsha" to correct the Tropical Zodiac positions of the> grahas so that they can relate the corrected graha positions to the positions> of the non-moving nakshatras. As the Tropical Zodiac

shifts according to> precession it is called Sayana (sa= with, ayana= movement) or with processional> shift. The non-moving Zodiac, i.e. the original> > <==> > May be this 3rd point needs a revision. Of course the> initial concept and trend must be of associating Rashi or Naksharas with a> "group of stars", especially when the span of Rashis and Nakshatras> were UNEQUAL. But this must have ended and got redefined when the mathematical> concept of EQUAL span for Nakshatras and Rashis came into place. For> example whether it be Leo or Scorpio (th group of stars, i.e. constellation I> mean) spans many Rashis (Signs), but the name Leo or Scorpio is applied only to> a span of 30 degree only. Same is the case with Nakshatras such as Bharani or> Mrigasira. The association of "group of stars" with> Bharani, Mrigasira etc can be in existence only

till the Nakshatras were> unequal and the association of "group of stars" with Leo or Scorpio> can be in existence only till the Rasis where unequal. Indian astrology> overcome this initial stage in the Vedic past itself as evident from the list> of 27 Nakshatras provided by the Vedas and the statements such as "Middle> of Aslesha (Nakshatra span)" and "Beginning of Dhanishta (Nakshatra> span)" present in Vedanga Jyotisha of Lagatha (dated BC 1400). So as> per the MATHAMATICALLY REFINED concept of NIRAYANA Rashis and Nakshatras used> in India (ancient and popular in India), "Rashis are no more related to group> of stars (constellations) as per Indian astrologia".> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:> >> >

Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya > Re: [WAVES-Vedic] RE: Fwd: An Important Matter> > waves-vedic> > Thursday, February 19, 2009, 3:19 PM> > > > Dear Shri Kaulji,> > > > Namaste,> > > > 1) It is wrong to say rashis are non-Vedic> > > > This is because the "rashis' are mentioned in the puranas including the Bhagavat purana and the rashis came to be used only towards the end of the Dwapara yuga ie. towards the end of the 4th Millennium BCE. I am sure you know that the Valmiki Ramayana of the Treta yuga mentions the position of the Moon in a particular nakshatra at the time of the birth of Lord Rama. But the Adhyatma Ramayana, composed by Vedavyasa in the Dwapara yuga, mentions the position of the Sun in Mesha rashi at the time of Lord Rama's birth. You also know from the Chandogya

upanishad that purana is considered to be the fifth Veda. So it is wrong to say that "Rashis" are non-Vedic. You must be aware that reading of this fifth Veda is a prerequisite for reading the four Vedas.> > > > 2) It is wrong to say that rashis are imported from Babylonia.> > > > This is because the rashis have been used in India in the 4th Millennium BCE. You date of Varahamihira is also wrong as in Varahamihira' s time Saka kala was not there . Sakakala, which Brahmagupta calls Shakanta kala, came at the end of the Shaka rule in 78 CE. Varahamihira mentions Shakendra kala, which was at the beginning of the Shaka rule Therefore my request to you is that kindly revise your Rotary document immediately.> > > > 3) Your argument towards Nirayana versus Sayana needs revision too.> > > > This is because the "Rashi" by definition means a group. You can check that in your

favourite Monier-Williams. Rashis are a group of Nakshatras. To the ancient jyotishis the twelve clusters of nakshatras in the ecliptic appeared like different figures. For example, the Vrashabha rashi appeared like a bull. This they did that by imagining some lines joining the nakshatras within the rashi. It is true that an unimaginative person may not be able to visualise the shape or form, but the nakshtras within the rashis are very real. In olden days the jyotishis were not like the arm-chair jyotishis of today. They determined the positions of the grahas and nakshatras through the naked eye. They could tell which graha was in which nakshatra and rashi. Today this system is termed as Nirayana. In olden days the seasons occurred in different rashis at different times due to the precession of the earth. Madhu and Madhava etc. occurred at different nakshatras> and> > rashis at different times. You know that Varahamihira too

indicated this.> > > > Further the western jyotishis concentrated their attention on the Tropical Zodiac system and imagined the fake rashis. (Please refer to the definition of rashi). However the Indian jyotishis did not give up the link between their jyotish and the nakshatras and the true rashis but they gave up observing the grahas and the nakshatras with the naked eye. So they wanted the measure of precessional shift, called "Ayanamsha" to correct the Tropical Zodiac positions of the grahas so that they can relate the corrected graha positions to the positions of the non-moving nakshatras. As the Tropical Zodiac shifts according to precession it is called Sayana (sa= with, ayana= movement) or with precessional shift. The non-moving Zodiac, ie. the original> >>