Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
Guest guest

Greeks vs Indians HOLY JEUS!

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Vinayji,1)You said QuoteHow physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can "torment" Rohini ?UnquoteI thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.2)You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you

to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say.3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4)Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.5)Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement.6)You do not know the meaning of the phrase "good riddance". When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said "good riddance"7)You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not

character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed?-SKB--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote:vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Date: Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

TO ALL :

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

<<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in

common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned...

 

Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word "ayanamsha". 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof.">>>>

---

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>>" You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini."<<<< <<

 

Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the "physical planet" ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can "torment" Rohini ?

 

His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says "you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic." Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

 

His next point is >>>>"your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. "<<<<

 

He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a

means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a

lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

 

His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like "dirty tactics" , "you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic" , "bullshit" , 'unprovable tall claims", "left ignominiously" which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says "in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims." These "strong words" were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I

recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages.

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : "In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you." Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me.

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : "Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you." Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers).

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

 

I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as "scientific" spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it.

 

I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses.

 

-VJ

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

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

> Vinayji,

>

> 1)

> You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

>

> 2)

> You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic

>

> 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

>

> 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

>

> 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading.

>

> 6)

> I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously.

>

> -SKB

>

>

> --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

>

> Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Bhaskar Jee,

>

> You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language.

>

> You say : "I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors."

>

> Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : "Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum." AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to

know

> everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

>

> I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

>

> You say : "I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... "

>

> I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading.

>

> You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

>

> I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

your

> time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

>

> -VJ

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

>

> Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Dear Vinay jee,

>

> Ha Ha. That was a good one.

>

> See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

>

> Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

>

> I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors.

>

> See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??).

>

> The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground.

>

> Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

>

> I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing.

>

> I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

>

> Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

>

> regards/Bhaskar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Vinayji,

 

1)

 

You said

 

Quote

 

How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

Unquote

 

I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and

physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any

astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini.

Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and

when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary

Saurpaksha.

 

2)

You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round

the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.  Shakuntala Devi does not tour

the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical

and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to  prove it if you

want others to believe in what you say.

 

3)

 I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married

person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical

intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into

Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining

unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and

follow all the required rules and  that you do not sleep in the night etc. and

you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours.

 

4)

Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the

presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text.

Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it

just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a

planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi

cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the

planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from

the planet.

 

5)

Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference

to back your statement.

 

6)

You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that

you do not want  to have anything with me then I said " good riddance "

 

7)

You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think

that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say

that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go

and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in

independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will

go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character

assassination.

 

I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail

to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul

words against you  and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you

think that the character assassination that you are doing  and that your

maligning of Tantra etc. should  have gone unopposed?

 

-SKB

 

 

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

 

vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16

Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TO ALL :

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance

with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting

with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not

want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I

believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently

sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

 

 

<<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is

Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional

texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts,

and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these

terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of

sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy

deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this

noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due

to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world

that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have

nothing in common with

Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing

which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and

cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from

us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of

over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect

to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far

as mean positions of planets are concerned...

 

 

 

Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern

astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent

for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th

century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient

Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha.

Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic

(Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found

to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any

zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at

sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious

assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

 

 

The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of

precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+

vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with

ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes.

In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was

used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the

time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected

by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not

found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a

non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

 

 

We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of

its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence

or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only

proof. " >>>>

 

---

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location

of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas

but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have

spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time

of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra

(physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

 

 

 

Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has

mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities

can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical

astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

 

 

His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability.

I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my

computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since

early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and

departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead

of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is

certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts

me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not

travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find

new excuses to malign me.

 

 

 

His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. " <<<<

 

 

 

He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari,

although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris

at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a

distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a

celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his

fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in

his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife

and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's

offer there Kaama was merely a

means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to

Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita.

Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal

sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If

Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong

definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single

instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company

and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize

a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a

real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget

that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food

habits are giving rise to a

lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya,

and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient

terms to suit his personal habits.

 

 

 

His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He

never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the

only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene)

remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you

cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " ,

'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be

conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are

his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words

in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and

then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to

spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science (

cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by

CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or

not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group

Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your

unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel

suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me,

not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance

of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying

any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is

a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the

practical methods of

Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects

himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged

him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers

started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages.

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what

Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his

last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in

vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss

the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked

Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started

abusing me.

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators

were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning,

but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started

challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went

into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in

private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing

him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

the answers).

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here

just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman

and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my

Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is

Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I

removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not

be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

 

 

A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world

is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not

discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist

belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the

truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology.

I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to

deny.

 

 

 

I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why

he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That

cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta.

Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy,

the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of

Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude

or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test

the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific "

spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before

testing it.

 

 

 

I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA

because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these

persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does

not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice.

Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an

obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses.

 

 

 

-VJ

 

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

 

 

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy

a wrote:

 

>

 

> Vinayji,

 

>  

 

> 1)

 

> You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the

actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess?

Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical

planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting

Rohini.

 

>  

 

> 2)

 

> You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a

madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like

Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you

want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the

wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic

 

>  

 

> 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is

un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces

its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I

only corrected it by saying that Tantra  recommends that one should take the

substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a

symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking

wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit

of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted  WHO before

fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas

due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. 

 

>  

 

> 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I

use? Please have  the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of

false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya

he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math

were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

 

>  

 

> 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website

but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to

delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play

such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is

your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such

attitude may not be worth reading.

 

>  

 

> 6)

 

> I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at

one time,  a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each

other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including

Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a

single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning.

But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims.

In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning

to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word

you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

towards you and I  do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself

made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously.

 

>  

 

> -SKB

 

>  

 

>

 

> --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

>

 

>

 

> Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Bhaskar Jee,

 

>

 

> You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language.

 

>

 

> You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid

arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she

understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

 

>

 

> Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical

observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology

was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and

does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative

attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to

offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is

taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to

prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of

cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free

and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never

wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything

about my methods and often wanted to know

 

> everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional

astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart.

I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from

astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh

who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without

any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their

and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

 

>

 

> I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are

populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found

to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software.

Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no

hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the

misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology

which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software,

it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

 

>

 

> You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ?

Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... "

 

>

 

> I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all

other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing

my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you

to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my

works if you find it not worth testing and reading.

 

>

 

> You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I

never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth

is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I

waste my time over you ??

 

>

 

> I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum

last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it

to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two

persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading

nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted

my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a

lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion.

Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the

original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like

panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra

chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil

Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are

also adamant on wasting my and

your

 

> time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the

moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

 

>

 

> -VJ

 

>

 

> ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

 

>

 

> Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

 

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> Dear Vinay jee,

 

>

 

> Ha Ha. That was a good one.

 

>

 

> See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture

and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this

differences between us, which i did not want.

 

>

 

> Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

 

>

 

> I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not

being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in

front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left

back doors.

 

>

 

> See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i

still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good

knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever

encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone

abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence

of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??).

 

>

 

> The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in

thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or

proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send

me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground.

 

>

 

> Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a

single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to

impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your

claims which amount to nought.

 

>

 

> I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that

by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are

not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned

which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and

nights spent in reading and analysing.

 

>

 

> I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you

are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to

marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been

showed the door, I am sorry to say.

 

>

 

> Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the

Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

 

>

 

> regards/Bhaskar.

 

>

 

> , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

> >

 

> > Bhaskar Jee,

 

> >

 

> > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor,

otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have

been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule

the roost on the Forums. "

 

> >

 

> > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you,

nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such

mindless messages as posted by you recently.

 

> >

 

> > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing

conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say

" I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. "

 

> >

 

> > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are

trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was

successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had

viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would

have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me :

 

> >

 

> > "

 

> >

 

> > praNaam sir,

 

> >

 

> > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

 

> > that already and u dont need any confirmation

 

> > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

 

> > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative

 

> > the last time(about fonts and vb

 

> > errors).

 

> >

 

> > and its accurate till prana

 

> > dashas.

 

> > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

 

> > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

 

> > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

 

> > normally.

 

> >

 

> > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

 

> > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

 

> > another time

 

> > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

 

> > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

 

> >

 

> > -VJ

 

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

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

 

> >

 

> > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

 

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> > Dear Vinay ji,

 

> >

 

> > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

 

> >

 

> > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who

 

> > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot

 

> > prove that you know " something " ?

 

> >

 

> > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the

 

> > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

 

> >

 

> > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from

 

> > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who

 

> > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken

 

> > glass pieces in his kitty.

 

> >

 

> > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or

 

> > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ?

 

> > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a

 

> > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

 

> >

 

> > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then

 

> > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian

 

> > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ?

 

> > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been

 

> > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

 

> >

 

> > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken

 

> > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have

 

> > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove

 

> > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front

 

> > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly

 

> > but just rattling in the air.

 

> >

 

> > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

 

> >

 

> > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

 

> >

 

> > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just

 

> > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could

 

> > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

 

> >

 

> > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have

 

> > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present

 

> > set up of mind.

 

> >

 

> > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started

 

> > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

 

> >

 

> > best wishes,

 

> >

 

> > Bhaskar.

 

> >

 

> > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

> > >

 

> > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you.

 

> > I have yet to see

 

> > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You

 

> > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

 

> > >

 

> > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears

 

> > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has

 

> > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made

 

> > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one

 

> > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya

 

> > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I

 

> > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I

 

> > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of

 

> > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on

 

> > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to

 

> > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free

 

> > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are

 

> > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to

 

> > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

 

> > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free

 

> > softwares in future.

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > -VJ

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

 

> > >

 

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

 

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > The Dating of Ramayana

 

> > >

 

> > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that

 

> > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place,

 

> > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge

 

> > made over Lanka is to be believed.

 

> > >

 

> > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge

 

> > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed

 

> > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this

 

> > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan

 

> > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this

 

> > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole

 

> > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

 

> > >

 

> > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to

 

> > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ?

 

> > >

 

> > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

 

> > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to

 

> > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

 

> > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

 

> > >

 

> > > Can Marg produce better references then these to claim that the West

 

> > knew about astrology much before the Indians ?

 

> > >

 

> > > But before that, I suppose we would be asked wheres the signboard on

 

> > the Adams bridge, written that it was the same bridge, and may also

 

> > probably ask us additionally whether the Ramayana is authentic. And we

 

> > are good people so we will never ask about the authenticity of the

 

> > Bible, because I do believe in Jesus and love him probably more than

 

> > Christians do.

 

> > >

 

> > > Or they may ask us how can You prove that the underwater city

 

> > discovered in Dwarka is Krishnas city. And we may also be asked to prove

 

> > that the Bhagwat was written by the ancients and not the modern day

 

> > authors.

 

> > >

 

> > > Which is why I say that do not fall in trap of trying to impress the

 

> > fairer sex, and neither try to show the greatness of your country or the

 

> > origins of something which you have not studied about, properly. learn a

 

> > subject properly before you try to attract somebody's attention and put

 

> > your theories upon. If You have some light

 

> > > then the brightness would be seen around you. No need to

 

> > > prove it or show case it. Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is

 

> > for you. I have yet to see your proficiency either in Astrology,

 

> > Astronomy, or Mathematics. You have stirred the Hornests nest with no

 

> > contribution, and no strong argument to take the None believers, which I

 

> > have to settle for the dignity of my country, culture and love for

 

> > astrology , single handedly.

 

> > >

 

> > > regards/Bhaskar.

 

> > >

 

> > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@

 

> > ....> wrote:

 

> > > >

 

> > > > Dear Vinay,

 

> > > >

 

> > > > I would like you to predict here too on the groups so that all could

 

> > witness your predictive abilities, which you mentioned in the below

 

> > mail. But Computational and Mathematical skills are not required o be

 

> > showcased, as I dont think anybody would be interested in that,this

 

> > being an astrology Forum and not a maths one.

 

> > > >

 

> > > > By the way I am fighting your battle which you began here by trying

 

> > to impress on Marg the origin of Indian vedic astrology which you could

 

> > not. I have also fought for you in the past without any thanksgivings.

 

> > One should go and try proving something which can be proved, or else not

 

> > claim about anything. Otherwise one makes a fool of himself. And others

 

> > have to defend him with their time and efforts.

 

> > > >

 

> > > > Nothing is going to be achieved by proving the origin to anybody.

 

> > This is actually a waste of time. Instead of taking up easy and

 

> > unverifiable issues , why not pick up some astrological principles and

 

> > use them effectively here to show how you can predict so wonderfully as

 

> > you have claimed in this mail. In this way the thread can become

 

> > interesting and we all can learn from you.

 

> > > >

 

> > > > best wishes,

 

> > > > Bhaskar.

 

> > > >

 

> > > >

 

> > > >

 

> > > >

 

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

> > wrote:

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > A reader in Department of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University

 

> > tested me before many scholars. Then the Head of Department of Grammar

 

> > in the same university tested me (he asked me a simpler question : 786

 

> > raised to the power 8, which I answered within seconds without using

 

> > paper or any tool. Then he replied that I must have used some tricks !!!

 

> > It is impossible to satisfy such sceptics. If Sunil ji wants that I

 

> > should stop my research work and become a madaari demonstrating my

 

> > computational ability, he will be discouraged.

 

> > > > > I am not Ramanujam, and I acquired some mathematical talents which

 

> > I really needed. I learnt logarithmic and antilog tables and a lot more

 

> > by rote in early boyhood.

 

> > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a@>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 3:32:19 AM

 

> > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Dear Vinayji,

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > You said that you can compute faster than a computer. In this age

 

> > people want proof and do not want to believe in assertions because

 

> > anybody can get away with assertions. So may I request you to get your

 

> > computing power publicly demonstrated and reliably reported so that

 

> > people will not doubt what you say.

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Regards,

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > --- On Tue, 3/31/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

> > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 11:21 AM

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > As I had suspected, Marg entirely missed the points raised by me,

 

> > and is deliberately harping on physical proofs of what I say are

 

> > metaphysical entities. Bhaskar ji can give her planetary positions

 

> > without using any physical tools, and I can demonstrate that I can

 

> > compute faster than a computer. Margie is not interested in knowing the

 

> > marvels of Vedic astrology, and is more keen on proving the superiority

 

> > of non-Indian astrology. Earlier too, I had tried to attract her

 

> > attention towards secret methods of Vedic mundane astrology, but to no

 

> > avail. Even if someone finds physical evidences of Indian or non-Indian

 

> > astrology in 20000000 BC, it will help nobody. Veda and Vedic Astrology

 

> > are parts of Eternal Religion (Sanatana Dharma), and religion is

 

> > personal experience which can be taught and learnt only through a

 

> > guru-shishya tradition. Sterile discussion will lead us nowhere.

 

> > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:36:16 PM

 

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > I can give you the planetary positions of any date in future

 

> > sitting in

 

> > > > > a closed room without going to a observatory or physical

 

> > observation, or

 

> > > > > access to any Table, Ephemeris, Computer or Almanac. That must be

 

> > enough

 

> > > > > proof of the Ancient Indian knowledge of observing the heavens,

 

> > who had

 

> > > > > after observing for centuries, and through their intellect ,

 

> > developed

 

> > > > > so much analytical powers that even modern day astrologers like me

 

> > can

 

> > > > > make use of their findings and talk. What more further proof is

 

> > > > > required ? I can also give geographical proof to a worthy and

 

> > actual

 

> > > > > serious enquirist who is unbiased. But otherwise would not like to

 

> > > > > fritter this knowledge for the sake of some people who may wish to

 

> > > > > collect this, and write a book in their name, and sell it for

 

> > money .

 

> > > > > But if I show someone a place and tell him that this existed in

 

> > 2,50000

 

> > > > > BC, then how many will be able to test this , how many will have

 

> > the

 

> > > > > capacity and apparatus to test this. Or are they going to take the

 

> > > > > bricks for Carbon testing ? For being accessible to such knowledge

 

> > one

 

> > > > > has to be a worthy and unsuspecting invitee who must not have any

 

> > qualms

 

> > > > > of prejudices of " My country " or " Your country " etc.

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Bhaskar.

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > , " Marg " <margie9@ > wrote:

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Hi Vinay

 

> > > > > > you say:

 

> > > > > > ''and some concepts of astrology an be traced back torock

 

> > paintings of

 

> > > > > even 30000 BC''

 

> > > > > > So these torock paintings exist, can be viewed and were first

 

> > > > > discovered in India?

 

> > > > > > Is there any other physical evidence in India to show recording

 

> > of

 

> > > > > planets or constellations? Pyramids, stone circles, caves with

 

> > paintings

 

> > > > > on the wall, or any other structures at all which demonstrate an

 

> > ancient

 

> > > > > Indian system of observing the heavens pre 250,000 BC?

 

> > > > > > best wishes

 

> > > > > > M

 

> > > > > > -

 

> > > > > > Vinay Jha

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:13 PM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Fine question by Margie. The answer formed gist of my lecture at

 

> > > > > Kalidasa Academy in April 2008 titled " Contribution of Indian

 

> > Astrology

 

> > > > > To the World Astrology " (in Hindi). The article, in Hindi, can be

 

> > read

 

> > > > > in full at my website. Here I can offer only a brief answer, which

 

> > may

 

> > > > > not satisfy readers.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Indian Jyotisha is regarded as a Vedaanga (part of Veda). Since

 

> > Vedas

 

> > > > > are said to be composed after 1500 BC, its part cannot predate it.

 

> > But

 

> > > > > proofs of astrology with 12 house concept and other paraphernalia

 

> > > > > existed in ancient civilizations around 3000 BC, and some concepts

 

> > of

 

> > > > > astrology an be traced back torock paintings of even 30000 BC.

 

> > Hence,

 

> > > > > the very topic " Contribution of Indian Astrology... " is

 

> > meaningless,

 

> > > > > unless we prove that the dating of Vedas should be advanced

 

> > > > > considerably. This was how I introduced the topic, and then

 

> > discussed

 

> > > > > the unscientific method of comparative linguistics of 19th century

 

> > > > > linguists. I devoted 12 years in this field. I found no concrete

 

> > > > > evidence in favour of dating of the Vedas, only opinions were

 

> > forwarded.

 

> > > > > Rgvedic society was believed to be a pastoral one, and was

 

> > therefore

 

> > > > > held to be at par with Greeks at the time of Battle of Troy, which

 

> > was

 

> > > > > the earliest known historical event in the West. Hence, 1200 BC

 

> > was said

 

> > > > > to

 

> > > > > > be the mean date of Rgveda. But when Michael Ventris proved that

 

> > > > > Mycenaean Greeks enjoyed urban civilization around the middle of

 

> > 2nd

 

> > > > > millenium BC, it proved that their pastoral ancestors must have

 

> > lived

 

> > > > > befor 2000 BC. Taking into account the presence of Harappan

 

> > > > > civilization, Rgvedic civilization could not be possible after

 

> > 3000 BC,

 

> > > > > if the logic of 19th century linguists was to be applied.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Then, I applied the methods of modern linguistics, and assuming

 

> > that

 

> > > > > we do not know which IE branch was more archaic I applied equal

 

> > > > > weightage to all major IE branches, and took statistical averages

 

> > for

 

> > > > > all consonants and vowels separately, and to my surprize found

 

> > that the

 

> > > > > PIE etymon exactly copied the Vedic form in almost all cases !!!

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Such a result contradicted the prevalent opinion. I had no doubt

 

> > in

 

> > > > > the accuracy of my results, because I checked it again and again

 

> > for

 

> > > > > years. For one month, I was profoundly disturbed. Then I decided

 

> > to

 

> > > > > carry on my research into historical semantics, and unexpectedly

 

> > arrived

 

> > > > > at far more bizarre conclusions. For instance, there is no root

 

> > for

 

> > > > > " brother " in any IE language. In the Rgveda, bhraatr and its

 

> > derivatives

 

> > > > > occur 33 times. At 32 places, it means " Sun " . At 33th instance, it

 

> > is

 

> > > > > used for 'Yama', who is a son of Sun as well as a brother of Yami.

 

> > That

 

> > > > > is why ancient grammarians deduced bhraatr from the root bhraash

 

> > which

 

> > > > > meant " to shine " . the meaning " brother " was a later development, a

 

> > > > > Laukika (worldly) usage.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Similarly, Agni was derived from a root which meant " to move

 

> > > > > tortuously " . The Vedic god Agni was believed to move tortuously to

 

> > all

 

> > > > > worlds, and was therefore believed to fetch oblations to all gods,

 

> > and

 

> > > > > was therefore eulogized as the real purohita. When works were

 

> > being

 

> > > > > formed out of roots, physical " fire " was absent, social " brother "

 

> > was

 

> > > > > absent. Only divine terms and meanings were present. Does it mean

 

> > that

 

> > > > > Veda preceded society and world ??? Atheists will laugh at such

 

> > ideas,

 

> > > > > but all ancient grammarians believed so.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Instead of proving my views, I have put forth the problem. Solve

 

> > it.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Now come to the second proble. The concept of 12 astrological

 

> > houses

 

> > > > > existed in all ancient civilizations, from China and India to

 

> > Sumer and

 

> > > > > Egypt. In most societies, even their names had similar meanings

 

> > and

 

> > > > > significances. It points to some common origins. Where is that

 

> > common

 

> > > > > origin???

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Lagna (ascendant) is defined as the rising point of ec loptic at

 

> > > > > eastern horizon. it symbolizes Body and worldy life. opposite is

 

> > 7th

 

> > > > > house, which signifies Kaama (libido). Nishkaama state gives the

 

> > state

 

> > > > > of Videha, and Kaama gives bondage into Deha (flesh). Both have

 

> > cause :

 

> > > > > consequence relation.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > 2nd house is maarkesh, cause of death, and opposite is Death

 

> > (8th

 

> > > > > house). Aparigraha and Indriya-nigraha gives deliverance from

 

> > Death,

 

> > > > > while wealth and sensory pleasures lead to death. Hence, senses

 

> > and

 

> > > > > wealth are related to maarkesh.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > 3rd house is paraakrama (valour, vigour) and opposite is the

 

> > result ;

 

> > > > > bhaagya (Fortune).

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > At the foot lies Earth, the mother, and vehicle also lies below

 

> > the

 

> > > > > rider. Hence, 4th house is below. 10th house is heaven, Father,

 

> > glory,

 

> > > > > and the consequence of Land(4th house) in the form of State and

 

> > Power.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > 5th house is Vidyaa (knowledge) and opposite is its consequence

 

> > :

 

> > > > > > income / profit. 6thy house is enemy or disease and opposite is

 

> > its

 

> > > > > > result : loss.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Thus, all 12 houses have cause : consequence relation between

 

> > > > > contrasting and opposite houses. There is a discernible logical

 

> > design

 

> > > > > behind the concept of 12 houses, and this logic was present in the

 

> > > > > common origin wherefrom this concept spread to other lands.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > The source of this common origin is not difficult to discern. As

 

> > shown

 

> > > > > above, the philosophy of Deha versus Kaama, and Videha versus

 

> > Nishkaama

 

> > > > > underlied the concepts behind first and seventh houses. Similarly,

 

> > the

 

> > > > > ideas of sensory pleasures and wealth being related to cause of

 

> > death

 

> > > > > and renunciation as a means of liberation from the cycles of death

 

> > and

 

> > > > > birth was behind the idea of 2nd and 8th houses. Such a philosophy

 

> > > > > existed only in India. We cannot find such philosophies

 

> > elesewhere.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Now come to the third point : Why physical remains are not found

 

> > in

 

> > > > > India. There are two causes . Their is no dearth of physical

 

> > remains

 

> > > > > related to non-Vedic but hindu (ie, Asuric) cultures, but there is

 

> > a

 

> > > > > lack of political will to accept the truth. For instance, the

 

> > state

 

> > > > > symbol of Magadha was solar chakra consisting of 24 spokes as 24

 

> > ritus.

 

> > > > > It was adopted by Buddhism, and came to be known as Dhamma-chakka,

 

> > > > > whence modern India adopted it as its emblem. These " experts "

 

> > > > > deliberately forget that all punched-marked coins of Magadha right

 

> > from

 

> > > > > earliest times contain this sun sign. The concept of 24 ritus is

 

> > Vedic.

 

> > > > > But the second cause is more profound, and less marked. Real

 

> > experts of

 

> > > > > Vedic astrology used Suryasiddhanta whose planets differed from

 

> > those of

 

> > > > > physical astronomy and were believed to be deities , ie conscious

 

> > > > > elements. Deities could not be seen through human eyes. Hence

 

> > there was

 

> > > > > no need of any observatory & c. But Drikpakshiya astronomy was not

 

> > > > > > unknown, although it was not used in astrology by most

 

> > astrologers.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > It is a mere summary, which will not satisfy many readers. the

 

> > proof

 

> > > > > of Indian astrology is neither logical discussion nor correlation

 

> > with

 

> > > > > physical astronomy, but predictive astrology, which is highly

 

> > precise if

 

> > > > > Suryasiddhantic mathematics is followed.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > > Marg margie9@

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:42:05 PM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Thankyou for your reply Vinay, you are so obviously an expert on

 

> > many

 

> > > > > cultures. Perhaps you can help me with a query?

 

> > > > > > As you know there are signs all over the planet of star and moon

 

> > > > > watching by ancient civilisations, and even astrological practise

 

> > which

 

> > > > > are constantly being rediscovered by archaeology. For instance in

 

> > > > > Ireland there are caves thought to be inhabited circa 5000 BC

 

> > which show

 

> > > > > careful calculations of moon phases and star knowledge. We know

 

> > the

 

> > > > > Egyptians have star diagrams due to the engravings and paintings

 

> > on

 

> > > > > pyramid walls possible circa 2500BC and beyond. Reindeer and

 

> > mammoth

 

> > > > > tusks found on mainland Europe over 25,000 years old are known to

 

> > have

 

> > > > > notches on them which represent the phases of the moon.

 

> > > > > > Yet I have no knowledge of anything similar being found in

 

> > India,

 

> > > > > which is odd when so many believe astrology was founded there

 

> > don't you

 

> > > > > think?

 

> > > > > > I wonder if you know where in India there is similar physical

 

> > evidence

 

> > > > > of very early observation of the sky, not in a book, but actual

 

> > > > > geographically located physical evidence of early skywatching? I

 

> > would

 

> > > > > really appreciate knowing this

 

> > > > > > thanks

 

> > > > > > M

 

> > > > > > -

 

> > > > > > Vinay Jha

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:51 AM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > No. Modern India still preserves the archaic culture and

 

> > religion to a

 

> > > > > great extent, but modern Greece or Iran or Egypt or Mesopotamia

 

> > contain

 

> > > > > only relics of the past. China officially disowns its cultural

 

> > roots,

 

> > > > > and does nor preserve pre-Confucian or pre-Buddhist culture. India

 

> > is an

 

> > > > > exception. Not even 1% of modern Indians fully adhere to the

 

> > ancient

 

> > > > > ways, but millions try to adhere to ancient norms...

 

> > > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > > Marg margie9 (AT) talktalk (DOT) net>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:10:56 PM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Similarly modern Indians :-)

 

> > > > > > -

 

> > > > > > Vinay Jha

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:13 AM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Modern Iranians cannot be said to represent the ancient

 

> > Babylonians

 

> > > > > culturally.

 

> > > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > > Marg margie9 (AT) talktalk (DOT) net>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:22:07 PM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Dear R

 

> > > > > > I think the Babylonians aka Persians aka Iranians are still

 

> > delivering

 

> > > > > readings?

 

> > > > > > -

 

> > > > > > Rohiniranjan

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Monday, March 30, 2009 3:21 AM

 

> > > > > > Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > How many Babylonians are still giving astrology readings to

 

> > those who

 

> > > > > need same?

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > How many Indians (by birth, soul-connections or otherwise!) are

 

> > doing

 

> > > > > the same?

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Case closed?

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > For me it is! Karma = Action (not speeches and pontifications! )

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > RR

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Sunilji,Recently my astrologer friend said that the exaltation of a planet in a house is meaningful only at specified degrees, is it true, or whether the belonging of a planet to a house itself is sufficient to shower at least some beneficial aspects to the native. As I have told you earlier I'm a novice to the subject and hence your expert views shall help me to learn further.with regards and respects - R.kannan , 04.04.2009 --- On Fri, 3/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>To:

Cc: Date: Friday, 3 April, 2009, 1:21 PM

 

Vinayji,1)You said QuoteHow physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can "torment" Rohini ?UnquoteI thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.2)You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like

Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you

to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say.3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4)Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.5)Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement.6)You do not know the meaning of the phrase "good riddance". When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said "good riddance"7)You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not

character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed?-SKB--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

TO ALL :

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

<<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in

common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned...

 

Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word "ayanamsha". 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof.">>>>

---

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>>" You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini."<<<< <<

 

Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the "physical planet" ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can "torment" Rohini ?

 

His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says "you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic." Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

 

His next point is >>>>"your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. "<<<<

 

He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a

means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a

lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

 

His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like "dirty tactics" , "you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic" , "bullshit" , 'unprovable tall claims", "left ignominiously" which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says "in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims." These "strong words" were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I

recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages.

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : "In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you." Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me.

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : "Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you." Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers).

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

 

I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as "scientific" spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it.

 

I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses.

 

-VJ

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

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

> Vinayji,

>

> 1)

> You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

>

> 2)

> You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic

>

> 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

>

> 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

>

> 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading.

>

> 6)

> I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously.

>

> -SKB

>

>

> --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

>

> Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Bhaskar Jee,

>

> You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language.

>

> You say : "I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors."

>

> Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : "Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum." AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to

know

> everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

>

> I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

>

> You say : "I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... "

>

> I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading.

>

> You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

>

> I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

your

> time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

>

> -VJ

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

>

> Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Dear Vinay jee,

>

> Ha Ha. That was a good one.

>

> See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

>

> Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

>

> I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors.

>

> See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??).

>

> The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground.

>

> Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

>

> I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing.

>

> I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

>

> Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

>

> regards/Bhaskar.

 

 

Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Sunil ji,

 

I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But

you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted

traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my

invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and

anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has

continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of

Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it

discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not

believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived,

but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of

horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to

decide the issue.

 

I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of

mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or

tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these

tables by rote in my school days ?

 

You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of

the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been

mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not

my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not

try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the

hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I

provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in

youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided

with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule.

 

The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is

supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute.

 

You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any

reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to

back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy.

Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was

known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called

ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of

the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus.

Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

 

If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you.

But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to

test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I

still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to

others. It is only me who has a special treatment.

 

If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said,

things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to

provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so

that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and

forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with

me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated

into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit

unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient

texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide.

But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS,

IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening

properly, how will ever know my

views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting

all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if

you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message,

who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand.

I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct

abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I

believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so.

Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing,

but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss

his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr

Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was

propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr

Chandrahari has every right

to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for

shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started

abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair

debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

 

When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on

tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I

start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

 

If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of

Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if

you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you.

You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to

listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before

answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari,

if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the

benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such

talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in

these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I

belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in

English literature , but

renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things

which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all,

you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message

to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other

things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting

mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start

discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am

forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the

discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither

for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please

forget the past and start anew.

 

You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without

touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance

can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are

really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective

matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I

tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that

topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not

omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can

substantiate.

 

Good Wishes,

-VJ

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

 

 

________________________________

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

 

Cc:

Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

Vinayji,

 

1)

 

You said

 

Quote

 

How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

Unquote

 

I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and

physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any

astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini.

Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and

when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary

Saurpaksha.

 

2)

You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round

the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour

the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical

and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you

want others to believe in what you say.

 

3)

I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married

person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical

intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into

Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining

unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and

follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and

you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours.

 

4)

Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the

presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text.

Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it

just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a

planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi

cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the

planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from

the planet.

 

5)

Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference

to back your statement.

 

6)

You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that

you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance "

 

7)

You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think

that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say

that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go

and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in

independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will

go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character

assassination.

 

I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail

to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul

words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you

think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your

maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed?

 

-SKB

 

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

TO ALL :

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance

with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting

with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not

want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I

believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently

sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

<<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is

Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional

texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts,

and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these

terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of

sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy

deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this

noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due

to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world

that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have

nothing in common with

Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which

we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be

seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while

Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times

! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed

Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean

positions of planets are concerned...

 

Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern

astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent

for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th

century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient

Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha.

Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic

(Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found

to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any

zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at

sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious

assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of

precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession

), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The

latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of

knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by

almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of

Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by

physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not

found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a

non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of

its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence

or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only

proof. " >>>>

 

---

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location

of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas

but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have

spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time

of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra

(physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

 

Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has

mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities

can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical

astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability.

I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my

computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since

early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and

departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead

of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is

certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts

me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not

travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find

new excuses to malign me.

 

His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. " <<<<

 

He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari,

although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris

at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a

distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a

celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his

fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in

his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife

and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's

offer there Kaama was merely a

means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to

Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita.

Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal

sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If

Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong

definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single

instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company

and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize

a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a

real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget

that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food

habits are giving rise to a

lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and

Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to

suit his personal habits.

 

His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He

never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the

only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene)

remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you

cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " ,

'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be

conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are

his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words

in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and

then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to

spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science (

cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by

CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or

not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group

Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your

unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel

suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me,

not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance

of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying

any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is

a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the

practical methods of

Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects

himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged

him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers

started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages.

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what

Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his

last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in

vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss

the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked

Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started

abusing me.

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators

were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning,

but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started

challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went

into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in

private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing

him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

the answers).

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here

just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman

and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my

Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is

Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I

removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not

be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world

is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not

discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist

belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the

truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology.

I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to

deny.

 

I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why

he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That

cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta.

Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy,

the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of

Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude

or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test

the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific "

spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before

testing it.

 

I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA

because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these

persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does

not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice.

Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an

obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses.

 

-VJ

 

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

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy

a wrote:

 

>

 

> Vinayji,

 

>

 

> 1)

 

> You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the

actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess?

Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical

planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting

Rohini.

 

>

 

> 2)

 

> You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a

madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like

Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you

want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the

wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic

 

>

 

> 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is

un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces

its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I

only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the

substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a

symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking

wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit

of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before

fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas

due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

 

>

 

> 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use?

Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of

false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya

he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math

were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

 

>

 

> 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website

but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to

delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play

such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is

your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such

attitude may not be worth reading.

 

>

 

> 6)

 

> I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at

one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each

other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including

Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a

single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning.

But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims.

In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning

to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word

you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself

made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously.

 

>

 

> -SKB

 

>

 

>

 

> --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

>

 

>

 

> Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Bhaskar Jee,

 

>

 

> You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language.

 

>

 

> You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid

arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she

understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

 

>

 

> Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical

observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology

was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and

does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative

attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to

offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is

taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to

prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of

cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free

and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never

wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything

about my methods and often wanted to know

 

> everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional

astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart.

I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from

astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh

who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without

any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their

and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

 

>

 

> I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are

populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found

to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software.

Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no

hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the

misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology

which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software,

it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

 

>

 

> You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ?

Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... "

 

>

 

> I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all

other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing

my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you

to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my

works if you find it not worth testing and reading.

 

>

 

> You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I

never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth

is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I

waste my time over you ??

 

>

 

> I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum

last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it

to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two

persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading

nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted

my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a

lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion.

Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the

original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like

panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra

chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil

Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are

also adamant on wasting my and

your

 

> time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the

moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

 

>

 

> -VJ

 

>

 

> ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

 

>

 

> Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

 

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> Dear Vinay jee,

 

>

 

> Ha Ha. That was a good one.

 

>

 

> See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture

and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this

differences between us, which i did not want.

 

>

 

> Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

 

>

 

> I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not

being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in

front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left

back doors.

 

>

 

> See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i

still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good

knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever

encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone

abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence

of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??).

 

>

 

> The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in

thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or

proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send

me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground.

 

>

 

> Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a

single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to

impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your

claims which amount to nought.

 

>

 

> I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that

by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are

not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned

which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and

nights spent in reading and analysing.

 

>

 

> I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you

are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to

marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been

showed the door, I am sorry to say.

 

>

 

> Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the

Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

 

>

 

> regards/Bhaskar.

 

>

 

> , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

> >

 

> > Bhaskar Jee,

 

> >

 

> > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor,

otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have

been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule

the roost on the Forums. "

 

> >

 

> > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you,

nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such

mindless messages as posted by you recently.

 

> >

 

> > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing

conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say

" I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. "

 

> >

 

> > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are

trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was

successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had

viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would

have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me :

 

> >

 

> > "

 

> >

 

> > praNaam sir,

 

> >

 

> > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

 

> > that already and u dont need any confirmation

 

> > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

 

> > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative

 

> > the last time(about fonts and vb

 

> > errors).

 

> >

 

> > and its accurate till prana

 

> > dashas.

 

> > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

 

> > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

 

> > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

 

> > normally.

 

> >

 

> > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

 

> > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

 

> > another time

 

> > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

 

> > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

 

> >

 

> > -VJ

 

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

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

 

> >

 

> > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

 

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> > Dear Vinay ji,

 

> >

 

> > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

 

> >

 

> > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who

 

> > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot

 

> > prove that you know " something " ?

 

> >

 

> > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the

 

> > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

 

> >

 

> > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from

 

> > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who

 

> > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken

 

> > glass pieces in his kitty.

 

> >

 

> > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or

 

> > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ?

 

> > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a

 

> > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

 

> >

 

> > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then

 

> > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian

 

> > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ?

 

> > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been

 

> > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

 

> >

 

> > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken

 

> > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have

 

> > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove

 

> > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front

 

> > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly

 

> > but just rattling in the air.

 

> >

 

> > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

 

> >

 

> > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

 

> >

 

> > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just

 

> > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could

 

> > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

 

> >

 

> > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have

 

> > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present

 

> > set up of mind.

 

> >

 

> > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started

 

> > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

 

> >

 

> > best wishes,

 

> >

 

> > Bhaskar.

 

> >

 

> > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

> > >

 

> > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you.

 

> > I have yet to see

 

> > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You

 

> > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

 

> > >

 

> > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears

 

> > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has

 

> > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made

 

> > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one

 

> > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya

 

> > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I

 

> > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I

 

> > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of

 

> > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on

 

> > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to

 

> > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free

 

> > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are

 

> > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to

 

> > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

 

> > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free

 

> > softwares in future.

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > -VJ

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

 

> > >

 

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

 

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > The Dating of Ramayana

 

> > >

 

> > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that

 

> > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place,

 

> > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge

 

> > made over Lanka is to be believed.

 

> > >

 

> > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge

 

> > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed

 

> > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this

 

> > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan

 

> > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this

 

> > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole

 

> > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

 

> > >

 

> > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to

 

> > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ?

 

> > >

 

> > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

 

> > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to

 

> > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

 

> > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

 

> > >

 

> > > Can Marg produce better references then these to claim that the West

 

> > knew about astrology much before the Indians ?

 

> > >

 

> > > But before that, I suppose we would be asked wheres the signboard on

 

> > the Adams bridge, written that it was the same bridge, and may also

 

> > probably ask us additionally whether the Ramayana is authentic. And we

 

> > are good people so we will never ask about the authenticity of the

 

> > Bible, because I do believe in Jesus and love him probably more than

 

> > Christians do.

 

> > >

 

> > > Or they may ask us how can You prove that the underwater city

 

> > discovered in Dwarka is Krishnas city. And we may also be asked to prove

 

> > that the Bhagwat was written by the ancients and not the modern day

 

> > authors.

 

> > >

 

> > > Which is why I say that do not fall in trap of trying to impress the

 

> > fairer sex, and neither try to show the greatness of your country or the

 

> > origins of something which you have not studied about, properly. learn a

 

> > subject properly before you try to attract somebody's attention and put

 

> > your theories upon. If You have some light

 

> > > then the brightness would be seen around you. No need to

 

> > > prove it or show case it. Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is

 

> > for you. I have yet to see your proficiency either in Astrology,

 

> > Astronomy, or Mathematics. You have stirred the Hornests nest with no

 

> > contribution, and no strong argument to take the None believers, which I

 

> > have to settle for the dignity of my country, culture and love for

 

> > astrology , single handedly.

 

> > >

 

> > > regards/Bhaskar.

 

> > >

 

> > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@

 

> > ....> wrote:

 

> > > >

 

> > > > Dear Vinay,

 

> > > >

 

> > > > I would like you to predict here too on the groups so that all could

 

> > witness your predictive abilities, which you mentioned in the below

 

> > mail. But Computational and Mathematical skills are not required o be

 

> > showcased, as I dont think anybody would be interested in that,this

 

> > being an astrology Forum and not a maths one.

 

> > > >

 

> > > > By the way I am fighting your battle which you began here by trying

 

> > to impress on Marg the origin of Indian vedic astrology which you could

 

> > not. I have also fought for you in the past without any thanksgivings.

 

> > One should go and try proving something which can be proved, or else not

 

> > claim about anything. Otherwise one makes a fool of himself. And others

 

> > have to defend him with their time and efforts.

 

> > > >

 

> > > > Nothing is going to be achieved by proving the origin to anybody.

 

> > This is actually a waste of time. Instead of taking up easy and

 

> > unverifiable issues , why not pick up some astrological principles and

 

> > use them effectively here to show how you can predict so wonderfully as

 

> > you have claimed in this mail. In this way the thread can become

 

> > interesting and we all can learn from you.

 

> > > >

 

> > > > best wishes,

 

> > > > Bhaskar.

 

> > > >

 

> > > >

 

> > > >

 

> > > >

 

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

> > wrote:

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > A reader in Department of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University

 

> > tested me before many scholars. Then the Head of Department of Grammar

 

> > in the same university tested me (he asked me a simpler question : 786

 

> > raised to the power 8, which I answered within seconds without using

 

> > paper or any tool. Then he replied that I must have used some tricks !!!

 

> > It is impossible to satisfy such sceptics. If Sunil ji wants that I

 

> > should stop my research work and become a madaari demonstrating my

 

> > computational ability, he will be discouraged.

 

> > > > > I am not Ramanujam, and I acquired some mathematical talents which

 

> > I really needed. I learnt logarithmic and antilog tables and a lot more

 

> > by rote in early boyhood.

 

> > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a@>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 3:32:19 AM

 

> > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Dear Vinayji,

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > You said that you can compute faster than a computer. In this age

 

> > people want proof and do not want to believe in assertions because

 

> > anybody can get away with assertions. So may I request you to get your

 

> > computing power publicly demonstrated and reliably reported so that

 

> > people will not doubt what you say.

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Regards,

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > --- On Tue, 3/31/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

> > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 11:21 AM

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > As I had suspected, Marg entirely missed the points raised by me,

 

> > and is deliberately harping on physical proofs of what I say are

 

> > metaphysical entities. Bhaskar ji can give her planetary positions

 

> > without using any physical tools, and I can demonstrate that I can

 

> > compute faster than a computer. Margie is not interested in knowing the

 

> > marvels of Vedic astrology, and is more keen on proving the superiority

 

> > of non-Indian astrology. Earlier too, I had tried to attract her

 

> > attention towards secret methods of Vedic mundane astrology, but to no

 

> > avail. Even if someone finds physical evidences of Indian or non-Indian

 

> > astrology in 20000000 BC, it will help nobody. Veda and Vedic Astrology

 

> > are parts of Eternal Religion (Sanatana Dharma), and religion is

 

> > personal experience which can be taught and learnt only through a

 

> > guru-shishya tradition. Sterile discussion will lead us nowhere.

 

> > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:36:16 PM

 

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > I can give you the planetary positions of any date in future

 

> > sitting in

 

> > > > > a closed room without going to a observatory or physical

 

> > observation, or

 

> > > > > access to any Table, Ephemeris, Computer or Almanac. That must be

 

> > enough

 

> > > > > proof of the Ancient Indian knowledge of observing the heavens,

 

> > who had

 

> > > > > after observing for centuries, and through their intellect ,

 

> > developed

 

> > > > > so much analytical powers that even modern day astrologers like me

 

> > can

 

> > > > > make use of their findings and talk. What more further proof is

 

> > > > > required ? I can also give geographical proof to a worthy and

 

> > actual

 

> > > > > serious enquirist who is unbiased. But otherwise would not like to

 

> > > > > fritter this knowledge for the sake of some people who may wish to

 

> > > > > collect this, and write a book in their name, and sell it for

 

> > money .

 

> > > > > But if I show someone a place and tell him that this existed in

 

> > 2,50000

 

> > > > > BC, then how many will be able to test this , how many will have

 

> > the

 

> > > > > capacity and apparatus to test this. Or are they going to take the

 

> > > > > bricks for Carbon testing ? For being accessible to such knowledge

 

> > one

 

> > > > > has to be a worthy and unsuspecting invitee who must not have any

 

> > qualms

 

> > > > > of prejudices of " My country " or " Your country " etc.

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > Bhaskar.

 

> > > > >

 

> > > > > , " Marg " <margie9@ > wrote:

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Hi Vinay

 

> > > > > > you say:

 

> > > > > > ''and some concepts of astrology an be traced back torock

 

> > paintings of

 

> > > > > even 30000 BC''

 

> > > > > > So these torock paintings exist, can be viewed and were first

 

> > > > > discovered in India?

 

> > > > > > Is there any other physical evidence in India to show recording

 

> > of

 

> > > > > planets or constellations? Pyramids, stone circles, caves with

 

> > paintings

 

> > > > > on the wall, or any other structures at all which demonstrate an

 

> > ancient

 

> > > > > Indian system of observing the heavens pre 250,000 BC?

 

> > > > > > best wishes

 

> > > > > > M

 

> > > > > > -

 

> > > > > > Vinay Jha

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:13 PM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Fine question by Margie. The answer formed gist of my lecture at

 

> > > > > Kalidasa Academy in April 2008 titled " Contribution of Indian

 

> > Astrology

 

> > > > > To the World Astrology " (in Hindi). The article, in Hindi, can be

 

> > read

 

> > > > > in full at my website. Here I can offer only a brief answer, which

 

> > may

 

> > > > > not satisfy readers.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Indian Jyotisha is regarded as a Vedaanga (part of Veda). Since

 

> > Vedas

 

> > > > > are said to be composed after 1500 BC, its part cannot predate it.

 

> > But

 

> > > > > proofs of astrology with 12 house concept and other paraphernalia

 

> > > > > existed in ancient civilizations around 3000 BC, and some concepts

 

> > of

 

> > > > > astrology an be traced back torock paintings of even 30000 BC.

 

> > Hence,

 

> > > > > the very topic " Contribution of Indian Astrology... " is

 

> > meaningless,

 

> > > > > unless we prove that the dating of Vedas should be advanced

 

> > > > > considerably. This was how I introduced the topic, and then

 

> > discussed

 

> > > > > the unscientific method of comparative linguistics of 19th century

 

> > > > > linguists. I devoted 12 years in this field. I found no concrete

 

> > > > > evidence in favour of dating of the Vedas, only opinions were

 

> > forwarded.

 

> > > > > Rgvedic society was believed to be a pastoral one, and was

 

> > therefore

 

> > > > > held to be at par with Greeks at the time of Battle of Troy, which

 

> > was

 

> > > > > the earliest known historical event in the West. Hence, 1200 BC

 

> > was said

 

> > > > > to

 

> > > > > > be the mean date of Rgveda. But when Michael Ventris proved that

 

> > > > > Mycenaean Greeks enjoyed urban civilization around the middle of

 

> > 2nd

 

> > > > > millenium BC, it proved that their pastoral ancestors must have

 

> > lived

 

> > > > > befor 2000 BC. Taking into account the presence of Harappan

 

> > > > > civilization, Rgvedic civilization could not be possible after

 

> > 3000 BC,

 

> > > > > if the logic of 19th century linguists was to be applied.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Then, I applied the methods of modern linguistics, and assuming

 

> > that

 

> > > > > we do not know which IE branch was more archaic I applied equal

 

> > > > > weightage to all major IE branches, and took statistical averages

 

> > for

 

> > > > > all consonants and vowels separately, and to my surprize found

 

> > that the

 

> > > > > PIE etymon exactly copied the Vedic form in almost all cases !!!

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Such a result contradicted the prevalent opinion. I had no doubt

 

> > in

 

> > > > > the accuracy of my results, because I checked it again and again

 

> > for

 

> > > > > years. For one month, I was profoundly disturbed. Then I decided

 

> > to

 

> > > > > carry on my research into historical semantics, and unexpectedly

 

> > arrived

 

> > > > > at far more bizarre conclusions. For instance, there is no root

 

> > for

 

> > > > > " brother " in any IE language. In the Rgveda, bhraatr and its

 

> > derivatives

 

> > > > > occur 33 times. At 32 places, it means " Sun " . At 33th instance, it

 

> > is

 

> > > > > used for 'Yama', who is a son of Sun as well as a brother of Yami.

 

> > That

 

> > > > > is why ancient grammarians deduced bhraatr from the root bhraash

 

> > which

 

> > > > > meant " to shine " . the meaning " brother " was a later development, a

 

> > > > > Laukika (worldly) usage.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Similarly, Agni was derived from a root which meant " to move

 

> > > > > tortuously " . The Vedic god Agni was believed to move tortuously to

 

> > all

 

> > > > > worlds, and was therefore believed to fetch oblations to all gods,

 

> > and

 

> > > > > was therefore eulogized as the real purohita. When works were

 

> > being

 

> > > > > formed out of roots, physical " fire " was absent, social " brother "

 

> > was

 

> > > > > absent. Only divine terms and meanings were present. Does it mean

 

> > that

 

> > > > > Veda preceded society and world ??? Atheists will laugh at such

 

> > ideas,

 

> > > > > but all ancient grammarians believed so.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Instead of proving my views, I have put forth the problem. Solve

 

> > it.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Now come to the second proble. The concept of 12 astrological

 

> > houses

 

> > > > > existed in all ancient civilizations, from China and India to

 

> > Sumer and

 

> > > > > Egypt. In most societies, even their names had similar meanings

 

> > and

 

> > > > > significances. It points to some common origins. Where is that

 

> > common

 

> > > > > origin???

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Lagna (ascendant) is defined as the rising point of ec loptic at

 

> > > > > eastern horizon. it symbolizes Body and worldy life. opposite is

 

> > 7th

 

> > > > > house, which signifies Kaama (libido). Nishkaama state gives the

 

> > state

 

> > > > > of Videha, and Kaama gives bondage into Deha (flesh). Both have

 

> > cause :

 

> > > > > consequence relation.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > 2nd house is maarkesh, cause of death, and opposite is Death

 

> > (8th

 

> > > > > house). Aparigraha and Indriya-nigraha gives deliverance from

 

> > Death,

 

> > > > > while wealth and sensory pleasures lead to death. Hence, senses

 

> > and

 

> > > > > wealth are related to maarkesh.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > 3rd house is paraakrama (valour, vigour) and opposite is the

 

> > result ;

 

> > > > > bhaagya (Fortune).

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > At the foot lies Earth, the mother, and vehicle also lies below

 

> > the

 

> > > > > rider. Hence, 4th house is below. 10th house is heaven, Father,

 

> > glory,

 

> > > > > and the consequence of Land(4th house) in the form of State and

 

> > Power.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > 5th house is Vidyaa (knowledge) and opposite is its consequence

 

> > :

 

> > > > > > income / profit. 6thy house is enemy or disease and opposite is

 

> > its

 

> > > > > > result : loss.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Thus, all 12 houses have cause : consequence relation between

 

> > > > > contrasting and opposite houses. There is a discernible logical

 

> > design

 

> > > > > behind the concept of 12 houses, and this logic was present in the

 

> > > > > common origin wherefrom this concept spread to other lands.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > The source of this common origin is not difficult to discern. As

 

> > shown

 

> > > > > above, the philosophy of Deha versus Kaama, and Videha versus

 

> > Nishkaama

 

> > > > > underlied the concepts behind first and seventh houses. Similarly,

 

> > the

 

> > > > > ideas of sensory pleasures and wealth being related to cause of

 

> > death

 

> > > > > and renunciation as a means of liberation from the cycles of death

 

> > and

 

> > > > > birth was behind the idea of 2nd and 8th houses. Such a philosophy

 

> > > > > existed only in India. We cannot find such philosophies

 

> > elesewhere.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Now come to the third point : Why physical remains are not found

 

> > in

 

> > > > > India. There are two causes . Their is no dearth of physical

 

> > remains

 

> > > > > related to non-Vedic but hindu (ie, Asuric) cultures, but there is

 

> > a

 

> > > > > lack of political will to accept the truth. For instance, the

 

> > state

 

> > > > > symbol of Magadha was solar chakra consisting of 24 spokes as 24

 

> > ritus.

 

> > > > > It was adopted by Buddhism, and came to be known as Dhamma-chakka,

 

> > > > > whence modern India adopted it as its emblem. These " experts "

 

> > > > > deliberately forget that all punched-marked coins of Magadha right

 

> > from

 

> > > > > earliest times contain this sun sign. The concept of 24 ritus is

 

> > Vedic.

 

> > > > > But the second cause is more profound, and less marked. Real

 

> > experts of

 

> > > > > Vedic astrology used Suryasiddhanta whose planets differed from

 

> > those of

 

> > > > > physical astronomy and were believed to be deities , ie conscious

 

> > > > > elements. Deities could not be seen through human eyes. Hence

 

> > there was

 

> > > > > no need of any observatory & c. But Drikpakshiya astronomy was not

 

> > > > > > unknown, although it was not used in astrology by most

 

> > astrologers.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > It is a mere summary, which will not satisfy many readers. the

 

> > proof

 

> > > > > of Indian astrology is neither logical discussion nor correlation

 

> > with

 

> > > > > physical astronomy, but predictive astrology, which is highly

 

> > precise if

 

> > > > > Suryasiddhantic mathematics is followed.

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > > Marg margie9@

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:42:05 PM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Thankyou for your reply Vinay, you are so obviously an expert on

 

> > many

 

> > > > > cultures. Perhaps you can help me with a query?

 

> > > > > > As you know there are signs all over the planet of star and moon

 

> > > > > watching by ancient civilisations, and even astrological practise

 

> > which

 

> > > > > are constantly being rediscovered by archaeology. For instance in

 

> > > > > Ireland there are caves thought to be inhabited circa 5000 BC

 

> > which show

 

> > > > > careful calculations of moon phases and star knowledge. We know

 

> > the

 

> > > > > Egyptians have star diagrams due to the engravings and paintings

 

> > on

 

> > > > > pyramid walls possible circa 2500BC and beyond. Reindeer and

 

> > mammoth

 

> > > > > tusks found on mainland Europe over 25,000 years old are known to

 

> > have

 

> > > > > notches on them which represent the phases of the moon.

 

> > > > > > Yet I have no knowledge of anything similar being found in

 

> > India,

 

> > > > > which is odd when so many believe astrology was founded there

 

> > don't you

 

> > > > > think?

 

> > > > > > I wonder if you know where in India there is similar physical

 

> > evidence

 

> > > > > of very early observation of the sky, not in a book, but actual

 

> > > > > geographically located physical evidence of early skywatching? I

 

> > would

 

> > > > > really appreciate knowing this

 

> > > > > > thanks

 

> > > > > > M

 

> > > > > > -

 

> > > > > > Vinay Jha

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:51 AM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > No. Modern India still preserves the archaic culture and

 

> > religion to a

 

> > > > > great extent, but modern Greece or Iran or Egypt or Mesopotamia

 

> > contain

 

> > > > > only relics of the past. China officially disowns its cultural

 

> > roots,

 

> > > > > and does nor preserve pre-Confucian or pre-Buddhist culture. India

 

> > is an

 

> > > > > exception. Not even 1% of modern Indians fully adhere to the

 

> > ancient

 

> > > > > ways, but millions try to adhere to ancient norms...

 

> > > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > > Marg margie9 (AT) talktalk (DOT) net>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:10:56 PM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Similarly modern Indians :-)

 

> > > > > > -

 

> > > > > > Vinay Jha

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:13 AM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Modern Iranians cannot be said to represent the ancient

 

> > Babylonians

 

> > > > > culturally.

 

> > > > > > -VJ

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > > > > Marg margie9 (AT) talktalk (DOT) net>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:22:07 PM

 

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Dear R

 

> > > > > > I think the Babylonians aka Persians aka Iranians are still

 

> > delivering

 

> > > > > readings?

 

> > > > > > -

 

> > > > > > Rohiniranjan

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Monday, March 30, 2009 3:21 AM

 

> > > > > > Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > How many Babylonians are still giving astrology readings to

 

> > those who

 

> > > > > need same?

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > How many Indians (by birth, soul-connections or otherwise!) are

 

> > doing

 

> > > > > the same?

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > Case closed?

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > For me it is! Karma = Action (not speeches and pontifications! )

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > > RR

 

> > > > > >

 

> > > > > >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Kannan ji,

 

Though this mail was addressed to Shri Sunilji, I would like to

participate for once as Sunilji is a very knowledgable person and let me

take this query as a junior who can save him him this much efforts being

a very basic query.

 

When we go to attend a function of honour where you may be a invitee

You will notice that the first few rows of the chairs near the Stage or

dias are reserved normally. The Chief guest or the Guest of Honour will

usually be seated there. This is the Exaltation degree of the

particular inviitee seated there. Though he may be a member and part of

the same audience , yet he will be Exalted. Treat the auditorium as the

House and the front row of chairs as the Exaltation degrees where if a

planet is seated., is known ad Exalted.

 

You must have heard of the House of Commons in USA. It is just like the

parliament in india. Now here may be 600+ members in the House of

coomons, but one members is Exalted there. Why ? because he is also the

Elected Speaker there, who can control the debates etc. whenever the

House is in session. Treat the House of Commons as a House in the

Horoscope, and treat the Speaker as a Exalted Planet.

 

Your friend thus is right in his comments about the Exaltation degrees

of the Planets. But one more point, where I would differ from your

friend. Though any member of the House of Commons may not be the

Speaker, yet being part of this House makes him important nevertheless,

though not Exalted. You may ruminate on this.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, kannan padma

<kannan_padma30 wrote:

>

> Dear Sunilji,

>

> Recently my astrologer friend said that the exaltation of a planet in

a house is meaningful only at specified degrees, is it true, or whether

the belonging of a planet to a house itself is sufficient to shower at

least some beneficial aspects to the native. As I have told you earlier

I'm a novice to the subject and hence your expert views shall help me to

learn further.

>

> with regards and respects - R.kannan , 04.04.2009

>

> --- On Fri, 3/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

> Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya

> Re: Re: Greeks vs

Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Cc:

> Friday, 3 April, 2009, 1:21 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

Vinayji,

>

> 1)

>

> You said

>

> Quote

>

> How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

" torment " Rohini ?

>

> Unquote

>

> I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both

are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when

he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

>

> 2)

> You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets

invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that

it will be better for you

> to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say.

>

> 3)

> I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a

married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have

insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required

rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to

believe in these claims of yours.

>

> 4)

> Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets

and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any

ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you

want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you

so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

> through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his

body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

>

> 5)

> Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any

reference to back your statement.

>

> 6)

> You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you

said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good

riddance "

>

> 7)

> You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking.

you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right

or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to

you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors

depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong

impression. Asking for proof is not

> character assassination.

>

> I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in

your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I

have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in

Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are

doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

unopposed?

>

> -SKB

>

>

> --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

>

> vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

>

>

>

TO ALL :

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an

alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for

useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another

user may be useful in making some important points clear :

>

>

>

> <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha,

other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language

dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material

or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this

world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of

deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based

upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world.

Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away

from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets.

But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in

> common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a

physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose

position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of

Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is

only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times !

Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the

fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as

far as mean positions of planets are concerned...

>

>

>

> Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has

no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit

word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing

modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern

method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in

285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that

both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no

visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based

upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

> means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

>

>

>

> The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no

connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the

time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in

Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It

was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is

not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

>

>

>

> We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the

proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

>

> ---

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that

the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to

possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location)

and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

>

>

>

> Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and

everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

>

>

>

> His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational

ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog

tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where

my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a

face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in

my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

>

>

>

> His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient

times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and

only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

>

>

>

> He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes

Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order

to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he

does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said

Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa

was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which

can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to

presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was

known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but

rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was

merely a

> means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself

as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra

by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu.

Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why

should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere

state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation

destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and

drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was

not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few

tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a

real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but

forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and

unnatural food habits are giving rise to a

> lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should

not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

>

>

>

> His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by

him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I

know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often

abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like

" dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from

the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously "

which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most

provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements :

(1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only

(actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my

works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then

Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to

spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of

Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

> com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS,

IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me.

He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in

the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. "

These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used

such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial

mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me,

denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I

> recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to

literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of

Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely

projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him,

and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the

field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me

obscene messages.

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr

Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly

instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a

shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me.

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the

moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good

in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of

no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in

Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance

to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the

answers).

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had

he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another

is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book

from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

>

>

>

> A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which

modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only

those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these

rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

>

>

>

> I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of

me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as

based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic

astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will

continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables

originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

" scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

reject a thing before testing it.

>

>

>

> I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I

left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and

abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a

bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I

have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something

useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by

force, or by means of abuses.

>

>

>

> -VJ

>

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

>

>

>

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

> >

>

> > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> > 1)

>

> > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from

the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which

you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata

war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

>

> >

>

> > 2)

>

> > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power

like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing

abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)?

Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

from the topic

>

> >

>

> > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that

Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra

one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra

recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the

alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop.

However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas

(ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO

before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun

of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

>

> >

>

> > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I

use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty

tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he

became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

>

> >

>

> > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said

that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get

to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete

it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced

that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

reading.

>

> >

>

> > 6)

>

> > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in

the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims.

I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we

respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All

other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I

also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship

remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used

bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had

to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but

yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

ignominiously.

>

> >

>

> > -SKB

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Bhaskar Jee,

>

> >

>

> > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

language.

>

> >

>

> > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong

solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which

weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

>

> >

>

> > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on

revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India

really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change.

She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be

my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never

allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a

discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were

never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to

> know

>

> > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher.

We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I

do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of

any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined

Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

>

> >

>

> > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these

forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy

which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to

Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based

on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But

if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

>

> >

>

> > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to

give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

impudence... "

>

> >

>

> > I am a software developer who used principles different from those

used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my

work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my

software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

worth testing and reading.

>

> >

>

> > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to

you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about

my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

>

> >

>

> > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my

software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my

time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on

Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong

brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion.

Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts

are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra,

sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed.

Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started

using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

> your

>

> > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or

ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

> >

>

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

>

> >

>

> > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

>

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> > Dear Vinay jee,

>

> >

>

> > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

>

> >

>

> > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian

culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

>

> >

>

> > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

>

> >

>

> > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that

you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of

what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

played with you, till you left back doors.

>

> >

>

> > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant,

but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg

has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom

i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements

as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself (

??).

>

> >

>

> > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same,

in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous,

impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which

these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

planted firmly on the ground.

>

> >

>

> > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and

you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the

torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

>

> >

>

> > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers

? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and

not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

analysing.

>

> >

>

> > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually

what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself

to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups

you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

>

> >

>

> > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

>

> >

>

> > regards/Bhaskar.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

Check out the all-new Messenger 9.0! Go to

http://in.messenger./

>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Vinayji,I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu). When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the

eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in the reverse direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one Saptasindhu.When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that.I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations.Regards,Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Sunilji,

You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I answer

your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt astrological

discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in internet where you can

contribute ; this topic has no relation to astrology. You are lying that you

found the verse yourself , I sent the verse to you. Moreover, I never

misinterpreted the verse, I gave the literal translation while you believe your

fancuful meanings to be the real translation. there is no mention of stormy

conditions in that verse. literal translation and interpretation are different

things. The point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta

as mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument over

your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong interpretation.

 

Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your ignorance of

Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western commentators, as well as of

your habit of producing false arguments with a view to prove false things.

Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon have great difference with Sun and Moon

of physical astronomy, but Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with

that of physical astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and

Moon. Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, which

is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical period, ie, to

relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no much difference

between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical eclipses. i have used

the term " no much difference " while you use therm " accurately " which is a lie.

But even if eclipses have no much difference, absolute position of true Sun or

true Moon have great

differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at the rate of

360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is nearly 1.5 degrees

of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon and physical (Drikpakshiya)

Moon. Third source is difference between the length of Suryasiddhantic solar

year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; tropical year has less difference).

 

You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical and sensory

things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I always tried to hold

information, and simply answered your false and motivated charges on me. If

Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude he must talk about Drikpakshiya and

not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and do noy feel any need to substantiate that

physical reality is the ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing

merely in the physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

persons, how can I ?

 

My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish mails. I

will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe that astrological

concepts must be proven astrologically and not physically. although I do not

deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, I am giving you an instance of what

is astrological proof.

 

Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on the basis

of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare the phalita results

of both horoscopes along the principles of Paraashara. You will find that

Saurapakshiya predictions conform to actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya

predictions bear no such relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of

cases. I wasted decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss Saurapaksha

without any astrological investigation. You have no interest in astrological

investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta is an astrological

treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, which can be proven from

the text itself, but it is better to undertake an unbiased comparison of

Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to arrive at any conclusive finding.

But you are too biased to be interested

in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my precious time.

If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I will retract all my

statements against you and will apologize for using harsh words, but if you are

intent upon disrupting astrological discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I

will use harsher words for you in future, because an astrological forum should

have no place for non-astrological nonsense.

 

-VJ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

 

Cc:

Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

Vinayji,

 

I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to

west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet

Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is

Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one

of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . When I asked you the reference as to where

you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give

and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying

that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in

front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the

Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it . That

day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the eastward

moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in

the reverse

direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one

Saptasindhu.

 

When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses

accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that.

 

I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any

reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the

eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical

phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations.

 

Regards,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

 

Sunil ji,

 

I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But

you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted

traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my

invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and

anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has

continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of

Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it

discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not

believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived,

but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of

horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to

decide the issue.

 

I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of

mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or

tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these

tables by rote in my school days ?

 

You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of

the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been

mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not

my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not

try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the

hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I

provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in

youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided

with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule.

 

The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is

supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute.

 

You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any

reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to

back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy.

Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was

known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called

ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of

the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus.

Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

 

If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you.

But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to

test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I

still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to

others. It is only me who has a special treatment.

 

If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said,

things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to

provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so

that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and

forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with

me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated

into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit

unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient

texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide.

But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS,

IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening

properly, how will ever know my

 

views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting

all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if

you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message,

who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand.

I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct

abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I

believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so.

Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing,

but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss

his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr

Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was

propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr

Chandrahari has every right

 

to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for

shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started

abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair

debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

 

When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on

tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I

start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

 

If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of

Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if

you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you.

You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to

listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before

answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari,

if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the

benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such

talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in

these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I

belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in

English literature , but

 

renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things

which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all,

you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message

to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other

things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting

mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start

discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am

forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the

discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither

for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please

forget the past and start anew.

 

You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without

touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance

can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are

really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective

matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I

tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that

topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not

omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can

substantiate.

 

Good Wishes,

 

-VJ

 

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

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

 

 

 

Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

 

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

Vinayji,

 

1)

 

You said

 

Quote

 

How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

Unquote

 

I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and

physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any

astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini.

Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and

when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary

Saurpaksha.

 

2)

 

You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round

the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour

the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical

and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you

want others to believe in what you say.

 

3)

 

I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married

person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical

intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into

Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining

unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and

follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and

you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours.

 

4)

 

Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the

presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text.

Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it

just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a

planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi

cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the

planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from

the planet.

 

5)

 

Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference

to back your statement.

 

6)

 

You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that

you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance "

 

7)

 

You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think

that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say

that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go

and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in

independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will

go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character

assassination.

 

I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail

to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul

words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you

think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your

maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed?

 

-SKB

 

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

TO ALL :

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance

with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting

with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not

want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I

believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently

sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

<<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is

Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional

texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts,

and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these

terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of

sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy

deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this

noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due

to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world

that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have

nothing in common with

 

Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which

we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be

seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while

Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times

! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed

Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean

positions of planets are concerned...

 

Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern

astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent

for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th

century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient

Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha.

Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic

(Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found

to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any

zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at

sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious

assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

 

means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of

precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession

), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The

latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of

knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by

almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of

Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by

physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not

found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a

non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of

its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence

or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only

proof. " >>>>

 

---

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location

of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas

but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have

spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time

of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra

(physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

 

Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has

mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities

can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical

astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability.

I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my

computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since

early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and

departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead

of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is

certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts

me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not

travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find

new excuses to malign me.

 

His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. " <<<<

 

He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari,

although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris

at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a

distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a

celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his

fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in

his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife

and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's

offer there Kaama was merely a

 

means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to

Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita.

Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal

sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If

Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong

definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single

instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company

and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize

a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a

real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget

that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food

habits are giving rise to a

 

lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and

Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to

suit his personal habits.

 

His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He

never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the

only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene)

remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you

cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " ,

'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be

conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are

his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words

in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and

then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to

spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science (

cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

 

com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by

CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or

not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group

Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your

unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel

suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me,

not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance

of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying

any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is

a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the

practical methods of

 

Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects

himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged

him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers

started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages.

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what

Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his

last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in

vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss

the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked

Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started

abusing me.

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators

were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning,

but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started

challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went

into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in

private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing

him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

the answers).

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here

just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman

and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my

Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is

Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I

removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not

be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world

is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not

discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist

belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the

truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology.

I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to

deny.

 

I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why

he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That

cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta.

Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy,

the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of

Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude

or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test

the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific "

spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before

testing it.

 

I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA

because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these

persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does

not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice.

Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an

obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses.

 

-VJ

 

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

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy

a wrote:

 

>

 

> Vinayji,

 

>

 

> 1)

 

> You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the

actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess?

Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical

planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting

Rohini.

 

>

 

> 2)

 

> You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a

madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like

Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you

want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the

wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic

 

>

 

> 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is

un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces

its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I

only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the

substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a

symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking

wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit

of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before

fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas

due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

 

>

 

> 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use?

Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of

false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya

he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math

were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

 

>

 

> 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website

but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to

delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play

such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is

your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such

attitude may not be worth reading.

 

>

 

> 6)

 

> I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at

one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each

other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including

Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a

single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning.

But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims.

In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning

to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word

you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself

made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously.

 

>

 

> -SKB

 

>

 

>

 

> --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

>

 

>

 

> Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Bhaskar Jee,

 

>

 

> You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language.

 

>

 

> You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid

arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she

understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

 

>

 

> Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical

observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology

was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and

does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative

attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to

offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is

taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to

prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of

cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free

and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never

wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything

about my methods and often wanted to know

 

> everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional

astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart.

I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from

astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh

who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without

any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their

and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

 

>

 

> I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are

populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found

to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software.

Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no

hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the

misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology

which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software,

it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

 

>

 

> You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ?

Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... "

 

>

 

> I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all

other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing

my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you

to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my

works if you find it not worth testing and reading.

 

>

 

> You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I

never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth

is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I

waste my time over you ??

 

>

 

> I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum

last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it

to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two

persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading

nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted

my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a

lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion.

Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the

original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like

panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra

chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil

Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are

also adamant on wasting my and

 

your

 

> time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the

moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

 

>

 

> -VJ

 

>

 

> ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

 

>

 

> Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

 

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> Dear Vinay jee,

 

>

 

> Ha Ha. That was a good one.

 

>

 

> See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture

and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this

differences between us, which i did not want.

 

>

 

> Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

 

>

 

> I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not

being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in

front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left

back doors.

 

>

 

> See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i

still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good

knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever

encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone

abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence

of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??).

 

>

 

> The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in

thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or

proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send

me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground.

 

>

 

> Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a

single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to

impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your

claims which amount to nought.

 

>

 

> I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that

by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are

not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned

which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and

nights spent in reading and analysing.

 

>

 

> I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you

are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to

marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been

showed the door, I am sorry to say.

 

>

 

> Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the

Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

 

>

 

> regards/Bhaskar.

 

>

 

> , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

> >

 

> > Bhaskar Jee,

 

> >

 

> > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor,

otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have

been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule

the roost on the Forums. "

 

> >

 

> > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you,

nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such

mindless messages as posted by you recently.

 

> >

 

> > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing

conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say

" I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. "

 

> >

 

> > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are

trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was

successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had

viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would

have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me :

 

> >

 

> > "

 

> >

 

> > praNaam sir,

 

> >

 

> > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

 

> > that already and u dont need any confirmation

 

> > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

 

> > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative

 

> > the last time(about fonts and vb

 

> > errors).

 

> >

 

> > and its accurate till prana

 

> > dashas.

 

> > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

 

> > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

 

> > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

 

> > normally.

 

> >

 

> > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

 

> > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

 

> > another time

 

> > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

 

> > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

 

> >

 

> > -VJ

 

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

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

 

> >

 

> > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

 

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> >

 

> >

 

> >

 

> > Dear Vinay ji,

 

> >

 

> > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

 

> >

 

> > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who

 

> > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot

 

> > prove that you know " something " ?

 

> >

 

> > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the

 

> > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

 

> >

 

> > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from

 

> > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who

 

> > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken

 

> > glass pieces in his kitty.

 

> >

 

> > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or

 

> > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ?

 

> > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a

 

> > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

 

> >

 

> > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then

 

> > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian

 

> > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ?

 

> > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been

 

> > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

 

> >

 

> > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken

 

> > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have

 

> > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove

 

> > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front

 

> > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly

 

> > but just rattling in the air.

 

> >

 

> > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

 

> >

 

> > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

 

> >

 

> > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just

 

> > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could

 

> > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

 

> >

 

> > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have

 

> > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present

 

> > set up of mind.

 

> >

 

> > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started

 

> > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

 

> >

 

> > best wishes,

 

> >

 

> > Bhaskar.

 

> >

 

> > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

> > >

 

> > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you.

 

> > I have yet to see

 

> > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You

 

> > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

 

> > >

 

> > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears

 

> > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has

 

> > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made

 

> > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one

 

> > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya

 

> > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I

 

> > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I

 

> > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of

 

> > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on

 

> > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to

 

> > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free

 

> > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are

 

> > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to

 

> > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

 

> > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free

 

> > softwares in future.

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > -VJ

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

> > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

 

> > >

 

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

 

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > >

 

> > > The Dating of Ramayana

 

> > >

 

> > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that

 

> > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place,

 

> > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge

 

> > made over Lanka is to be believed.

 

> > >

 

> > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge

 

> > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed

 

> > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this

 

> > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan

 

> > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this

 

> > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole

 

> > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

 

> > >

 

> > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to

 

> > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ?

 

> > >

 

> > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

 

> > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to

 

> > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

 

> > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

 

> > >

 

> > & gt%

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Vinayji,

 

1)

Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your Saurapaksha

and drokpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your imaginary outpourings.

 

2)

Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the group to

show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

 

-SKB

 

 

--- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

 

Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sunilji,

 

You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I answer

your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt astrological

discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in internet where you can

contribute ; this topic has no relation to astrology. You are lying that you

found the verse yourself , I sent the verse to you. Moreover, I never

misinterpreted the verse, I gave the literal translation while you believe your

fancuful meanings to be the real translation. there is no mention of stormy

conditions in that verse. literal translation and interpretation are different

things. The point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta

as mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument over

your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong interpretation.

 

 

 

Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your ignorance of

Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western commentators, as well as of

your habit of producing false arguments with a view to prove false things.

Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon have great difference with Sun and Moon

of physical astronomy, but Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with

that of physical astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and

Moon. Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, which

is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical period, ie, to

relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no much difference

between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical eclipses. i have used

the term " no much difference " while you use therm " accurately " which is a lie.

But even if eclipses have no much difference, absolute position of true Sun or

true Moon have great

 

differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at the rate of

360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is nearly 1.5 degrees

of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon and physical (Drikpakshiya)

Moon. Third source is difference between the length of Suryasiddhantic solar

year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; tropical year has less difference).

 

 

 

You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical and sensory

things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I always tried to hold

information, and simply answered your false and motivated charges on me. If

Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude he must talk about Drikpakshiya and

not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and do noy feel any need to substantiate that

physical reality is the ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing

merely in the physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

persons, how can I ?

 

 

 

My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish mails. I

will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe that astrological

concepts must be proven astrologically and not physically. although I do not

deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, I am giving you an instance of what

is astrological proof.

 

 

 

Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on the basis

of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare the phalita results

of both horoscopes along the principles of Paraashara. You will find that

Saurapakshiya predictions conform to actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya

predictions bear no such relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of

cases. I wasted decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss Saurapaksha

without any astrological investigation. You have no interest in astrological

investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta is an astrological

treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, which can be proven from

the text itself, but it is better to undertake an unbiased comparison of

Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to arrive at any conclusive finding.

But you are too biased to be interested

 

in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my precious time.

If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I will retract all my

statements against you and will apologize for using harsh words, but if you are

intent upon disrupting astrological discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I

will use harsher words for you in future, because an astrological forum should

have no place for non-astrological nonsense.

 

 

 

-VJ

 

 

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @>

 

 

 

Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

 

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

Vinayji,

 

 

 

I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to

west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet

Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is

Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one

of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . When I asked you the reference as to where

you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give

and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying

that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in

front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the

Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it . That

day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the eastward

moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in

the reverse

 

direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one

Saptasindhu.

 

 

 

When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses

accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that.

 

 

 

I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any

reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the

eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical

phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

 

 

Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

 

 

 

Sunil ji,

 

 

 

I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But

you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted

traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my

invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and

anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has

continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of

Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it

discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not

believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived,

but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of

horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to

decide the issue.

 

 

 

I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of

mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or

tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these

tables by rote in my school days ?

 

 

 

You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of

the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been

mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not

my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not

try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the

hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I

provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in

youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided

with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule.

 

 

 

The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is

supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute.

 

 

 

You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any

reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to

back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy.

Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was

known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called

ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of

the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus.

Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

 

 

 

If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you.

But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to

test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I

still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to

others. It is only me who has a special treatment.

 

 

 

If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said,

things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to

provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so

that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and

forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with

me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated

into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit

unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient

texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide.

But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS,

IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening

properly, how will ever know my

 

 

 

views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting

all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if

you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message,

who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand.

I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct

abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I

believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so.

Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing,

but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss

his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr

Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was

propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr

Chandrahari has every right

 

 

 

to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for

shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started

abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair

debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

 

 

 

When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on

tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I

start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

 

 

 

If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of

Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if

you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you.

You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to

listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before

answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari,

if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the

benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such

talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in

these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I

belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in

English literature , but

 

 

 

renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things

which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all,

you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message

to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other

things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting

mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start

discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am

forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the

discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither

for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please

forget the past and start anew.

 

 

 

You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without

touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance

can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are

really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective

matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I

tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that

topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not

omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can

substantiate.

 

 

 

Good Wishes,

 

 

 

-VJ

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

 

 

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

 

 

Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

 

 

 

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

Vinayji,

 

 

 

1)

 

 

 

You said

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

 

 

Unquote

 

 

 

I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and

physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any

astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini.

Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and

when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary

Saurpaksha.

 

 

 

2)

 

 

 

You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round

the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour

the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical

and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you

want others to believe in what you say.

 

 

 

3)

 

 

 

I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married

person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical

intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into

Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining

unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and

follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and

you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours.

 

 

 

4)

 

 

 

Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the

presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text.

Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it

just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a

planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi

cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the

planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from

the planet.

 

 

 

5)

 

 

 

Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference

to back your statement.

 

 

 

6)

 

 

 

You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that

you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance "

 

 

 

7)

 

 

 

You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think

that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say

that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go

and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in

independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will

go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character

assassination.

 

 

 

I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail

to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul

words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you

think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your

maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed?

 

 

 

-SKB

 

 

 

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

 

 

vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

 

 

Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

 

 

TO ALL :

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance

with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting

with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not

want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I

believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently

sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

 

 

<<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is

Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional

texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts,

and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these

terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of

sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy

deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this

noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due

to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world

that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have

nothing in common with

 

 

 

Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which

we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be

seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while

Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times

! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed

Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean

positions of planets are concerned...

 

 

 

Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern

astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent

for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th

century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient

Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha.

Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic

(Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found

to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any

zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at

sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious

assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

 

 

 

means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

 

 

The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of

precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession

), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The

latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of

knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by

almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of

Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by

physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not

found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a

non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

 

 

We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of

its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence

or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only

proof. " >>>>

 

 

 

---

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location

of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas

but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have

spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time

of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra

(physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

 

 

 

Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has

mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities

can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical

astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

 

 

His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability.

I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my

computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since

early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and

departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead

of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is

certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts

me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not

travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find

new excuses to malign me.

 

 

 

His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. " <<<<

 

 

 

He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari,

although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris

at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a

distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a

celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his

fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in

his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife

and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's

offer there Kaama was merely a

 

 

 

means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to

Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita.

Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal

sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If

Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong

definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single

instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company

and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize

a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a

real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget

that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food

habits are giving rise to a

 

 

 

lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and

Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to

suit his personal habits.

 

 

 

His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He

never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the

only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene)

remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you

cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " ,

'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be

conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are

his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words

in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and

then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to

spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science (

cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

 

 

 

com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by

CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or

not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group

Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your

unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel

suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me,

not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance

of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying

any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is

a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the

practical methods of

 

 

 

Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects

himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged

him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers

started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages.

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what

Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his

last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in

vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss

the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked

Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started

abusing me.

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators

were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning,

but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started

challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went

into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in

private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing

him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

the answers).

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here

just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman

and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my

Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is

Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I

removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not

be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

 

 

A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world

is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not

discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist

belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the

truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology.

I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to

deny.

 

 

 

I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why

he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That

cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta.

Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy,

the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of

Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude

or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test

the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific "

spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before

testing it.

 

 

 

I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA

because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these

persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does

not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice.

Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an

obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses.

 

 

 

-VJ

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy

a wrote:

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Vinayji,

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 1)

 

 

 

> You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the

actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess?

Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical

planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting

Rohini.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 2)

 

 

 

> You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a

madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like

Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you

want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the

wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is

un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces

its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I

only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the

substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a

symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking

wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit

of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before

fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas

due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use?

Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of

false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya

he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math

were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website

but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to

delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play

such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is

your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such

attitude may not be worth reading.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 6)

 

 

 

> I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at

one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each

other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including

Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a

single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning.

But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims.

In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning

to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word

you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself

made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> -SKB

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

 

 

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Bhaskar Jee,

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid

arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she

understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical

observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology

was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and

does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative

attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to

offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is

taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to

prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of

cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free

and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never

wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything

about my methods and often wanted to know

 

 

 

> everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional

astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart.

I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from

astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh

who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without

any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their

and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are

populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found

to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software.

Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no

hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the

misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology

which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software,

it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

except that by using your software we will become very good ast

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Vinayji,

 

1)

Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your Saurapaksha

and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your imaginary outpourings.

 

2)

Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the group to

show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

 

-SKB

 

 

--- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

 

Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sunilji,

 

You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I answer

your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt astrological

discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in internet where you can

contribute ; this topic has no relation to astrology. You are lying that you

found the verse yourself , I sent the verse to you. Moreover, I never

misinterpreted the verse, I gave the literal translation while you believe your

fancuful meanings to be the real translation. there is no mention of stormy

conditions in that verse. literal translation and interpretation are different

things. The point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta

as mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument over

your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong interpretation.

 

 

 

Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your ignorance of

Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western commentators, as well as of

your habit of producing false arguments with a view to prove false things.

Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon have great difference with Sun and Moon

of physical astronomy, but Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with

that of physical astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and

Moon. Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, which

is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical period, ie, to

relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no much difference

between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical eclipses. i have used

the term " no much difference " while you use therm " accurately " which is a lie.

But even if eclipses have no much difference, absolute position of true Sun or

true Moon have great

 

differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at the rate of

360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is nearly 1.5 degrees

of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon and physical (Drikpakshiya)

Moon. Third source is difference between the length of Suryasiddhantic solar

year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; tropical year has less difference).

 

 

 

You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical and sensory

things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I always tried to hold

information, and simply answered your false and motivated charges on me. If

Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude he must talk about Drikpakshiya and

not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and do noy feel any need to substantiate that

physical reality is the ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing

merely in the physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

persons, how can I ?

 

 

 

My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish mails. I

will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe that astrological

concepts must be proven astrologically and not physically. although I do not

deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, I am giving you an instance of what

is astrological proof.

 

 

 

Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on the basis

of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare the phalita results

of both horoscopes along the principles of Paraashara. You will find that

Saurapakshiya predictions conform to actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya

predictions bear no such relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of

cases. I wasted decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss Saurapaksha

without any astrological investigation. You have no interest in astrological

investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta is an astrological

treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, which can be proven from

the text itself, but it is better to undertake an unbiased comparison of

Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to arrive at any conclusive finding.

But you are too biased to be interested

 

in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my precious time.

If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I will retract all my

statements against you and will apologize for using harsh words, but if you are

intent upon disrupting astrological discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I

will use harsher words for you in future, because an astrological forum should

have no place for non-astrological nonsense.

 

 

 

-VJ

 

 

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @>

 

 

 

Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

 

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

Vinayji,

 

 

 

I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to

west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet

Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is

Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one

of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . When I asked you the reference as to where

you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give

and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying

that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in

front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the

Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it . That

day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the eastward

moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in

the reverse

 

direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one

Saptasindhu.

 

 

 

When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses

accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that.

 

 

 

I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any

reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the

eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical

phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

 

 

Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

 

 

 

Sunil ji,

 

 

 

I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But

you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted

traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my

invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and

anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has

continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of

Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it

discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not

believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived,

but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of

horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to

decide the issue.

 

 

 

I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of

mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or

tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these

tables by rote in my school days ?

 

 

 

You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of

the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been

mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not

my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not

try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the

hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I

provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in

youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided

with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule.

 

 

 

The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is

supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute.

 

 

 

You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any

reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to

back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy.

Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was

known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called

ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of

the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus.

Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

 

 

 

If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you.

But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to

test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I

still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to

others. It is only me who has a special treatment.

 

 

 

If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said,

things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to

provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so

that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and

forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with

me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated

into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit

unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient

texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide.

But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS,

IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening

properly, how will ever know my

 

 

 

views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting

all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if

you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message,

who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand.

I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct

abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I

believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so.

Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing,

but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss

his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr

Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was

propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr

Chandrahari has every right

 

 

 

to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for

shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started

abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair

debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

 

 

 

When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on

tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I

start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

 

 

 

If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of

Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if

you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you.

You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to

listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before

answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari,

if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the

benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such

talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in

these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I

belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in

English literature , but

 

 

 

renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things

which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all,

you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message

to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other

things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting

mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start

discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am

forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the

discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither

for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please

forget the past and start anew.

 

 

 

You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without

touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance

can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are

really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective

matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I

tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that

topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not

omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can

substantiate.

 

 

 

Good Wishes,

 

 

 

-VJ

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

 

 

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

 

 

Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

 

 

 

Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

Vinayji,

 

 

 

1)

 

 

 

You said

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

 

 

Unquote

 

 

 

I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and

physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any

astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini.

Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and

when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary

Saurpaksha.

 

 

 

2)

 

 

 

You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round

the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour

the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical

and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you

want others to believe in what you say.

 

 

 

3)

 

 

 

I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married

person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical

intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into

Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining

unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and

follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and

you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours.

 

 

 

4)

 

 

 

Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the

presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text.

Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it

just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a

planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi

cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the

planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from

the planet.

 

 

 

5)

 

 

 

Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference

to back your statement.

 

 

 

6)

 

 

 

You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that

you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance "

 

 

 

7)

 

 

 

You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think

that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say

that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go

and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in

independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will

go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character

assassination.

 

 

 

I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail

to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul

words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you

think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your

maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed?

 

 

 

-SKB

 

 

 

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

 

 

vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

 

 

Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

 

 

TO ALL :

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance

with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting

with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not

want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I

believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently

sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

 

 

<<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is

Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional

texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts,

and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these

terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of

sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy

deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this

noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due

to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world

that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have

nothing in common with

 

 

 

Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which

we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be

seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while

Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times

! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed

Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean

positions of planets are concerned...

 

 

 

Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern

astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent

for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th

century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient

Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha.

Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic

(Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found

to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any

zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at

sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious

assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

 

 

 

means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

 

 

The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of

precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession

), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The

latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of

knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by

almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of

Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by

physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not

found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a

non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

 

 

We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of

its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence

or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only

proof. " >>>>

 

 

 

---

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location

of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas

but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have

spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time

of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra

(physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

 

 

 

Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has

mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities

can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical

astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

 

 

His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability.

I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my

computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since

early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and

departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead

of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is

certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts

me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not

travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find

new excuses to malign me.

 

 

 

His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. " <<<<

 

 

 

He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari,

although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris

at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a

distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a

celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his

fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in

his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife

and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's

offer there Kaama was merely a

 

 

 

means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to

Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita.

Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal

sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If

Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong

definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single

instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company

and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize

a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a

real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget

that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food

habits are giving rise to a

 

 

 

lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and

Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to

suit his personal habits.

 

 

 

His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He

never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the

only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene)

remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you

cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " ,

'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be

conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are

his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words

in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and

then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to

spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science (

cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

 

 

 

com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr

Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by

CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or

not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group

Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your

unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel

suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me,

not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance

of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying

any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is

a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the

practical methods of

 

 

 

Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects

himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged

him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers

started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages.

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what

Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his

last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in

vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss

the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked

Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started

abusing me.

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators

were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning,

but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started

challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went

into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in

private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing

him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

the answers).

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here

just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman

and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my

Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is

Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I

removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not

be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

 

 

A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world

is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not

discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist

belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the

truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology.

I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to

deny.

 

 

 

I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why

he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That

cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta.

Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy,

the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of

Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude

or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test

the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific "

spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before

testing it.

 

 

 

I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA

because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these

persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does

not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice.

Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an

obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses.

 

 

 

-VJ

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy

a wrote:

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Vinayji,

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 1)

 

 

 

> You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the

actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess?

Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical

planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting

Rohini.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 2)

 

 

 

> You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a

madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like

Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you

want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the

wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and

want a face-saving exit from the topic

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is

un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces

its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I

only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the

substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a

symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking

wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit

of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before

fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas

due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use?

Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of

false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to

get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like

Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were

balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya

he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math

were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website

but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to

delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play

such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is

your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such

attitude may not be worth reading.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> 6)

 

 

 

> I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at

one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each

other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including

Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a

single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning.

But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims.

In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning

to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word

you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself

made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> -SKB

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

 

 

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Bhaskar Jee,

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid

arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she

understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical

observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology

was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and

does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative

attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to

offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is

taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to

prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of

cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free

and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never

wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything

about my methods and often wanted to know

 

 

 

> everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional

astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart.

I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from

astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh

who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without

any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their

and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are

populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found

to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software.

Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no

hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the

misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology

which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software,

it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ?

Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... "

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all

other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing

my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you

to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my

works if you find it not worth testing and reading.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I

never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth

is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I

waste my time over you ??

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum

last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it

to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two

persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading

nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted

my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a

lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion.

Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the

original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like

panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra

chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil

Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are

also adamant on wasting my and

 

 

 

your

 

 

 

> time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the

moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> -VJ

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> ____________ _________ _________ __

 

 

 

> Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

 

 

 

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Dear Vinay jee,

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Ha Ha. That was a good one.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture

and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this

differences between us, which i did not want.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not

being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in

front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left

back doors.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i

still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good

knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever

encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone

abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence

of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??).

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in

thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or

proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send

me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a

single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to

impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your

claims which amount to nought.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that

by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are

not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned

which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and

nights spent in reading and analysing.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you

are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to

marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been

showed the door, I am sorry to say.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the

Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> regards/Bhaskar.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

> , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Bhaskar Jee,

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor,

otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have

been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule

the roost on the Forums. "

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you,

nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such

mindless messages as posted by you recently.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing

conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say

" I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. "

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are

trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was

successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had

viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would

have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me :

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > "

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > praNaam sir,

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

 

 

 

> > that already and u dont need any confirmation

 

 

 

> > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

 

 

 

> > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative

 

 

 

> > the last time(about fonts and vb

 

 

 

> > errors).

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > and its accurate till prana

 

 

 

> > dashas.

 

 

 

> > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

 

 

 

> > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

 

 

 

> > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

 

 

 

> > normally.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

 

 

 

> > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

 

 

 

> > another time

 

 

 

> > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

 

 

 

> > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > -VJ

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

 

 

> > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

 

 

 

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Dear Vinay ji,

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who

 

 

 

> > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot

 

 

 

> > prove that you know " something " ?

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the

 

 

 

> > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from

 

 

 

> > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who

 

 

 

> > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken

 

 

 

> > glass pieces in his kitty.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or

 

 

 

> > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ?

 

 

 

> > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a

 

 

 

> > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then

 

 

 

> > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian

 

 

 

> > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ?

 

 

 

> > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been

 

 

 

> > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken

 

 

 

> > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have

 

 

 

> > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove

 

 

 

> > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front

 

 

 

> > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly

 

 

 

> > but just rattling in the air.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just

 

 

 

> > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could

 

 

 

> > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have

 

 

 

> > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present

 

 

 

> > set up of mind.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started

 

 

 

> > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > best wishes,

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > Bhaskar.

 

 

 

> >

 

 

 

> > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you.

 

 

 

> > I have yet to see

 

 

 

> > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You

 

 

 

> > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears

 

 

 

> > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has

 

 

 

> > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made

 

 

 

> > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one

 

 

 

> > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya

 

 

 

> > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I

 

 

 

> > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I

 

 

 

> > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of

 

 

 

> > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on

 

 

 

> > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to

 

 

 

> > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free

 

 

 

> > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are

 

 

 

> > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to

 

 

 

> > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

 

 

 

> > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free

 

 

 

> > softwares in future.

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > -VJ

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

 

 

> > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

 

 

 

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > The Dating of Ramayana

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that

 

 

 

> > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place,

 

 

 

> > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge

 

 

 

> > made over Lanka is to be believed.

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge

 

 

 

> > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed

 

 

 

> > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this

 

 

 

> > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan

 

 

 

> > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this

 

 

 

> > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole

 

 

 

> > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to

 

 

 

> > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ?

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

 

 

 

> > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to

 

 

 

> > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

 

 

 

> > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

 

 

 

> > >

 

 

 

> > & gt%

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

To ALL :

 

Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here

that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show

concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has

made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out

of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A

New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

(http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecastin\

g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made

him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore)

that I was a cheat ?

 

To Sunil ji :

 

You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never

did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me.

 

Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail

convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other

things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of

your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet

Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without

providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the

antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make

discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me

to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

field of interest, I can only be amused.

 

Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will

enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

Siddhaantatattvaviveka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets

are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord

Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so

?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements.

Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and

there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a

tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

results.

 

With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me,

you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want

to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a

liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about

Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the

verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward

flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and

instead have already started abusing me after getting this information.

This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to

science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and

makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned

institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever

produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

 

In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again

and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

astrological credentials (

http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s_Report%3B_%26_my_Paper_acc\

epted_by_CAOS%2C_IISc

http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Credentials

http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Vinay_Jha

http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting\

?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my

paper by CAOS, IISc.

 

Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of

evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

veracity and started attacking me.

 

Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works,

you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss

the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly

fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing

fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it

also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone.

Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me

personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never

serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I

wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of

my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now

you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of

what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas

of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on

one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides

performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life

gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ??

Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of

interest.

 

Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to

tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you

again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want

to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption

of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

forums.

 

Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in

my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my

supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie,

and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be

compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have

an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

 

Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it

are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get

anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real

giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

acknowledge.

 

Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your

own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from

the root).

 

-VJ

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

, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Vinayji,

>

> 1)

> Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your

Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

imaginary outpourings.

>

> 2)

> Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the

group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

>

> -SKB

>

>

> --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16 wrote:

>

> Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

Sunilji,

>

> You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I

answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt

astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the

verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the

real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The

point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as

mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument

over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong

interpretation.

>

>

>

> Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with

a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical

astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon.

Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical

period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no

much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical

eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm

" accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

>

> differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at

the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is

nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon

and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the

length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ;

tropical year has less difference).

>

>

>

> You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical

and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I

always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude

he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and

do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

persons, how can I ?

>

>

>

> My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish

mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe

that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion,

I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

>

>

>

> Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on

the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare

the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest

in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta

is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy,

which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake

an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to

arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

interested

>

> in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I

will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using

harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for

you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for

non-astrological nonsense.

>

>

>

> -VJ

>

>

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @>

>

>

>

> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

>

> Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

>

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

>

>

> Vinayji,

>

>

>

> I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from

east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how

it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of

Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) .

When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you

have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are

going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of

you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the

Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it

.. That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy

that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed

here) appeared to move in the reverse

>

> direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

than one Saptasindhu.

>

>

>

> When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the

eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

just ignored that.

>

>

>

> I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not

given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he

referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

imaginary locations.

>

>

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

>

>

> --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

>

>

>

> Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

>

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

>

>

> Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

>

>

>

> Sunil ji,

>

>

>

> I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your

mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and

two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But

with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened

and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof

of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which

is the only proper way to decide the issue.

>

>

>

> I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of

mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical

or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

>

>

>

> You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not

read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse

because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided.

But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided

the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other

person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and

was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule.

>

>

>

> The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It

is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of

repute.

>

>

>

> You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did

not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept

of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never

called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation

or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was

therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

>

>

>

> If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can

show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time,

I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I

gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

treatment.

>

>

>

> If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I

said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am

ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over

personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to

behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views

are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is

neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here

in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me.

And without listening properly, how will ever know my

>

>

>

> views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew

forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give

you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters,

including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to

supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion

of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till

his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an

honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested

him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed.

Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his

ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that

Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta

and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

>

>

>

> to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for

shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh

started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a

free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

>

>

>

> When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted

to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

>

>

>

> If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

" tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting

the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering.

There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but

I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and

there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling

you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature ,

but

>

>

>

> renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It

is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or

stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds,

in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am

forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize

me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused

me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

>

>

>

> You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about

Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there

is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing

you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain

to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am

not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and

can substantiate.

>

>

>

> Good Wishes,

>

>

>

> -VJ

>

>

>

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

>

>

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

>

>

>

> Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

>

>

>

> Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

>

>

>

> Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

>

>

> Vinayji,

>

>

>

> 1)

>

>

>

> You said

>

>

>

> Quote

>

>

>

> How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

" torment " Rohini ?

>

>

>

> Unquote

>

>

>

> I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both

are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when

he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

>

>

>

> 2)

>

>

>

> You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets

invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that

it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in

what you say.

>

>

>

> 3)

>

>

>

> I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a

married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have

insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required

rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to

believe in these claims of yours.

>

>

>

> 4)

>

>

>

> Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets

and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any

ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you

want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you

so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body

until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

>

>

>

> 5)

>

>

>

> Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any

reference to back your statement.

>

>

>

> 6)

>

>

>

> You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you

said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good

riddance "

>

>

>

> 7)

>

>

>

> You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking.

you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right

or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to

you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors

depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong

impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

>

>

>

> I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in

your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I

have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in

Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are

doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

unopposed?

>

>

>

> -SKB

>

>

>

> --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

>

>

>

> vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

>

>

>

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

>

>

>

> TO ALL :

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an

alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for

useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another

user may be useful in making some important points clear :

>

>

>

> <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha,

other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language

dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material

or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this

world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of

deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based

upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world.

Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away

from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets.

But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

>

>

>

> Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead

thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is

149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million

Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates

once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In

early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

planets are concerned...

>

>

>

> Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has

no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit

word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing

modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern

method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in

285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that

both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no

visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based

upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

>

>

>

> means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

>

>

>

> The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no

connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the

time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in

Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It

was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is

not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

>

>

>

> We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the

proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

>

>

>

> ---

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that

the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to

possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location)

and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

>

>

>

> Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and

everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

>

>

>

> His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational

ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog

tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where

my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a

face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in

my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

>

>

>

> His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient

times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and

only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

>

>

>

> He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner

in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa

said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said

Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no

episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief

reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war.

Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring,

but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was

merely a

>

>

>

> means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real

sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say

so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a

mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika

foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to

eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than

cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat,

fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a

>

>

>

> lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should

not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

>

>

>

> His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by

him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I

know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often

abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like

" dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from

the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately

false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired

by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at

Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

>

>

>

> com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS,

IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me.

He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in

the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. "

These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used

such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial

mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me,

denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that

Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just

because I know the practical methods of

>

>

>

> Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely

projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him,

and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the

field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me

obscene messages.

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr

Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly

instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a

shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me.

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the

moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good

in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of

no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in

Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance

to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the

answers).

>

>

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had

he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another

is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book

from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

>

>

>

> A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which

modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only

those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these

rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

>

>

>

> I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of

me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as

based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic

astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will

continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables

originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

" scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

reject a thing before testing it.

>

>

>

> I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I

left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and

abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a

bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I

have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something

useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by

force, or by means of abuses.

>

>

>

> -VJ

>

>

>

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

>

>

>

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Vinayji,

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > 1)

>

>

>

> > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from

the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which

you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata

war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > 2)

>

>

>

> > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power

like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing

abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)?

Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

from the topic

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that

Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra

one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra

recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the

alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop.

However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas

(ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO

before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun

of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I

use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty

tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he

became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said

that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get

to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete

it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced

that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

reading.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > 6)

>

>

>

> > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in

the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims.

I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we

respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All

other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I

also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship

remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used

bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had

to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but

yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

ignominiously.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > -SKB

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

>

>

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Bhaskar Jee,

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

language.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong

solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which

weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on

revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India

really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change.

She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be

my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never

allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a

discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were

never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know

>

>

>

> > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher.

We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I

do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of

any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined

Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these

forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy

which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to

Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based

on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But

if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to

give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

impudence... "

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > I am a software developer who used principles different from those

used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my

work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my

software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

worth testing and reading.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to

you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about

my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my

software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my

time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on

Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong

brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion.

Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts

are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra,

sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed.

Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started

using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

>

>

>

> your

>

>

>

> > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or

ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > -VJ

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

>

>

> > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

>

>

>

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Dear Vinay jee,

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian

culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that

you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of

what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

played with you, till you left back doors.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant,

but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg

has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom

i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements

as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself (

??).

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same,

in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous,

impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which

these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

planted firmly on the ground.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and

you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the

torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers

? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and

not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

analysing.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually

what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself

to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups

you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > regards/Bhaskar.

>

>

>

> >

>

>

>

> > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

wrote:

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Bhaskar Jee,

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support

you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons

like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as

you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1

minute. "

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use

it. Read a recent email to me :

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > "

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > praNaam sir,

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

>

>

>

> > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

>

>

>

> > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

>

>

>

> > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative

>

>

>

> > > the last time(about fonts and vb

>

>

>

> > > errors).

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > and its accurate till prana

>

>

>

> > > dashas.

>

>

>

> > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

>

>

>

> > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

>

>

>

> > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

>

>

>

> > > normally.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

>

>

>

> > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

>

>

>

> > > another time

>

>

>

> > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

>

>

>

> > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > -VJ

>

>

>

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

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

>

>

> > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

>

>

>

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Dear Vinay ji,

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

persons who

>

>

>

> > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

cannot

>

>

>

> > > prove that you know " something " ?

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost

on the

>

>

>

> > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from

>

>

>

> > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean

who

>

>

>

> > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just

broken

>

>

>

> > > glass pieces in his kitty.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention

or

>

>

>

> > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on

them ?

>

>

>

> > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought

was a

>

>

>

> > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself

then

>

>

>

> > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian

>

>

>

> > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this

Group ?

>

>

>

> > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have

been

>

>

>

> > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the

broken

>

>

>

> > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none

have

>

>

>

> > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

prove

>

>

>

> > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in

front

>

>

>

> > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

convincingly

>

>

>

> > > but just rattling in the air.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because

I just

>

>

>

> > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I

could

>

>

>

> > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have

>

>

>

> > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

present

>

>

>

> > > set up of mind.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started

>

>

>

> > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > best wishes,

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > Bhaskar.

>

>

>

> > >

>

>

>

> > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

....> wrote:

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is

for you.

>

>

>

> > > I have yet to see

>

>

>

> > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics.

You

>

>

>

> > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he

appears

>

>

>

> > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates.

He has

>

>

>

> > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I

made

>

>

>

> > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and

one

>

>

>

> > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

Bhattacharya

>

>

>

> > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers.

I

>

>

>

> > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet.

When I

>

>

>

> > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

Astrology of

>

>

>

> > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

discussion on

>

>

>

> > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need

to

>

>

>

> > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free

>

>

>

> > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and

are

>

>

>

> > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators

to

>

>

>

> > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

>

>

>

> > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my

free

>

>

>

> > > softwares in future.

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > -VJ

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

>

>

> > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

>

>

>

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > The Dating of Ramayana

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here,

that

>

>

>

> > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

place,

>

>

>

> > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the

bridge

>

>

>

> > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

bridge

>

>

>

> > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

believed

>

>

>

> > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time

this

>

>

>

> > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the

Ramayan

>

>

>

> > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that

this

>

>

>

> > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the

whole

>

>

>

> > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

this to

>

>

>

> > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ?

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

>

>

>

> > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now

have to

>

>

>

> > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

>

>

>

> > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

>

>

>

> > > >

>

>

>

> > > & gt%

>

>

>

>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear all.

 

1)

In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha.

I shall not insist on that hereafter.

2)

Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move

away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti

or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also

have taught Mayasura.

3)

Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling

that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the

date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have

frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

about it with proof.

4)

In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle

of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to

give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without

establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper

on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25

August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year

periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point)

could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer

worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to

its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles.

But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way

his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter

cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the

newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine

truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal

attack on him.

 

5)

Vinayji says

 

Quote

 

You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you

will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after getting this information.

 

Unquote

 

Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails

in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

playing tricks with him.

6)

He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others

do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this

he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be

accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability

to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to

discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran

in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

7)

Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that

I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that

Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

given in his own websites.

8)

Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to

assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not

claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to

question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot

call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything

from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a

verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of

the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that

verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession

is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned that

astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji

did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested

against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting

against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may

know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in

interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his

past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic

but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if

necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have

devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the

efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his

energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish

shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I

think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in

astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

 

Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he

very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just

a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am

not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert that

myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution

so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison.

I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity

to do so, for which I am thankful to them.However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never lie?

 

Regards nevertheless,

Sunil. Bhattacharjya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Sunil bhai/Dada,

 

I do not know your age but you sound older than me ...

 

Why is this Vinayji becoming so important to you? Each point that you shared

with this forum of thousands of us ants -- had a reference to Vinayji.

 

Who is this " Vinayji " who claims so much of your attention and energy and why

should you think he should ours as well?

 

At least in the post that I responded to?

 

Rohiniranjan

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Dear all.

>

>

>

> 1)

>

> In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

> reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha.

> I shall not insist on that hereafter.

>

> 2)

>

> Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

> has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

> though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move

> away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti

> or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

> Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also

> have taught Mayasura.

>

> 3)

>

> Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling

> that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the

> date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have

> frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

> knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

> about it with proof.

>

> 4)

>

> In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle

> of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to

> give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta  without

> establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

> appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

> Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and  there is already a paper

> on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

> published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25

> August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year

> periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

> cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point)

> could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer

> worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to

> its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles.

> But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way

> his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter

> cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our  questioning the

> newness in his work.  He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine

> truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal

> attack on him.

>

>

>

> 5)

>

> Vinayji says

>

>

>

> Quote

>

>

>

> You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you

> will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

> source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after

getting this information.

>

>

>

> Unquote

>

>

>

> Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails

> in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

> flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

> playing tricks with him.

>

> 6)

>

> He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others

> do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

> does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this

> he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore  what he says must be

> accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability

> to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

> vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

> normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to

> discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran

> in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

>

> 7)

>

> Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that

> I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that

> Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

> Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

> given  in his own websites.

>

> 8)

>

> Vinayji questioned as to  what I contributed in astrology. I want to

> assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

> questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not

> claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to

> question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

> misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot

> call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

> astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything

> from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

> student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a

> verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of

> the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that

> verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

> Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession

> is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

> ancient times in India  though he himself said that Manu mentioned that

> astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

> Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

> temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji

> did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested

> against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting

> against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

> There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may

> know astrology but  he must accept the human limitations in

> interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

> astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

> genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his

> past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

> present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic

> but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

> towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

> change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

> counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

> approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if

> necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

> people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have

> devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

> some of my gullible brothers and sisters  by misinterpreting the

> efficacy and the purpose of astrology.  Kaulji should channelise his

> energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish

> shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

> condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar.   I

> think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in

> astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

> least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

> claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

>

>

>

> Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he

> very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just

> a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am

> not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert

that

> myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution

> so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

> Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison.

> I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity

> to do so, for which I am thankful to them.

>

> However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any

contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in

peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of

repute and  presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical

seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this

sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never

lie?

>

>

>

> Regards nevertheless,

>

>

> Sunil. Bhattacharjya.

>

> --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

>

> vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM

>

>

>

>

>

>

To ALL :

>

>

>

> Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here

>

> that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show

>

> concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

>

> comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

>

> deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has

>

> made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

>

> writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out

>

> of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A

>

> New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

>

> (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast in\

>

> g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made

>

> him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore)

>

> that I was a cheat ?

>

>

>

> To Sunil ji :

>

>

>

> You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never

>

> did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me.

>

>

>

> Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail

>

> convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other

>

> things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of

>

> your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

>

> without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet

>

> Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without

>

> providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

>

> record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the

>

> antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make

>

> discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me

>

> to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

>

> field of interest, I can only be amused.

>

>

>

> Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

>

> sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

>

> Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will

>

> enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

>

> Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

>

> Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets

>

> are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

>

> lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord

>

> Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so

>

> ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

>

> blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements.

>

> Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and

>

> there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a

>

> tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

>

> results.

>

>

>

> With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me,

>

> you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want

>

> to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a

>

> liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about

>

> Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

>

> proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

>

> misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the

>

> verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward

>

> flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

>

> without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and

>

> instead have already started abusing me after getting this information.

>

> This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to

>

> science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and

>

> makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned

>

> institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever

>

> produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

>

>

>

> In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again

>

> and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

>

> astrological credentials (

>

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_

acc\

>

> epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

>

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials

>

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha

>

> http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\

>

> ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my

>

> paper by CAOS, IISc.

>

>

>

> Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of

>

> evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

>

> veracity and started attacking me.

>

>

>

> Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works,

>

> you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

>

> approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

>

> explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss

>

> the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly

>

> fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing

>

> fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it

>

> also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone.

>

> Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me

>

> personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

>

> Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

>

> mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

>

> benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

>

> brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never

>

> serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I

>

> wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of

>

> my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now

>

> you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

>

> topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of

>

> what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas

>

> of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on

>

> one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides

>

> performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life

>

> gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ??

>

> Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

>

> Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

>

> Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of

>

> interest.

>

>

>

> Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to

>

> tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

>

> disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you

>

> again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

>

> benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want

>

> to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption

>

> of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

>

> forums.

>

>

>

> Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in

>

> my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my

>

> supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie,

>

> and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be

>

> compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

>

> words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have

>

> an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

>

>

>

> Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

>

> degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it

>

> are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get

>

> anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real

>

> giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

>

> acknowledge.

>

>

>

> Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

>

> dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

>

> your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your

>

> own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

>

> ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from

>

> the root).

>

>

>

> -VJ

>

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

>

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

>

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

> >

>

> > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> > 1)

>

> > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your

>

> Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

>

> imaginary outpourings.

>

> >

>

> > 2)

>

> > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the

>

> group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

>

> >

>

> > -SKB

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

>

> >

>

> > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ...

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Sunilji,

>

> >

>

> > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I

>

> answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt

>

> astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

>

> internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

>

> astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the

>

> verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

>

> literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the

>

> real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

>

> verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The

>

> point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as

>

> mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument

>

> over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong

>

> interpretation.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

>

> ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

>

> commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with

>

> a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

>

> have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

>

> Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical

>

> astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon.

>

> Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

>

> which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical

>

> period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no

>

> much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical

>

> eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm

>

> " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

>

> difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

>

> >

>

> > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at

>

> the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is

>

> nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon

>

> and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the

>

> length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ;

>

> tropical year has less difference).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical

>

> and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I

>

> always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

>

> motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude

>

> he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and

>

> do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

>

> ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

>

> physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

>

> persons, how can I ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish

>

> mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe

>

> that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

>

> physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion,

>

> I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on

>

> the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare

>

> the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

>

> Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

>

> actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

>

> relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

>

> decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

>

> horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

>

> Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest

>

> in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta

>

> is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy,

>

> which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake

>

> an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to

>

> arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

>

> interested

>

> >

>

> > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

>

> precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I

>

> will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using

>

> harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

>

> discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for

>

> you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for

>

> non-astrological nonsense.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

>

> >

>

> > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

>

> >

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from

>

> east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

>

> Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how

>

> it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of

>

> Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) .

>

> When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

>

> changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you

>

> have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are

>

> going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of

>

> you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the

>

> Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it

>

> . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy

>

> that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed

>

> here) appeared to move in the reverse

>

> >

>

> > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

>

> than one Saptasindhu.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the

>

> eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

>

> just ignored that.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not

>

> given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

>

> talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he

>

> referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

>

> imaginary locations.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Regards,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

>

> >

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Sunil ji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your

>

> mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

>

> commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

>

> imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and

>

> two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

>

> astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But

>

> with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened

>

> and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

>

> intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

>

> Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof

>

> of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

>

> perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

>

> practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which

>

> is the only proper way to decide the issue.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of

>

> mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical

>

> or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

>

> learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

>

> locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

>

> planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not

>

> read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

>

> eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse

>

> because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided.

>

> But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided

>

> the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

>

> me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other

>

> person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and

>

> was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It

>

> is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of

>

> repute.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did

>

> not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

>

> provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

>

> concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept

>

> of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never

>

> called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation

>

> or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was

>

> therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

>

> socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can

>

> show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time,

>

> I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

>

> sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I

>

> gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

>

> treatment.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I

>

> said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am

>

> ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over

>

> personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to

>

> behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views

>

> are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

>

> works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

>

> form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is

>

> neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here

>

> in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

>

> texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

>

> provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

>

> accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me.

>

> And without listening properly, how will ever know my

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew

>

> forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give

>

> you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters,

>

> including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to

>

> supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion

>

> of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till

>

> his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an

>

> honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested

>

> him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed.

>

> Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his

>

> ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that

>

> Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta

>

> and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

>

> Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

>

> Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for

>

> shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh

>

> started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a

>

> free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

>

> topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted

>

> to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

>

> existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

>

> tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

>

> " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

>

> missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting

>

> the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering.

>

> There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but

>

> I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

>

> brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

>

> start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

>

> sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and

>

> there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling

>

> you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

>

> powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature ,

>

> but

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

>

> tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

>

> want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It

>

> is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or

>

> stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds,

>

> in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

>

> rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

>

> astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

>

> you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am

>

> forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

>

> divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize

>

> me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused

>

> me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

>

> developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about

>

> Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there

>

> is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing

>

> you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

>

> astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain

>

> to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

>

> again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

>

> because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am

>

> not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and

>

> can substantiate.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Good Wishes,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

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

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 1)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You said

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Quote

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

>

> " torment " Rohini ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Unquote

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

>

> astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both

>

> are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

>

> Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when

>

> he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

>

> within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 2)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

>

> travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

>

> Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets

>

> invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that

>

> it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in

>

> what you say.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 3)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a

>

> married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

>

> physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have

>

> insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

>

> requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

>

> Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required

>

> rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to

>

> believe in these claims of yours.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 4)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets

>

> and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any

>

> ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you

>

> want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you

>

> so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

>

> through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body

>

> until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

>

> identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 5)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any

>

> reference to back your statement.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 6)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you

>

> said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good

>

> riddance "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 7)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking.

>

> you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

>

> question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right

>

> or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to

>

> you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors

>

> depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong

>

> impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in

>

> your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I

>

> have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in

>

> Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are

>

> doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

>

> unopposed?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > -SKB

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > TO ALL :

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an

>

> alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

>

> guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for

>

> useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

>

> starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

>

> changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another

>

> user may be useful in making some important points clear :

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha,

>

> other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

>

> because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language

>

> dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

>

> modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material

>

> or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

>

> terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this

>

> world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of

>

> deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

>

> words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based

>

> upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world.

>

> Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away

>

> from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets.

>

> But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead

>

> thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

>

> different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is

>

> 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million

>

> Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates

>

> once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In

>

> early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

>

> planets are concerned...

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

>

> modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has

>

> no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit

>

> word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing

>

> modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

>

> present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern

>

> method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

>

> Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in

>

> 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that

>

> both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

>

> inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

>

> point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no

>

> visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based

>

> upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

>

> degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

>

> Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no

>

> connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

>

> libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the

>

> time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in

>

> Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It

>

> was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

>

> scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

>

> precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is

>

> not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

>

> precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the

>

> proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

>

> disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

>

> Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > ---

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that

>

> the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

>

> locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

>

> say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to

>

> possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

>

> Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location)

>

> and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

>

> Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and

>

> everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

>

> themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

>

> Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational

>

> ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

>

> Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

>

> mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog

>

> tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where

>

> my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

>

> professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a

>

> face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

>

> like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

>

> is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

>

> really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in

>

> my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

>

> decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

>

> Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient

>

> times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and

>

> only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

>

> Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

>

> married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

>

> Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

>

> quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner

>

> in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa

>

> said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said

>

> Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

>

> Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

>

> Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no

>

> episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief

>

> reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war.

>

> Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring,

>

> but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was

>

> merely a

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

>

> according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

>

> Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

>

> Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real

>

> sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say

>

> so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a

>

> mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

>

> ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika

>

> foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

>

> Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to

>

> eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than

>

> cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat,

>

> fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

>

> non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

>

> brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should

>

> not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by

>

> him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I

>

> know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often

>

> abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like

>

> " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from

>

> the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

>

> ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

>

> discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately

>

> false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

>

> beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

>

> leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

>

> institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired

>

> by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at

>

> Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

>

> IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

>

> which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS,

>

> IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me.

>

> He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in

>

> the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. "

>

> These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used

>

> such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial

>

> mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

>

> Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

>

> that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me,

>

> denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that

>

> Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just

>

> because I know the practical methods of

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely

>

> projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him,

>

> and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the

>

> field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me

>

> obscene messages.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

>

> bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

>

> Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

>

> requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr

>

> Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly

>

> instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a

>

> shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the

>

> moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good

>

> in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of

>

> no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

>

> shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

>

> launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in

>

> Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance

>

> to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the

>

> answers).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

>

> misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had

>

> he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

>

> should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

>

> summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another

>

> is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book

>

> from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

>

> uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

>

> material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which

>

> modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

>

> springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only

>

> those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

>

> away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these

>

> rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of

>

> me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

>

> some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as

>

> based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

>

> softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic

>

> astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will

>

> continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables

>

> originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

>

> astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

>

> " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

>

> reject a thing before testing it.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I

>

> left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and

>

> abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a

>

> bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I

>

> have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something

>

> useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by

>

> force, or by means of abuses.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

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

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

>

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 1)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from

>

> the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

>

> you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which

>

> you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata

>

> war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

>

> location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 2)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power

>

> like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing

>

> abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

>

> computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)?

>

> Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

>

> otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

>

> from the topic

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that

>

> Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

>

> Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra

>

> one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra

>

> recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the

>

> alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop.

>

> However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas

>

> (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

>

> permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

>

> not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO

>

> before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun

>

> of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I

>

> use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty

>

> tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

>

> lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

>

> ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

>

> Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

>

> biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

>

> mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he

>

> became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

>

> mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

>

> Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

>

> Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said

>

> that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get

>

> to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete

>

> it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced

>

> that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

>

> reading.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 6)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in

>

> the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims.

>

> I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we

>

> respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All

>

> other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

>

> towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I

>

> also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship

>

> remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used

>

> bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

>

> threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had

>

> to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

>

> towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but

>

> yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

>

> ignominiously.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > -SKB

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Bhaskar Jee,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

>

> language.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong

>

> solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which

>

> weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

>

> astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

>

> ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on

>

> revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India

>

> really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change.

>

> She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

>

> explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be

>

> my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

>

> nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

>

> where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

>

> handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never

>

> allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a

>

> discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were

>

> never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

>

> professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher.

>

> We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I

>

> do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of

>

> any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

>

> singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

>

> some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

>

> forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined

>

> Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these

>

> forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy

>

> which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to

>

> Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based

>

> on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

>

> recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

>

> science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But

>

> if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

>

> going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to

>

> give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

>

> astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

>

> impudence... "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those

>

> used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my

>

> work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my

>

> software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

>

> wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

>

> worth testing and reading.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to

>

> you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

>

> criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about

>

> my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

>

> non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my

>

> software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

>

> fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my

>

> time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

>

> Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on

>

> Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong

>

> brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion.

>

> Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts

>

> are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

>

> like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra,

>

> sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed.

>

> Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started

>

> using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > your

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or

>

> ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Dear Vinay jee,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian

>

> culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

>

> seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that

>

> you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of

>

> what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

>

> played with you, till you left back doors.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant,

>

> but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg

>

> has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom

>

> i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

>

> leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements

>

> as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself (

>

> ??).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same,

>

> in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous,

>

> impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which

>

> these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

>

> planted firmly on the ground.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

>

> claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and

>

> you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the

>

> torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

>

> except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers

>

> ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and

>

> not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

>

> acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

>

> analysing.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually

>

> what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself

>

> to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups

>

> you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

>

> otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > regards/Bhaskar.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

>

> wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Bhaskar Jee,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

>

> liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support

>

> you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

>

> certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons

>

> like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

>

> moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

>

> nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as

>

> you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1

>

> minute. "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

>

> persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

>

> Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

>

> attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

>

> software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use

>

> it. Read a recent email to me :

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > praNaam sir,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > the last time(about fonts and vb

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > errors).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > and its accurate till prana

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > dashas.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > normally.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > another time

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

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

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Dear Vinay ji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

>

> persons who

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

>

> cannot

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > prove that you know " something " ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost

>

> on the

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean

>

> who

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just

>

> broken

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > glass pieces in his kitty.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention

>

> or

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on

>

> them ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought

>

> was a

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself

>

> then

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this

>

> Group ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have

>

> been

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the

>

> broken

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none

>

> have

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

>

> prove

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in

>

> front

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

>

> convincingly

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > but just rattling in the air.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because

>

> I just

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I

>

> could

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

>

> present

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > set up of mind.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > best wishes,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Bhaskar.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

>

> ...> wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is

>

> for you.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I have yet to see

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics.

>

> You

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he

>

> appears

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates.

>

> He has

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I

>

> made

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and

>

> one

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

>

> Bhattacharya

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers.

>

> I

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet.

>

> When I

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

>

> Astrology of

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

>

> discussion on

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need

>

> to

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and

>

> are

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators

>

> to

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my

>

> free

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > softwares in future.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > The Dating of Ramayana

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here,

>

> that

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

>

> place,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the

>

> bridge

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

>

> bridge

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

>

> believed

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time

>

> this

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the

>

> Ramayan

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that

>

> this

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the

>

> whole

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

>

> this to

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now

>

> have to

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > & gt%

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

RR ji,

 

Sunil ji is ~69 years old and is an expert in environmental engineering

with qualification in Chemistry, and experience as manager and

consultancy in environmental engineering. He is interested in indology

and related topics. His differences with me started when he frustrated

my attempts to discuss ancient astrology of Yaamala Tantras by diverting

the discussion to benefits of wine in that topic of " Tantric Astrology " .

He knew I could not discuss such things, and these things had no use in

astrology, as far as I knew. Since then, he is devoting much of his time

in harassing me and leveling false charges on me. He joined this forum

merely to harass me. He sometimes discusses astrology with others, esp

in AIA, but never with me. I really believe that he will forgive me only

when I accept that wine is a good and divine thing, which I cannot. I do

not want to discuss any topic with him. He uses bad words for me, levels

false charges, and then asks me to answer his questions. I would have

liked to answer these questions had he checked his offensive language.

 

bad language.

 

-VJ

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

, " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani

wrote:

>

> Sunil bhai/Dada,

>

> I do not know your age but you sound older than me ...

>

> Why is this Vinayji becoming so important to you? Each point that you

shared with this forum of thousands of us ants -- had a reference to

Vinayji.

>

> Who is this " Vinayji " who claims so much of your attention and energy

and why should you think he should ours as well?

>

> At least in the post that I responded to?

>

> Rohiniranjan

>

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote:

> >

> > Dear all.

> >

> >

> >

> > 1)

> >

> > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

> > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of

Jyotisha.

> > I shall not insist on that hereafter.

> >

> > 2)

> >

> > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

> > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

> > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to

move

> > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to

Kunti

> > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

> > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could

also

> > have taught Mayasura.

> >

> > 3)

> >

> > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is

telling

> > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how

the

> > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could

have

> > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

> > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

> > about it with proof.

> >

> > 4)

> >

> > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year

cycle

> > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted

to

> > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without

> > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

> > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

> > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a

paper

> > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

> > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4,

25

> > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year

> > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

> > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same

point)

> > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any

astrologer

> > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes

to

> > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year

cycles.

> > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what

way

> > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year

Jupiter

> > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the

> > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as

divine

> > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a

personal

> > attack on him.

> >

> >

> >

> > 5)

> >

> > Vinayji says

> >

> >

> >

> > Quote

> >

> >

> >

> > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now

you

> > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

> > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing

me after getting this information.

> >

> >

> >

> > Unquote

> >

> >

> >

> > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first

mails

> > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

> > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

> > playing tricks with him.

> >

> > 6)

> >

> > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others.

Others

> > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

> > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by

this

> > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be

> > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my

inability

> > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

> > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

> > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation

to

> > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a

veteran

> > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

> >

> > 7)

> >

> > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not

that

> > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate

that

> > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

> > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

> > given in his own websites.

> >

> > 8)

> >

> > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to

> > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

> > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do

not

> > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right

to

> > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

> > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we

cannot

> > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

> > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied

everything

> > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

> > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted

a

> > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge

of

> > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually

that

> > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

> > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any

profession

> > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

> > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned

that

> > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

> > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

> > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies.

Kaulji

> > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only

protested

> > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am

protesting

> > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

> > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He

may

> > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in

> > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

> > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

> > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from

his

> > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

> > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not

fatalistic

> > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

> > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

> > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

> > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

> > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail

if

> > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

> > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I

have

> > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

> > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the

> > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his

> > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology.

Jyotish

> > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

> > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar.

I

> > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work

in

> > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

> > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

> > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

> >

> >

> >

> > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his

admirers as he

> > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am

just

> > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I

am

> > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot

assert that

> > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any

contribution

> > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

> > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such

comparison.

> > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an

opportunity

> > to do so, for which I am thankful to them.

> >

> > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not

made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a

number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific

and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in

big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents

to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling

your self-claimed vow that you would never lie?

> >

> >

> >

> > Regards nevertheless,

> >

> >

> > Sunil. Bhattacharjya.

> >

> > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

> >

> > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > To ALL :

> >

> >

> >

> > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add

here

> >

> > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to

show

> >

> > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

> >

> > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

> >

> > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who

has

> >

> > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

> >

> > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just

out

> >

> > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper

" A

> >

> > New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

> >

> > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

to+Rain+Forecast in\

> >

> > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India

made

> >

> > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc

(Bangalore)

> >

> > that I was a cheat ?

> >

> >

> >

> > To Sunil ji :

> >

> >

> >

> > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you

never

> >

> > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on

me.

> >

> >

> >

> > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent

mail

> >

> > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or

other

> >

> > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and

some of

> >

> > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

> >

> > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great

poet

> >

> > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " ,

without

> >

> > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

> >

> > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including

the

> >

> > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to

make

> >

> > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person

asks me

> >

> > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

> >

> > field of interest, I can only be amused.

> >

> >

> >

> > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

> >

> > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

> >

> > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they

will

> >

> > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

> >

> > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical

planets

> >

> > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

> >

> > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that

Lord

> >

> > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun

do so

> >

> > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

> >

> > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false

statements.

> >

> > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya,

and

> >

> > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of

such a

> >

> > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

> >

> > results.

> >

> >

> >

> > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with

me,

> >

> > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately

want

> >

> > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling

me a

> >

> > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied

about

> >

> > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

> >

> > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

> >

> > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of

the

> >

> > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of

eastward

> >

> > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

> >

> > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information,

and

> >

> > instead have already started abusing me after getting this

information.

> >

> > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution

to

> >

> > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree

and

> >

> > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world

renowned

> >

> > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you

ever

> >

> > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

> >

> >

> >

> > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific "

again

> >

> > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

> >

> > astrological credentials (

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_

%26_my_Paper_ acc\

> >

> > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha

> >

> > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

to+Rain+Forecast ing\

> >

> > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of

my

> >

> > paper by CAOS, IISc.

> >

> >

> >

> > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness

of

> >

> > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

> >

> > veracity and started attacking me.

> >

> >

> >

> > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my

works,

> >

> > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

> >

> > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

> >

> > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to

discuss

> >

> > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my

supposedly

> >

> > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was

producing

> >

> > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth

and it

> >

> > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of

someone.

> >

> > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking

me

> >

> > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

> >

> > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

> >

> > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

> >

> > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

> >

> > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were

never

> >

> > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field

; I

> >

> > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage

of

> >

> > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends.

Now

> >

> > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

> >

> > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof

of

> >

> > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two

tolas

> >

> > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I

subsist on

> >

> > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods,

besides

> >

> > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of

life

> >

> > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to

me ??

> >

> > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

> >

> > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

> >

> > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields

of

> >

> > interest.

> >

> >

> >

> > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not

going to

> >

> > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

> >

> > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told

you

> >

> > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

> >

> > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not

want

> >

> > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was

disruption

> >

> > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

> >

> > forums.

> >

> >

> >

> > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails

in

> >

> > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show

my

> >

> > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to

lie,

> >

> > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to

be

> >

> > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

> >

> > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you

have

> >

> > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

> >

> >

> >

> > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

> >

> > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of

it

> >

> > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never

get

> >

> > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the

real

> >

> > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

> >

> > acknowledge.

> >

> >

> >

> > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

> >

> > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

> >

> > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within

your

> >

> > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

> >

> > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning

from

> >

> > the root).

> >

> >

> >

> > -VJ

> >

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

> >

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> >

> > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 1)

> >

> > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about

your

> >

> > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

> >

> > imaginary outpourings.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 2)

> >

> > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to

the

> >

> > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ...

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunilji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words

while I

> >

> > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to

disrupt

> >

> > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

> >

> > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

> >

> > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent

the

> >

> > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

> >

> > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be

the

> >

> > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

> >

> > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things.

The

> >

> > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta

as

> >

> > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false

argument

> >

> > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly

wrong

> >

> > interpretation.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

> >

> > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

> >

> > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments

with

> >

> > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

> >

> > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of

physical

> >

> > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and

Moon.

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

> >

> > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to

synodical

> >

> > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley

found no

> >

> > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and

physical

> >

> > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use

therm

> >

> > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

> >

> > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

> >

> > >

> >

> > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases

at

> >

> > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference

is

> >

> > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic

Moon

> >

> > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between

the

> >

> > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal

;

> >

> > tropical year has less difference).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in

physical

> >

> > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why

I

> >

> > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

> >

> > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you

conclude

> >

> > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses

and

> >

> > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

> >

> > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

> >

> > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

> >

> > persons, how can I ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your

foolish

> >

> > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to

believe

> >

> > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

> >

> > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal

discussion,

> >

> > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis

on

> >

> > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and

compare

> >

> > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

> >

> > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

> >

> > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

> >

> > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

> >

> > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

> >

> > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

> >

> > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no

interest

> >

> > in astrological investigation of astrological entities.

Suryasiddhanta

> >

> > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical

astronomy,

> >

> > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to

undertake

> >

> > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes

to

> >

> > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

> >

> > interested

> >

> > >

> >

> > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

> >

> > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY "

, I

> >

> > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for

using

> >

> > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

> >

> > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words

for

> >

> > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place

for

> >

> > non-astrological nonsense.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved

from

> >

> > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

> >

> > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is

how

> >

> > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream

of

> >

> > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu)

..

> >

> > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

> >

> > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that

you

> >

> > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you

are

> >

> > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in

front of

> >

> > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in

the

> >

> > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you

mistranslated it

> >

> > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so

stormy

> >

> > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not

sataed

> >

> > here) appeared to move in the reverse

> >

> > >

> >

> > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

> >

> > than one Saptasindhu.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of

the

> >

> > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

> >

> > just ignored that.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have

not

> >

> > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

> >

> > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that

he

> >

> > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

> >

> > imaginary locations.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Regards,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil ji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering

your

> >

> > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

> >

> > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

> >

> > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns

and

> >

> > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

> >

> > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times.

But

> >

> > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has

weakened

> >

> > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

> >

> > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

> >

> > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

proof

> >

> > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

> >

> > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

> >

> > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods,

which

> >

> > is the only proper way to decide the issue.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery

of

> >

> > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a

magical

> >

> > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

> >

> > learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

> >

> > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

> >

> > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have

not

> >

> > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

> >

> > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the

verse

> >

> > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I

provided.

> >

> > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I

provided

> >

> > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks

against

> >

> > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any

other

> >

> > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA

and

> >

> > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for

ridicule.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your

inventiomn. It

> >

> > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts

of

> >

> > repute.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you

did

> >

> > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

> >

> > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

> >

> > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a

concept

> >

> > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they

never

> >

> > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as

trapidation

> >

> > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and

was

> >

> > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

> >

> > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I

can

> >

> > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last

time,

> >

> > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

> >

> > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as

I

> >

> > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

> >

> > treatment.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what

I

> >

> > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs

I am

> >

> > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time

over

> >

> > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you

to

> >

> > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my

views

> >

> > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

> >

> > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

> >

> > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It

is

> >

> > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts

here

> >

> > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

> >

> > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

> >

> > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

> >

> > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to

me.

> >

> > And without listening properly, how will ever know my

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin

anew

> >

> > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to

give

> >

> > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless

matters,

> >

> > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me

to

> >

> > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low

opinion

> >

> > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari

till

> >

> > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be

an

> >

> > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh

requested

> >

> > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but

failed.

> >

> > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss

his

> >

> > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn

that

> >

> > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of

Suryasiddhanta

> >

> > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his

views

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him

for

> >

> > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and

Sreenadh

> >

> > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided

a

> >

> > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

> >

> > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was

diverted

> >

> > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

> >

> > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

> >

> > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

> >

> > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

> >

> > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by

diverting

> >

> > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before

answering.

> >

> > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

but

> >

> > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

> >

> > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

> >

> > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

> >

> > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum

and

> >

> > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not

belittling

> >

> > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

> >

> > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English

literature ,

> >

> > but

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

> >

> > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

> >

> > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions.

It

> >

> > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology,

or

> >

> > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal

feuds,

> >

> > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

> >

> > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

> >

> > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not

from

> >

> > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me,

I am

> >

> > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

> >

> > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you

eulogize

> >

> > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you

abused

> >

> > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

> >

> > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices

about

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but

there

> >

> > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not

abusing

> >

> > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

> >

> > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in

vain

> >

> > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

> >

> > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric

astrology,

> >

> > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i

am

> >

> > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well

and

> >

> > can substantiate.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Good Wishes,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

=========

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 1)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You said

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Quote

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

> >

> > " torment " Rohini ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Unquote

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

> >

> > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as

both

> >

> > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

> >

> > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena

when

> >

> > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

> >

> > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 2)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

> >

> > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

> >

> > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She

gets

> >

> > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said

that

> >

> > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe

in

> >

> > what you say.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 3)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to

Manu a

> >

> > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

> >

> > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you

have

> >

> > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

> >

> > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

> >

> > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the

required

> >

> > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted

all to

> >

> > believe in these claims of yours.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 4)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical

planets

> >

> > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in

any

> >

> > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do

you

> >

> > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told

you

> >

> > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

> >

> > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his

body

> >

> > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

> >

> > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 5)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give

any

> >

> > reference to back your statement.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 6)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When

you

> >

> > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said

" good

> >

> > riddance "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 7)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your

liking.

> >

> > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

> >

> > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are

right

> >

> > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known

to

> >

> > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these

professors

> >

> > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under

wrong

> >

> > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my

name in

> >

> > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me

that I

> >

> > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of

wine in

> >

> > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you

are

> >

> > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

> >

> > unopposed?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > TO ALL :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to

forge an

> >

> > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

> >

> > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time

for

> >

> > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

> >

> > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

> >

> > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to

another

> >

> > user may be useful in making some important points clear :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is

Saurpaksha,

> >

> > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

> >

> > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other

language

> >

> > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

> >

> > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the

material

> >

> > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

> >

> > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with

this

> >

> > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

world of

> >

> > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

> >

> > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally

based

> >

> > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal

world.

> >

> > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept

away

> >

> > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for

planets.

> >

> > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical

dead

> >

> > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

> >

> > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun

is

> >

> > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5

million

> >

> > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world

rotates

> >

> > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world.

In

> >

> > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

> >

> > planets are concerned...

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

> >

> > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy

has

> >

> > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the

Sanskrit

> >

> > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started

imposing

> >

> > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

> >

> > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this

modern

> >

> > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

> >

> > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be

zero in

> >

> > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

that

> >

> > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

> >

> > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

> >

> > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There

is no

> >

> > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is

based

> >

> > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

> >

> > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

> >

> > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had

no

> >

> > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

> >

> > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in

the

> >

> > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers

in

> >

> > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus.

It

> >

> > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

> >

> > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

> >

> > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and

is

> >

> > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

> >

> > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is

the

> >

> > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

> >

> > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

> >

> > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ---

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say

that

> >

> > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

> >

> > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will

you

> >

> > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim

to

> >

> > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

> >

> > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

location)

> >

> > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

> >

> > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities,

and

> >

> > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

> >

> > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

> >

> > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my

computational

> >

> > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

> >

> > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

> >

> > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and

antilog

> >

> > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university

where

> >

> > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

> >

> > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want

a

> >

> > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the

globe

> >

> > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil

Bhattacharya

> >

> > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

> >

> > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses

in

> >

> > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

> >

> > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

> >

> > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

ancient

> >

> > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras

and

> >

> > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

> >

> > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

> >

> > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

> >

> > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

> >

> > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted

manner

> >

> > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

Ashwatthaamaa

> >

> > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

said

> >

> > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari,

while

> >

> > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

> >

> > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is

no

> >

> > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a

brief

> >

> > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during

war.

> >

> > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one

offspring,

> >

> > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama

was

> >

> > merely a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

> >

> > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

> >

> > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

> >

> > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a

real

> >

> > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee

say

> >

> > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya

as a

> >

> > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

> >

> > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and

taamasika

> >

> > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

> >

> > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free

to

> >

> > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse

than

> >

> > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine ,

meat,

> >

> > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

> >

> > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to

a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

> >

> > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he

should

> >

> > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused

by

> >

> > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as

I

> >

> > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and

often

> >

> > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words

like

> >

> > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

from

> >

> > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

> >

> > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

> >

> > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his

deliberately

> >

> > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

> >

> > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when

he

> >

> > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

> >

> > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were

hired

> >

> > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything

at

> >

> > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

> >

> > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

> >

> > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact

CAOS,

> >

> > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign

me.

> >

> > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

in

> >

> > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

claims. "

> >

> > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji

used

> >

> > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his

initial

> >

> > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

> >

> > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never

thought

> >

> > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against

me,

> >

> > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized

that

> >

> > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me

just

> >

> > because I know the practical methods of

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and

falsely

> >

> > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting

him,

> >

> > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left

the

> >

> > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent

me

> >

> > obscene messages.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

> >

> > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

> >

> > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

> >

> > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh

and Mr

> >

> > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter

calmly

> >

> > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for

a

> >

> > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing

me.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and

the

> >

> > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really

good

> >

> > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a

point of

> >

> > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

> >

> > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

> >

> > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and

in

> >

> > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a

chance

> >

> > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

the

> >

> > answers).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

> >

> > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me.

Had

> >

> > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

> >

> > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

> >

> > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian,

another

> >

> > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my

book

> >

> > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

> >

> > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

> >

> > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge

which

> >

> > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

> >

> > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists,

only

> >

> > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

> >

> > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set

these

> >

> > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get

rid of

> >

> > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

> >

> > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional

astrology as

> >

> > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

> >

> > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill

Suryasiddhantic

> >

> > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and

will

> >

> > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined

tables

> >

> > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

> >

> > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

> >

> > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

> >

> > reject a thing before testing it.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya.

I

> >

> > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges

and

> >

> > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I

am a

> >

> > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ?

I

> >

> > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding

something

> >

> > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced

by

> >

> > force, or by means of abuses.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> >

> > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 1)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different

from

> >

> > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

> >

> > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge

which

> >

> > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the

Mahabharata

> >

> > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

> >

> > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 2)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing

power

> >

> > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you

computing

> >

> > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

> >

> > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a

madaari(ni)?

> >

> > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

> >

> > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving

exit

> >

> > from the topic

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying

that

> >

> > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

> >

> > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in

Tantra

> >

> > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that

Tantra

> >

> > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also

the

> >

> > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a

drop.

> >

> > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only

two-Tolas

> >

> > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

> >

> > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please

do

> >

> > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted

WHO

> >

> > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap

fun

> >

> > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word

did I

> >

> > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your

dirty

> >

> > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

> >

> > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In

the

> >

> > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

> >

> > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

> >

> > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

> >

> > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

unless he

> >

> > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool

his

> >

> > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

> >

> > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

> >

> > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you

said

> >

> > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't

get

> >

> > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to

delete

> >

> > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am

convinced

> >

> > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

> >

> > reading.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 6)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

in

> >

> > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

claims.

> >

> > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and

we

> >

> > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things.

All

> >

> > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

> >

> > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In

fact I

> >

> > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted

scholarship

> >

> > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you

used

> >

> > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

> >

> > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you

had

> >

> > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very

tolerant

> >

> > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group

but

> >

> > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

> >

> > ignominiously.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Bhaskar Jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

> >

> > language.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage

strong

> >

> > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg,

which

> >

> > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back

doors. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

> >

> > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

> >

> > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but

on

> >

> > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what

India

> >

> > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can

change.

> >

> > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

> >

> > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you

to be

> >

> > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

> >

> > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only

forum

> >

> > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

> >

> > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and

never

> >

> > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started

such a

> >

> > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you

were

> >

> > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to

know

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

> >

> > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a

researcher.

> >

> > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because

I

> >

> > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber

of

> >

> > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

> >

> > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

> >

> > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

> >

> > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

joined

> >

> > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all

these

> >

> > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern

astronomy

> >

> > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison

to

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares

based

> >

> > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

> >

> > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

> >

> > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose.

But

> >

> > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

> >

> > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying

to

> >

> > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

> >

> > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

> >

> > impudence... "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from

those

> >

> > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on

my

> >

> > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing

my

> >

> > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

> >

> > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

> >

> > worth testing and reading.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets

to

> >

> > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

> >

> > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa

about

> >

> > my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

> >

> > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using

my

> >

> > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

> >

> > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste

my

> >

> > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

> >

> > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in

AIA on

> >

> > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a

lifelong

> >

> > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a

discussion.

> >

> > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric

texts

> >

> > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

> >

> > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi

chakra,

> >

> > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was

destroyed.

> >

> > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then

started

> >

> > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > your

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me

or

> >

> > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Dear Vinay jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against

indian

> >

> > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

> >

> > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see

that

> >

> > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs

of

> >

> > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

> >

> > played with you, till you left back doors.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as

ignorant,

> >

> > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that

Marg

> >

> > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person

whom

> >

> > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

> >

> > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these

statements

> >

> > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your

goodeself (

> >

> > ??).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of

same,

> >

> > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me

Pompous,

> >

> > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology,

which

> >

> > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

> >

> > planted firmly on the ground.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

> >

> > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these,

and

> >

> > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed

the

> >

> > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give

us,

> >

> > except that by using your software we will become very good

astrologers

> >

> > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence,

and

> >

> > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

> >

> > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

> >

> > analysing.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study

actually

> >

> > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved

yourself

> >

> > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various

groups

> >

> > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

> >

> > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > regards/Bhaskar.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

....>

> >

> > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar Jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

> >

> > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my

support

> >

> > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

> >

> > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant

persons

> >

> > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

> >

> > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

> >

> > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works,

as

> >

> > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only

for 1

> >

> > minute. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

> >

> > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

> >

> > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

> >

> > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

> >

> > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and

use

> >

> > it. Read a recent email to me :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > praNaam sir,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being

negative

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > errors).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > and its accurate till prana

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > dashas.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > normally.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > another time

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Dear Vinay ji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

> >

> > persons who

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

> >

> > cannot

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > prove that you know " something " ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the

roost

> >

> > on the

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my

knowledge.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not

from

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I

mean

> >

> > who

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has

just

> >

> > broken

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > glass pieces in his kitty.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to

mention

> >

> > or

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours

on

> >

> > them ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we

thought

> >

> > was a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove

yourself

> >

> > then

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of

indian

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of

this

> >

> > Group ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would

have

> >

> > been

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from

the

> >

> > broken

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but

none

> >

> > have

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

> >

> > prove

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our

name in

> >

> > front

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

> >

> > convincingly

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > but just rattling in the air.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed,

because

> >

> > I just

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute,

because I

> >

> > could

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but

have

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

> >

> > present

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > set up of mind.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have

started

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > best wishes,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

> >

> > ...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message

is

> >

> > for you.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I have yet to see

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or

Mathematics.

> >

> > You

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now

he

> >

> > appears

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his

certificates.

> >

> > He has

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and

says I

> >

> > made

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta

and

> >

> > one

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

> >

> > Bhattacharya

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to

abusers.

> >

> > I

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep

quiet.

> >

> > When I

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

> >

> > Astrology of

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

> >

> > discussion on

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no

need

> >

> > to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some

free

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use,

and

> >

> > are

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the

moderators

> >

> > to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell

my

> >

> > free

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > softwares in future.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana

here,

> >

> > that

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

> >

> > place,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then

the

> >

> > bridge

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

> >

> > bridge

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

> >

> > believed

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the

time

> >

> > this

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with

the

> >

> > Ramayan

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming

that

> >

> > this

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what

the

> >

> > whole

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

> >

> > this to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of

astrology ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of

Jyotish

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would

now

> >

> > have to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > & gt%

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Vinay ji,

 

Thanks for the information!

 

In that case I shall continue to call him Dada!

 

He excels in areas that are very close to my heart and ambition: Chemistry and

Environment and I can tell that he has a sharp mind and has pretty much all that

one needs to embrace and uphold astrology!

 

That said, he is human, I am sure because ISPs do not give access to internet

accounts without checking one's capability to pay! Just plain and simple

pragmatic stuff! And he has an internet account!

 

As do you and I! Simply humans?

 

But does that make any of us less capable of thinking and communicating?

 

<< " ..Ass offossed to comnicating and so on so 4th...? " >>

 

Please " sample " the fare that is laid out on the smorgasbord of INTERNET and let

us count our blessings! Shall we...?

 

Rohiniranjan

 

, " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

>

> RR ji,

>

> Sunil ji is ~69 years old and is an expert in environmental engineering

> with qualification in Chemistry, and experience as manager and

> consultancy in environmental engineering. He is interested in indology

> and related topics. His differences with me started when he frustrated

> my attempts to discuss ancient astrology of Yaamala Tantras by diverting

> the discussion to benefits of wine in that topic of " Tantric Astrology " .

> He knew I could not discuss such things, and these things had no use in

> astrology, as far as I knew. Since then, he is devoting much of his time

> in harassing me and leveling false charges on me. He joined this forum

> merely to harass me. He sometimes discusses astrology with others, esp

> in AIA, but never with me. I really believe that he will forgive me only

> when I accept that wine is a good and divine thing, which I cannot. I do

> not want to discuss any topic with him. He uses bad words for me, levels

> false charges, and then asks me to answer his questions. I would have

> liked to answer these questions had he checked his offensive language.

>

> bad language.

>

> -VJ

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

> , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Sunil bhai/Dada,

> >

> > I do not know your age but you sound older than me ...

> >

> > Why is this Vinayji becoming so important to you? Each point that you

> shared with this forum of thousands of us ants -- had a reference to

> Vinayji.

> >

> > Who is this " Vinayji " who claims so much of your attention and energy

> and why should you think he should ours as well?

> >

> > At least in the post that I responded to?

> >

> > Rohiniranjan

> >

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear all.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > 1)

> > >

> > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

> > > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of

> Jyotisha.

> > > I shall not insist on that hereafter.

> > >

> > > 2)

> > >

> > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

> > > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

> > > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to

> move

> > > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to

> Kunti

> > > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

> > > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could

> also

> > > have taught Mayasura.

> > >

> > > 3)

> > >

> > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is

> telling

> > > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how

> the

> > > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could

> have

> > > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

> > > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

> > > about it with proof.

> > >

> > > 4)

> > >

> > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year

> cycle

> > > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted

> to

> > > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without

> > > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

> > > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

> > > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a

> paper

> > > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

> > > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4,

> 25

> > > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year

> > > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

> > > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same

> point)

> > > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any

> astrologer

> > > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes

> to

> > > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year

> cycles.

> > > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what

> way

> > > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year

> Jupiter

> > > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the

> > > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as

> divine

> > > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a

> personal

> > > attack on him.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > 5)

> > >

> > > Vinayji says

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Quote

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now

> you

> > > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

> > > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing

> me after getting this information.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Unquote

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first

> mails

> > > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

> > > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

> > > playing tricks with him.

> > >

> > > 6)

> > >

> > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others.

> Others

> > > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

> > > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by

> this

> > > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be

> > > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my

> inability

> > > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

> > > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

> > > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation

> to

> > > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a

> veteran

> > > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

> > >

> > > 7)

> > >

> > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not

> that

> > > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate

> that

> > > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

> > > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

> > > given in his own websites.

> > >

> > > 8)

> > >

> > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to

> > > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

> > > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do

> not

> > > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right

> to

> > > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

> > > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we

> cannot

> > > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

> > > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied

> everything

> > > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

> > > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted

> a

> > > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge

> of

> > > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually

> that

> > > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

> > > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any

> profession

> > > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

> > > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned

> that

> > > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

> > > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

> > > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies.

> Kaulji

> > > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only

> protested

> > > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am

> protesting

> > > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

> > > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He

> may

> > > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in

> > > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

> > > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

> > > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from

> his

> > > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

> > > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not

> fatalistic

> > > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

> > > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

> > > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

> > > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

> > > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail

> if

> > > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

> > > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I

> have

> > > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

> > > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the

> > > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his

> > > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology.

> Jyotish

> > > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

> > > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar.

> I

> > > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work

> in

> > > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

> > > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

> > > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his

> admirers as he

> > > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am

> just

> > > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I

> am

> > > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot

> assert that

> > > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any

> contribution

> > > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

> > > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such

> comparison.

> > > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an

> opportunity

> > > to do so, for which I am thankful to them.

> > >

> > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not

> made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a

> number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific

> and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in

> big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents

> to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling

> your self-claimed vow that you would never lie?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Regards nevertheless,

> > >

> > >

> > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya.

> > >

> > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

> > >

> > > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > To ALL :

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add

> here

> > >

> > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to

> show

> > >

> > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

> > >

> > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

> > >

> > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who

> has

> > >

> > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

> > >

> > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just

> out

> > >

> > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper

> " A

> > >

> > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

> > >

> > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

> to+Rain+Forecast in\

> > >

> > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India

> made

> > >

> > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc

> (Bangalore)

> > >

> > > that I was a cheat ?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > To Sunil ji :

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you

> never

> > >

> > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on

> me.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent

> mail

> > >

> > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or

> other

> > >

> > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and

> some of

> > >

> > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

> > >

> > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great

> poet

> > >

> > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " ,

> without

> > >

> > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

> > >

> > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including

> the

> > >

> > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to

> make

> > >

> > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person

> asks me

> > >

> > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

> > >

> > > field of interest, I can only be amused.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

> > >

> > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

> > >

> > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they

> will

> > >

> > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

> > >

> > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

> > >

> > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical

> planets

> > >

> > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

> > >

> > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that

> Lord

> > >

> > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun

> do so

> > >

> > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

> > >

> > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false

> statements.

> > >

> > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya,

> and

> > >

> > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of

> such a

> > >

> > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

> > >

> > > results.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with

> me,

> > >

> > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately

> want

> > >

> > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling

> me a

> > >

> > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied

> about

> > >

> > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

> > >

> > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

> > >

> > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of

> the

> > >

> > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of

> eastward

> > >

> > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

> > >

> > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information,

> and

> > >

> > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this

> information.

> > >

> > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution

> to

> > >

> > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree

> and

> > >

> > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world

> renowned

> > >

> > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you

> ever

> > >

> > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific "

> again

> > >

> > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

> > >

> > > astrological credentials (

> > >

> > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_

> %26_my_Paper_ acc\

> > >

> > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

> > >

> > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials

> > >

> > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha

> > >

> > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

> to+Rain+Forecast ing\

> > >

> > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of

> my

> > >

> > > paper by CAOS, IISc.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness

> of

> > >

> > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

> > >

> > > veracity and started attacking me.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my

> works,

> > >

> > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

> > >

> > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

> > >

> > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to

> discuss

> > >

> > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my

> supposedly

> > >

> > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was

> producing

> > >

> > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth

> and it

> > >

> > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of

> someone.

> > >

> > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking

> me

> > >

> > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

> > >

> > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

> > >

> > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

> > >

> > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

> > >

> > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were

> never

> > >

> > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field

> ; I

> > >

> > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage

> of

> > >

> > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends.

> Now

> > >

> > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

> > >

> > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof

> of

> > >

> > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two

> tolas

> > >

> > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I

> subsist on

> > >

> > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods,

> besides

> > >

> > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of

> life

> > >

> > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to

> me ??

> > >

> > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

> > >

> > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

> > >

> > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields

> of

> > >

> > > interest.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not

> going to

> > >

> > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

> > >

> > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told

> you

> > >

> > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

> > >

> > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not

> want

> > >

> > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was

> disruption

> > >

> > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

> > >

> > > forums.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails

> in

> > >

> > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show

> my

> > >

> > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to

> lie,

> > >

> > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to

> be

> > >

> > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

> > >

> > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you

> have

> > >

> > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

> > >

> > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of

> it

> > >

> > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never

> get

> > >

> > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the

> real

> > >

> > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

> > >

> > > acknowledge.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

> > >

> > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

> > >

> > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within

> your

> > >

> > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

> > >

> > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning

> from

> > >

> > > the root).

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > -VJ

> > >

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

> > >

> > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> > >

> > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Vinayji,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 1)

> > >

> > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about

> your

> > >

> > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

> > >

> > > imaginary outpourings.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 2)

> > >

> > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to

> the

> > >

> > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > -SKB

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ...

> > >

> > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Sunilji,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words

> while I

> > >

> > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to

> disrupt

> > >

> > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

> > >

> > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

> > >

> > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent

> the

> > >

> > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

> > >

> > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be

> the

> > >

> > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

> > >

> > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things.

> The

> > >

> > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta

> as

> > >

> > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false

> argument

> > >

> > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly

> wrong

> > >

> > > interpretation.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

> > >

> > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

> > >

> > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments

> with

> > >

> > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

> > >

> > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

> > >

> > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of

> physical

> > >

> > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and

> Moon.

> > >

> > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

> > >

> > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to

> synodical

> > >

> > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley

> found no

> > >

> > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and

> physical

> > >

> > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use

> therm

> > >

> > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

> > >

> > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases

> at

> > >

> > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference

> is

> > >

> > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic

> Moon

> > >

> > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between

> the

> > >

> > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal

> ;

> > >

> > > tropical year has less difference).

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in

> physical

> > >

> > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why

> I

> > >

> > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

> > >

> > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you

> conclude

> > >

> > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses

> and

> > >

> > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

> > >

> > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

> > >

> > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

> > >

> > > persons, how can I ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your

> foolish

> > >

> > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to

> believe

> > >

> > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

> > >

> > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal

> discussion,

> > >

> > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis

> on

> > >

> > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and

> compare

> > >

> > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

> > >

> > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

> > >

> > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

> > >

> > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

> > >

> > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

> > >

> > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

> > >

> > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no

> interest

> > >

> > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities.

> Suryasiddhanta

> > >

> > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical

> astronomy,

> > >

> > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to

> undertake

> > >

> > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes

> to

> > >

> > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

> > >

> > > interested

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

> > >

> > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY "

> , I

> > >

> > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for

> using

> > >

> > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

> > >

> > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words

> for

> > >

> > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place

> for

> > >

> > > non-astrological nonsense.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > -VJ

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Vinayji,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved

> from

> > >

> > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

> > >

> > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is

> how

> > >

> > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream

> of

> > >

> > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu)

> .

> > >

> > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

> > >

> > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that

> you

> > >

> > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you

> are

> > >

> > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in

> front of

> > >

> > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in

> the

> > >

> > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you

> mistranslated it

> > >

> > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so

> stormy

> > >

> > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not

> sataed

> > >

> > > here) appeared to move in the reverse

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

> > >

> > > than one Saptasindhu.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of

> the

> > >

> > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

> > >

> > > just ignored that.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have

> not

> > >

> > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

> > >

> > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that

> he

> > >

> > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

> > >

> > > imaginary locations.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Regards,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Sunil ji,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering

> your

> > >

> > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

> > >

> > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

> > >

> > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns

> and

> > >

> > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

> > >

> > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times.

> But

> > >

> > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has

> weakened

> > >

> > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

> > >

> > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

> > >

> > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

> proof

> > >

> > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

> > >

> > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

> > >

> > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods,

> which

> > >

> > > is the only proper way to decide the issue.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery

> of

> > >

> > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a

> magical

> > >

> > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

> > >

> > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

> > >

> > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

> > >

> > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have

> not

> > >

> > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

> > >

> > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the

> verse

> > >

> > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I

> provided.

> > >

> > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I

> provided

> > >

> > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks

> against

> > >

> > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any

> other

> > >

> > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA

> and

> > >

> > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for

> ridicule.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your

> inventiomn. It

> > >

> > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts

> of

> > >

> > > repute.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you

> did

> > >

> > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

> > >

> > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

> > >

> > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a

> concept

> > >

> > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they

> never

> > >

> > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as

> trapidation

> > >

> > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and

> was

> > >

> > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

> > >

> > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I

> can

> > >

> > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last

> time,

> > >

> > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

> > >

> > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as

> I

> > >

> > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

> > >

> > > treatment.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what

> I

> > >

> > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs

> I am

> > >

> > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time

> over

> > >

> > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you

> to

> > >

> > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my

> views

> > >

> > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

> > >

> > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

> > >

> > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It

> is

> > >

> > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts

> here

> > >

> > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

> > >

> > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

> > >

> > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

> > >

> > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to

> me.

> > >

> > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin

> anew

> > >

> > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to

> give

> > >

> > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless

> matters,

> > >

> > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me

> to

> > >

> > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low

> opinion

> > >

> > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari

> till

> > >

> > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be

> an

> > >

> > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh

> requested

> > >

> > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but

> failed.

> > >

> > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss

> his

> > >

> > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn

> that

> > >

> > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of

> Suryasiddhanta

> > >

> > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

> > >

> > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his

> views

> > >

> > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him

> for

> > >

> > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and

> Sreenadh

> > >

> > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided

> a

> > >

> > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

> > >

> > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was

> diverted

> > >

> > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

> > >

> > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

> > >

> > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

> > >

> > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

> > >

> > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by

> diverting

> > >

> > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before

> answering.

> > >

> > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

> but

> > >

> > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

> > >

> > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

> > >

> > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

> > >

> > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum

> and

> > >

> > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not

> belittling

> > >

> > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

> > >

> > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English

> literature ,

> > >

> > > but

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

> > >

> > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

> > >

> > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions.

> It

> > >

> > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology,

> or

> > >

> > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal

> feuds,

> > >

> > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

> > >

> > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

> > >

> > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not

> from

> > >

> > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me,

> I am

> > >

> > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

> > >

> > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you

> eulogize

> > >

> > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you

> abused

> > >

> > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

> > >

> > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices

> about

> > >

> > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but

> there

> > >

> > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not

> abusing

> > >

> > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

> > >

> > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in

> vain

> > >

> > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

> > >

> > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric

> astrology,

> > >

> > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i

> am

> > >

> > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well

> and

> > >

> > > can substantiate.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Good Wishes,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > -VJ

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

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

> =========

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Vinayji,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 1)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You said

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Quote

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

> > >

> > > " torment " Rohini ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Unquote

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

> > >

> > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as

> both

> > >

> > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

> > >

> > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena

> when

> > >

> > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

> > >

> > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 2)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

> > >

> > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

> > >

> > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She

> gets

> > >

> > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said

> that

> > >

> > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe

> in

> > >

> > > what you say.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 3)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to

> Manu a

> > >

> > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

> > >

> > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you

> have

> > >

> > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

> > >

> > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

> > >

> > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the

> required

> > >

> > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted

> all to

> > >

> > > believe in these claims of yours.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 4)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical

> planets

> > >

> > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in

> any

> > >

> > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do

> you

> > >

> > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told

> you

> > >

> > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

> > >

> > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his

> body

> > >

> > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

> > >

> > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 5)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give

> any

> > >

> > > reference to back your statement.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 6)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When

> you

> > >

> > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said

> " good

> > >

> > > riddance "

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > 7)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your

> liking.

> > >

> > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

> > >

> > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are

> right

> > >

> > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known

> to

> > >

> > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these

> professors

> > >

> > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under

> wrong

> > >

> > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my

> name in

> > >

> > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me

> that I

> > >

> > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of

> wine in

> > >

> > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you

> are

> > >

> > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

> > >

> > > unopposed?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > -SKB

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > TO ALL :

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to

> forge an

> > >

> > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

> > >

> > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time

> for

> > >

> > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

> > >

> > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

> > >

> > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to

> another

> > >

> > > user may be useful in making some important points clear :

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is

> Saurpaksha,

> > >

> > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

> > >

> > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other

> language

> > >

> > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

> > >

> > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the

> material

> > >

> > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

> > >

> > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with

> this

> > >

> > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

> world of

> > >

> > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

> > >

> > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally

> based

> > >

> > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal

> world.

> > >

> > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept

> away

> > >

> > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for

> planets.

> > >

> > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical

> dead

> > >

> > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

> > >

> > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun

> is

> > >

> > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5

> million

> > >

> > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world

> rotates

> > >

> > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world.

> In

> > >

> > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

> > >

> > > planets are concerned...

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

> > >

> > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy

> has

> > >

> > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the

> Sanskrit

> > >

> > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started

> imposing

> > >

> > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

> > >

> > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this

> modern

> > >

> > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

> > >

> > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be

> zero in

> > >

> > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

> that

> > >

> > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

> > >

> > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

> > >

> > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There

> is no

> > >

> > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is

> based

> > >

> > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

> > >

> > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

> > >

> > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had

> no

> > >

> > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

> > >

> > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in

> the

> > >

> > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers

> in

> > >

> > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus.

> It

> > >

> > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

> > >

> > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

> > >

> > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and

> is

> > >

> > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

> > >

> > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is

> the

> > >

> > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

> > >

> > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

> > >

> > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > ---

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say

> that

> > >

> > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

> > >

> > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will

> you

> > >

> > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim

> to

> > >

> > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

> > >

> > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

> location)

> > >

> > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

> > >

> > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities,

> and

> > >

> > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

> > >

> > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

> > >

> > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my

> computational

> > >

> > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

> > >

> > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

> > >

> > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and

> antilog

> > >

> > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university

> where

> > >

> > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

> > >

> > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want

> a

> > >

> > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the

> globe

> > >

> > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil

> Bhattacharya

> > >

> > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

> > >

> > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses

> in

> > >

> > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

> > >

> > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

> > >

> > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

> ancient

> > >

> > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras

> and

> > >

> > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

> > >

> > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

> > >

> > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

> > >

> > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

> > >

> > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted

> manner

> > >

> > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

> Ashwatthaamaa

> > >

> > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

> said

> > >

> > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari,

> while

> > >

> > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

> > >

> > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is

> no

> > >

> > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a

> brief

> > >

> > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during

> war.

> > >

> > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one

> offspring,

> > >

> > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama

> was

> > >

> > > merely a

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

> > >

> > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

> > >

> > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

> > >

> > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a

> real

> > >

> > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee

> say

> > >

> > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya

> as a

> > >

> > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

> > >

> > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and

> taamasika

> > >

> > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

> > >

> > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free

> to

> > >

> > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse

> than

> > >

> > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine ,

> meat,

> > >

> > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

> > >

> > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to

> a

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

> > >

> > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he

> should

> > >

> > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused

> by

> > >

> > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as

> I

> > >

> > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and

> often

> > >

> > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words

> like

> > >

> > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

> from

> > >

> > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

> > >

> > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

> > >

> > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his

> deliberately

> > >

> > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

> > >

> > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when

> he

> > >

> > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

> > >

> > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were

> hired

> > >

> > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything

> at

> > >

> > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

> > >

> > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

> > >

> > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact

> CAOS,

> > >

> > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign

> me.

> > >

> > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

> in

> > >

> > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

> claims. "

> > >

> > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji

> used

> > >

> > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his

> initial

> > >

> > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

> > >

> > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never

> thought

> > >

> > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against

> me,

> > >

> > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized

> that

> > >

> > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me

> just

> > >

> > > because I know the practical methods of

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and

> falsely

> > >

> > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting

> him,

> > >

> > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left

> the

> > >

> > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent

> me

> > >

> > > obscene messages.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

> > >

> > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

> > >

> > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

> > >

> > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh

> and Mr

> > >

> > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter

> calmly

> > >

> > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for

> a

> > >

> > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing

> me.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and

> the

> > >

> > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really

> good

> > >

> > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a

> point of

> > >

> > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

> > >

> > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

> > >

> > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and

> in

> > >

> > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a

> chance

> > >

> > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

> the

> > >

> > > answers).

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

> > >

> > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me.

> Had

> > >

> > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

> > >

> > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

> > >

> > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian,

> another

> > >

> > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my

> book

> > >

> > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

> > >

> > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

> > >

> > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge

> which

> > >

> > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

> > >

> > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists,

> only

> > >

> > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

> > >

> > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set

> these

> > >

> > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get

> rid of

> > >

> > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

> > >

> > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional

> astrology as

> > >

> > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

> > >

> > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill

> Suryasiddhantic

> > >

> > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and

> will

> > >

> > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined

> tables

> > >

> > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

> > >

> > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

> > >

> > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

> > >

> > > reject a thing before testing it.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya.

> I

> > >

> > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges

> and

> > >

> > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I

> am a

> > >

> > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ?

> I

> > >

> > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding

> something

> > >

> > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced

> by

> > >

> > > force, or by means of abuses.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > -VJ

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

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

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> > >

> > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Vinayji,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > 1)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different

> from

> > >

> > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

> > >

> > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge

> which

> > >

> > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the

> Mahabharata

> > >

> > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

> > >

> > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > 2)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing

> power

> > >

> > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you

> computing

> > >

> > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

> > >

> > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a

> madaari(ni)?

> > >

> > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

> > >

> > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving

> exit

> > >

> > > from the topic

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying

> that

> > >

> > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

> > >

> > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in

> Tantra

> > >

> > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that

> Tantra

> > >

> > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also

> the

> > >

> > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a

> drop.

> > >

> > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only

> two-Tolas

> > >

> > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

> > >

> > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please

> do

> > >

> > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted

> WHO

> > >

> > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap

> fun

> > >

> > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word

> did I

> > >

> > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your

> dirty

> > >

> > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

> > >

> > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In

> the

> > >

> > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

> > >

> > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

> > >

> > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

> > >

> > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

> unless he

> > >

> > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool

> his

> > >

> > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

> > >

> > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

> > >

> > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you

> said

> > >

> > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't

> get

> > >

> > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to

> delete

> > >

> > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am

> convinced

> > >

> > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

> > >

> > > reading.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > 6)

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

> in

> > >

> > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

> claims.

> > >

> > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and

> we

> > >

> > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things.

> All

> > >

> > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

> > >

> > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In

> fact I

> > >

> > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted

> scholarship

> > >

> > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you

> used

> > >

> > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

> > >

> > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you

> had

> > >

> > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very

> tolerant

> > >

> > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group

> but

> > >

> > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

> > >

> > > ignominiously.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > -SKB

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Bhaskar Jee,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

> > >

> > > language.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage

> strong

> > >

> > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg,

> which

> > >

> > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back

> doors. "

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

> > >

> > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

> > >

> > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but

> on

> > >

> > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what

> India

> > >

> > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can

> change.

> > >

> > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

> > >

> > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you

> to be

> > >

> > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

> > >

> > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only

> forum

> > >

> > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

> > >

> > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and

> never

> > >

> > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started

> such a

> > >

> > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you

> were

> > >

> > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to

> know

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

> > >

> > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a

> researcher.

> > >

> > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because

> I

> > >

> > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber

> of

> > >

> > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

> > >

> > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

> > >

> > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

> > >

> > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

> joined

> > >

> > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all

> these

> > >

> > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern

> astronomy

> > >

> > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison

> to

> > >

> > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares

> based

> > >

> > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

> > >

> > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

> > >

> > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose.

> But

> > >

> > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

> > >

> > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying

> to

> > >

> > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

> > >

> > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

> > >

> > > impudence... "

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from

> those

> > >

> > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on

> my

> > >

> > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing

> my

> > >

> > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

> > >

> > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

> > >

> > > worth testing and reading.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets

> to

> > >

> > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

> > >

> > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa

> about

> > >

> > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

> > >

> > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using

> my

> > >

> > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

> > >

> > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste

> my

> > >

> > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

> > >

> > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in

> AIA on

> > >

> > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a

> lifelong

> > >

> > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a

> discussion.

> > >

> > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric

> texts

> > >

> > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

> > >

> > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi

> chakra,

> > >

> > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was

> destroyed.

> > >

> > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then

> started

> > >

> > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > your

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me

> or

> > >

> > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > -VJ

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Dear Vinay jee,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against

> indian

> > >

> > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

> > >

> > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see

> that

> > >

> > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs

> of

> > >

> > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

> > >

> > > played with you, till you left back doors.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as

> ignorant,

> > >

> > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that

> Marg

> > >

> > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person

> whom

> > >

> > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

> > >

> > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these

> statements

> > >

> > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your

> goodeself (

> > >

> > > ??).

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of

> same,

> > >

> > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me

> Pompous,

> > >

> > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology,

> which

> > >

> > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

> > >

> > > planted firmly on the ground.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

> > >

> > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these,

> and

> > >

> > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed

> the

> > >

> > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give

> us,

> > >

> > > except that by using your software we will become very good

> astrologers

> > >

> > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence,

> and

> > >

> > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

> > >

> > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

> > >

> > > analysing.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study

> actually

> > >

> > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved

> yourself

> > >

> > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various

> groups

> > >

> > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

> > >

> > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > regards/Bhaskar.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

> ...>

> > >

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Bhaskar Jee,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

> > >

> > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my

> support

> > >

> > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

> > >

> > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant

> persons

> > >

> > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

> > >

> > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

> > >

> > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works,

> as

> > >

> > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only

> for 1

> > >

> > > minute. "

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

> > >

> > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

> > >

> > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

> > >

> > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

> > >

> > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and

> use

> > >

> > > it. Read a recent email to me :

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > "

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > praNaam sir,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being

> negative

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > errors).

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > and its accurate till prana

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > dashas.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > normally.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > another time

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > -VJ

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

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

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Dear Vinay ji,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

> > >

> > > persons who

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

> > >

> > > cannot

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > prove that you know " something " ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the

> roost

> > >

> > > on the

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my

> knowledge.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not

> from

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I

> mean

> > >

> > > who

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has

> just

> > >

> > > broken

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to

> mention

> > >

> > > or

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours

> on

> > >

> > > them ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we

> thought

> > >

> > > was a

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove

> yourself

> > >

> > > then

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of

> indian

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of

> this

> > >

> > > Group ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would

> have

> > >

> > > been

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from

> the

> > >

> > > broken

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but

> none

> > >

> > > have

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

> > >

> > > prove

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our

> name in

> > >

> > > front

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

> > >

> > > convincingly

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > but just rattling in the air.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed,

> because

> > >

> > > I just

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute,

> because I

> > >

> > > could

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but

> have

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

> > >

> > > present

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > set up of mind.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have

> started

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > best wishes,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Bhaskar.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

> > >

> > > ...> wrote:

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message

> is

> > >

> > > for you.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > I have yet to see

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or

> Mathematics.

> > >

> > > You

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now

> he

> > >

> > > appears

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his

> certificates.

> > >

> > > He has

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and

> says I

> > >

> > > made

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta

> and

> > >

> > > one

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

> > >

> > > Bhattacharya

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to

> abusers.

> > >

> > > I

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep

> quiet.

> > >

> > > When I

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

> > >

> > > Astrology of

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

> > >

> > > discussion on

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no

> need

> > >

> > > to

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some

> free

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use,

> and

> > >

> > > are

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the

> moderators

> > >

> > > to

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell

> my

> > >

> > > free

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > softwares in future.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > -VJ

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana

> here,

> > >

> > > that

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

> > >

> > > place,

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then

> the

> > >

> > > bridge

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

> > >

> > > bridge

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

> > >

> > > believed

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the

> time

> > >

> > > this

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with

> the

> > >

> > > Ramayan

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming

> that

> > >

> > > this

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what

> the

> > >

> > > whole

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

> > >

> > > this to

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of

> astrology ?

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of

> Jyotish

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would

> now

> > >

> > > have to

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > > > > & gt%

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Rohiniranjanji,

 

I am sixty eight years old. I heard about you and I will be glad if you kindly

let me know about your age etc.

 

After my M.Sc. in Chemistry I underwent one year's training course in the Atomic

Energy Establishment, Trombay (now BARC) and then joined that organisation as a

scientist. Thereafter I moved to Chemical Industry. Much later, ie. towards the

end of my career, I changed my field to Environmental engineering. I have

interest in Indian Philosophy, Ancient Indian History and  in Jyotish Shastra.

In Jyotish shastra I have equal interest interest in Hindu astronomy and Hindu

astrology. But astrology is really a big subject and in that I am somewhat like

a beginner but I have come to realize the utility of Astrlogy and see that

sooner the world realises its value better it will be. Astrology ia a boon to

the humanity  and that is why, even though I am not an expert in astrology, I do

not like anybody condemning astrology without any basis like Shri Avtar Krishen

Kaul  isdoing. I came to know about Shri Vinay Jha first time in the AIA forum

and he somehow

extricated himself from the bad situation he created for himself in the AIA. As

Sreenadhji invited him to AIA he thought that everybody would worship him there

without questioning. He claimed that he alone has the secret knowledge of

Suryasiddhanta and he went on telling about such things, which he could not

substantiate. However he was in for surprise as AIA, like any other sensible

fora, the AIA members would not tolerate any baseless statement. 

 

I too feel now that there is no point in responding to his mails. If anybody is

interested the old mails of the groups are there to refer to.

 

Regards,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

 

--- On Sun, 4/5/09, Rohiniranjan <jyotish_vani wrote:

 

Rohiniranjan <jyotish_vani

Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

Sunday, April 5, 2009, 7:28 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sunil bhai/Dada,

 

 

 

I do not know your age but you sound older than me ...

 

 

 

Why is this Vinayji becoming so important to you? Each point that you shared

with this forum of thousands of us ants -- had a reference to Vinayji.

 

 

 

Who is this " Vinayji " who claims so much of your attention and energy and why

should you think he should ours as well?

 

 

 

At least in the post that I responded to?

 

 

 

Rohiniranjan

 

 

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy

a wrote:

 

>

 

> Dear all.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> 1)

 

>

 

> In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

 

> reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha.

 

> I shall not insist on that hereafter.

 

>

 

> 2)

 

>

 

> Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

 

> has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

 

> though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move

 

> away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti

 

> or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

 

> Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also

 

> have taught Mayasura.

 

>

 

> 3)

 

>

 

> Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling

 

> that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the

 

> date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have

 

> frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

 

> knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

 

> about it with proof.

 

>

 

> 4)

 

>

 

> In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle

 

> of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to

 

> give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta  without

 

> establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

 

> appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

 

> Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and  there is already a paper

 

> on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

 

> published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25

 

> August,2003) , where the authors were saying about the 60-year

 

> periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

 

> cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point)

 

> could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer

 

> worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to

 

> its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles.

 

> But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way

 

> his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter

 

> cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our  questioning the

 

> newness in his work.  He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine

 

> truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal

 

> attack on him.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> 5)

 

>

 

> Vinayji says

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Quote

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you

 

> will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

 

> source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after

getting this information.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Unquote

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails

 

> in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

 

> flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

 

> playing tricks with him.

 

>

 

> 6)

 

>

 

> He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others

 

> do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

 

> does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this

 

> he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore  what he says must be

 

> accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability

 

> to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

 

> vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

 

> normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to

 

> discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran

 

> in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

 

>

 

> 7)

 

>

 

> Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that

 

> I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that

 

> Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

 

> Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

 

> given  in his own websites.

 

>

 

> 8)

 

>

 

> Vinayji questioned as to  what I contributed in astrology. I want to

 

> assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

 

> questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not

 

> claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to

 

> question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

 

> misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot

 

> call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

 

> astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything

 

> from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

 

> student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a

 

> verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of

 

> the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that

 

> verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

 

> Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession

 

> is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

 

> ancient times in India  though he himself said that Manu mentioned that

 

> astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

 

> Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

 

> temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji

 

> did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested

 

> against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting

 

> against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

 

> There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may

 

> know astrology but  he must accept the human limitations in

 

> interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

 

> astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

 

> genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his

 

> past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

 

> present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic

 

> but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

 

> towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

 

> change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

 

> counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

 

> approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if

 

> necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

 

> people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have

 

> devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

 

> some of my gullible brothers and sisters  by misinterpreting the

 

> efficacy and the purpose of astrology.  Kaulji should channelise his

 

> energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish

 

> shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

 

> condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar.   I

 

> think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in

 

> astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

 

> least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

 

> claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he

 

> very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just

 

> a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am

 

> not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert

that

 

> myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution

 

> so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

 

> Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison.

 

> I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity

 

> to do so, for which I am thankful to them.

 

>

 

> However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any

contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in

peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of

repute and  presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical

seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this

sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never

lie?

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Regards nevertheless,

 

>

 

>

 

> Sunil. Bhattacharjya.

 

>

 

> --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

>

 

> vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> To ALL :

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here

 

>

 

> that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show

 

>

 

> concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

 

>

 

> comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

 

>

 

> deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has

 

>

 

> made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

 

>

 

> writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out

 

>

 

> of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A

 

>

 

> New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

 

>

 

> (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast in\

 

>

 

> g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made

 

>

 

> him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore)

 

>

 

> that I was a cheat ?

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> To Sunil ji :

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never

 

>

 

> did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail

 

>

 

> convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other

 

>

 

> things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of

 

>

 

> your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

 

>

 

> without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet

 

>

 

> Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without

 

>

 

> providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

 

>

 

> record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the

 

>

 

> antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make

 

>

 

> discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me

 

>

 

> to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

 

>

 

> field of interest, I can only be amused.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

 

>

 

> sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

 

>

 

> Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will

 

>

 

> enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

 

>

 

> Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets

 

>

 

> are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

 

>

 

> lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord

 

>

 

> Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so

 

>

 

> ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

 

>

 

> blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements.

 

>

 

> Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and

 

>

 

> there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a

 

>

 

> tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

 

>

 

> results.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me,

 

>

 

> you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want

 

>

 

> to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a

 

>

 

> liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about

 

>

 

> Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

 

>

 

> proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

 

>

 

> misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the

 

>

 

> verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward

 

>

 

> flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

 

>

 

> without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and

 

>

 

> instead have already started abusing me after getting this information.

 

>

 

> This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to

 

>

 

> science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and

 

>

 

> makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned

 

>

 

> institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever

 

>

 

> produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again

 

>

 

> and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

 

>

 

> astrological credentials (

 

>

 

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_

acc\

 

>

 

> epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

 

>

 

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials

 

>

 

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha

 

>

 

> http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\

 

>

 

> ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my

 

>

 

> paper by CAOS, IISc.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of

 

>

 

> evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

 

>

 

> veracity and started attacking me.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works,

 

>

 

> you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

 

>

 

> approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

 

>

 

> explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss

 

>

 

> the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly

 

>

 

> fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing

 

>

 

> fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it

 

>

 

> also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone.

 

>

 

> Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me

 

>

 

> personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

 

>

 

> Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

 

>

 

> mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

 

>

 

> benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

 

>

 

> brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never

 

>

 

> serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I

 

>

 

> wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of

 

>

 

> my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now

 

>

 

> you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

 

>

 

> topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of

 

>

 

> what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas

 

>

 

> of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on

 

>

 

> one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides

 

>

 

> performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life

 

>

 

> gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ??

 

>

 

> Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

 

>

 

> Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

 

>

 

> Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of

 

>

 

> interest.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to

 

>

 

> tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

 

>

 

> disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you

 

>

 

> again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

 

>

 

> benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want

 

>

 

> to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption

 

>

 

> of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

 

>

 

> forums.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in

 

>

 

> my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my

 

>

 

> supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie,

 

>

 

> and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be

 

>

 

> compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

 

>

 

> words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have

 

>

 

> an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

 

>

 

> degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it

 

>

 

> are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get

 

>

 

> anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real

 

>

 

> giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

 

>

 

> acknowledge.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

 

>

 

> dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

 

>

 

> your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your

 

>

 

> own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

 

>

 

> ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from

 

>

 

> the root).

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> -VJ

 

>

 

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

 

>

 

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

 

>

 

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinayji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 1)

 

>

 

> > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your

 

>

 

> Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

 

>

 

> imaginary outpourings.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 2)

 

>

 

> > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the

 

>

 

> group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -SKB

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ...

 

>

 

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunilji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I

 

>

 

> answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt

 

>

 

> astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

 

>

 

> internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

 

>

 

> astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the

 

>

 

> verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

 

>

 

> literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the

 

>

 

> real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

 

>

 

> verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The

 

>

 

> point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as

 

>

 

> mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument

 

>

 

> over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong

 

>

 

> interpretation.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

 

>

 

> ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

 

>

 

> commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with

 

>

 

> a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

 

>

 

> have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical

 

>

 

> astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon.

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

 

>

 

> which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical

 

>

 

> period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no

 

>

 

> much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical

 

>

 

> eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm

 

>

 

> " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

 

>

 

> difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at

 

>

 

> the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is

 

>

 

> nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon

 

>

 

> and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the

 

>

 

> length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ;

 

>

 

> tropical year has less difference).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical

 

>

 

> and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I

 

>

 

> always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

 

>

 

> motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude

 

>

 

> he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and

 

>

 

> do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

 

>

 

> ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

 

>

 

> physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

 

>

 

> persons, how can I ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish

 

>

 

> mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe

 

>

 

> that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

 

>

 

> physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion,

 

>

 

> I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on

 

>

 

> the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare

 

>

 

> the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

 

>

 

> Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

 

>

 

> actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

 

>

 

> relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

 

>

 

> decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

 

>

 

> horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

 

>

 

> Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest

 

>

 

> in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta

 

>

 

> is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy,

 

>

 

> which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake

 

>

 

> an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to

 

>

 

> arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

 

>

 

> interested

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

 

>

 

> precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I

 

>

 

> will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using

 

>

 

> harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

 

>

 

> discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for

 

>

 

> you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for

 

>

 

> non-astrological nonsense.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinayji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from

 

>

 

> east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

 

>

 

> Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how

 

>

 

> it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of

 

>

 

> Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) .

 

>

 

> When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

 

>

 

> changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you

 

>

 

> have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are

 

>

 

> going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of

 

>

 

> you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the

 

>

 

> Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it

 

>

 

> . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy

 

>

 

> that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed

 

>

 

> here) appeared to move in the reverse

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

 

>

 

> than one Saptasindhu.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the

 

>

 

> eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

 

>

 

> just ignored that.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not

 

>

 

> given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

 

>

 

> talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he

 

>

 

> referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

 

>

 

> imaginary locations.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Regards,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunil ji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your

 

>

 

> mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

 

>

 

> commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

 

>

 

> imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and

 

>

 

> two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

 

>

 

> astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But

 

>

 

> with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened

 

>

 

> and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

 

>

 

> intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

 

>

 

> Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof

 

>

 

> of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

 

>

 

> perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

 

>

 

> practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which

 

>

 

> is the only proper way to decide the issue.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of

 

>

 

> mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical

 

>

 

> or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

 

>

 

> learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

 

>

 

> locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

 

>

 

> planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not

 

>

 

> read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

 

>

 

> eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse

 

>

 

> because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided.

 

>

 

> But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided

 

>

 

> the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

 

>

 

> me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other

 

>

 

> person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and

 

>

 

> was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It

 

>

 

> is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of

 

>

 

> repute.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did

 

>

 

> not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

 

>

 

> provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

 

>

 

> concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept

 

>

 

> of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never

 

>

 

> called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation

 

>

 

> or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was

 

>

 

> therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

 

>

 

> socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can

 

>

 

> show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time,

 

>

 

> I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

 

>

 

> sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I

 

>

 

> gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

 

>

 

> treatment.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I

 

>

 

> said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am

 

>

 

> ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over

 

>

 

> personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to

 

>

 

> behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views

 

>

 

> are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

 

>

 

> works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

 

>

 

> form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is

 

>

 

> neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here

 

>

 

> in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

 

>

 

> texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

 

>

 

> provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

 

>

 

> accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me.

 

>

 

> And without listening properly, how will ever know my

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew

 

>

 

> forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give

 

>

 

> you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters,

 

>

 

> including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to

 

>

 

> supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion

 

>

 

> of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till

 

>

 

> his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an

 

>

 

> honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested

 

>

 

> him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed.

 

>

 

> Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his

 

>

 

> ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that

 

>

 

> Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta

 

>

 

> and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for

 

>

 

> shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh

 

>

 

> started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a

 

>

 

> free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

 

>

 

> topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted

 

>

 

> to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

 

>

 

> existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

 

>

 

> tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

 

>

 

> " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

 

>

 

> missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting

 

>

 

> the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering.

 

>

 

> There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but

 

>

 

> I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

 

>

 

> brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

 

>

 

> start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

 

>

 

> sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and

 

>

 

> there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling

 

>

 

> you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

 

>

 

> powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature ,

 

>

 

> but

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

 

>

 

> tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

 

>

 

> want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It

 

>

 

> is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or

 

>

 

> stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds,

 

>

 

> in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

 

>

 

> rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

 

>

 

> astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

 

>

 

> you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am

 

>

 

> forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

 

>

 

> divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize

 

>

 

> me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused

 

>

 

> me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

 

>

 

> developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there

 

>

 

> is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing

 

>

 

> you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

 

>

 

> astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain

 

>

 

> to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

 

>

 

> again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

 

>

 

> because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am

 

>

 

> not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and

 

>

 

> can substantiate.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Good Wishes,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

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

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinayji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 1)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You said

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Quote

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

 

>

 

> " torment " Rohini ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Unquote

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

 

>

 

> astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both

 

>

 

> are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

 

>

 

> Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when

 

>

 

> he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

 

>

 

> within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 2)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

 

>

 

> travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

 

>

 

> Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets

 

>

 

> invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that

 

>

 

> it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in

 

>

 

> what you say.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 3)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a

 

>

 

> married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

 

>

 

> physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have

 

>

 

> insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

 

>

 

> requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

 

>

 

> Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required

 

>

 

> rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to

 

>

 

> believe in these claims of yours.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 4)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets

 

>

 

> and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any

 

>

 

> ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you

 

>

 

> want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you

 

>

 

> so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

 

>

 

> through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body

 

>

 

> until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

 

>

 

> identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 5)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any

 

>

 

> reference to back your statement.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 6)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you

 

>

 

> said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good

 

>

 

> riddance "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 7)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking.

 

>

 

> you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

 

>

 

> question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right

 

>

 

> or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to

 

>

 

> you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors

 

>

 

> depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong

 

>

 

> impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in

 

>

 

> your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I

 

>

 

> have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in

 

>

 

> Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are

 

>

 

> doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

 

>

 

> unopposed?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -SKB

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > TO ALL :

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an

 

>

 

> alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

 

>

 

> guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for

 

>

 

> useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

 

>

 

> starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

 

>

 

> changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another

 

>

 

> user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha,

 

>

 

> other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

 

>

 

> because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language

 

>

 

> dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

 

>

 

> modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material

 

>

 

> or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

 

>

 

> terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this

 

>

 

> world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of

 

>

 

> deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

 

>

 

> words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based

 

>

 

> upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world.

 

>

 

> Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away

 

>

 

> from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets.

 

>

 

> But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead

 

>

 

> thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

 

>

 

> different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is

 

>

 

> 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million

 

>

 

> Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates

 

>

 

> once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In

 

>

 

> early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

 

>

 

> planets are concerned...

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

 

>

 

> modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has

 

>

 

> no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit

 

>

 

> word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing

 

>

 

> modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

 

>

 

> present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern

 

>

 

> method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

 

>

 

> Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in

 

>

 

> 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that

 

>

 

> both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

 

>

 

> inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

 

>

 

> point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no

 

>

 

> visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based

 

>

 

> upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

 

>

 

> degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

 

>

 

> Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no

 

>

 

> connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

 

>

 

> libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the

 

>

 

> time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in

 

>

 

> Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It

 

>

 

> was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

 

>

 

> scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

 

>

 

> precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is

 

>

 

> not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

 

>

 

> precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the

 

>

 

> proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

 

>

 

> disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

 

>

 

> Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > ---

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that

 

>

 

> the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

 

>

 

> locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you

 

>

 

> say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to

 

>

 

> possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

 

>

 

> Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location)

 

>

 

> and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

 

>

 

> Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and

 

>

 

> everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

 

>

 

> themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

 

>

 

> Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational

 

>

 

> ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

 

>

 

> Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

 

>

 

> mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog

 

>

 

> tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where

 

>

 

> my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

 

>

 

> professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a

 

>

 

> face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe

 

>

 

> like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

 

>

 

> is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

 

>

 

> really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in

 

>

 

> my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

 

>

 

> decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

 

>

 

> Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient

 

>

 

> times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and

 

>

 

> only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

 

>

 

> Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

 

>

 

> married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

 

>

 

> Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

 

>

 

> quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner

 

>

 

> in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa

 

>

 

> said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said

 

>

 

> Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

 

>

 

> Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

 

>

 

> Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no

 

>

 

> episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief

 

>

 

> reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war.

 

>

 

> Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring,

 

>

 

> but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was

 

>

 

> merely a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

 

>

 

> according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

 

>

 

> Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

 

>

 

> Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real

 

>

 

> sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say

 

>

 

> so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a

 

>

 

> mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

 

>

 

> ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika

 

>

 

> foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

 

>

 

> Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to

 

>

 

> eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than

 

>

 

> cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat,

 

>

 

> fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

 

>

 

> non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

 

>

 

> brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should

 

>

 

> not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by

 

>

 

> him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I

 

>

 

> know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often

 

>

 

> abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like

 

>

 

> " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from

 

>

 

> the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

 

>

 

> ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

 

>

 

> discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately

 

>

 

> false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

 

>

 

> beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

 

>

 

> leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

 

>

 

> institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired

 

>

 

> by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at

 

>

 

> Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

 

>

 

> IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

 

>

 

> which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS,

 

>

 

> IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me.

 

>

 

> He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in

 

>

 

> the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. "

 

>

 

> These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used

 

>

 

> such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial

 

>

 

> mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

 

>

 

> Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought

 

>

 

> that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me,

 

>

 

> denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that

 

>

 

> Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just

 

>

 

> because I know the practical methods of

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely

 

>

 

> projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him,

 

>

 

> and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the

 

>

 

> field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me

 

>

 

> obscene messages.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

 

>

 

> bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

 

>

 

> Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

 

>

 

> requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr

 

>

 

> Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly

 

>

 

> instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a

 

>

 

> shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the

 

>

 

> moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good

 

>

 

> in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of

 

>

 

> no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

 

>

 

> shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

 

>

 

> launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in

 

>

 

> Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance

 

>

 

> to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the

 

>

 

> answers).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

 

>

 

> misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had

 

>

 

> he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

 

>

 

> should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

 

>

 

> summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another

 

>

 

> is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book

 

>

 

> from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

 

>

 

> uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

 

>

 

> material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which

 

>

 

> modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

 

>

 

> springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only

 

>

 

> those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

 

>

 

> away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these

 

>

 

> rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of

 

>

 

> me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

 

>

 

> some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as

 

>

 

> based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

 

>

 

> softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic

 

>

 

> astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will

 

>

 

> continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables

 

>

 

> originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

 

>

 

> astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

 

>

 

> " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

 

>

 

> reject a thing before testing it.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I

 

>

 

> left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and

 

>

 

> abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a

 

>

 

> bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I

 

>

 

> have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something

 

>

 

> useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by

 

>

 

> force, or by means of abuses.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

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

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

 

>

 

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Vinayji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 1)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from

 

>

 

> the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

 

>

 

> you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which

 

>

 

> you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata

 

>

 

> war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

 

>

 

> location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 2)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power

 

>

 

> like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing

 

>

 

> abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

 

>

 

> computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)?

 

>

 

> Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

 

>

 

> otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

 

>

 

> from the topic

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that

 

>

 

> Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

 

>

 

> Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra

 

>

 

> one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra

 

>

 

> recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the

 

>

 

> alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop.

 

>

 

> However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas

 

>

 

> (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

 

>

 

> permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

 

>

 

> not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO

 

>

 

> before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun

 

>

 

> of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I

 

>

 

> use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty

 

>

 

> tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

 

>

 

> lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

 

>

 

> ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

 

>

 

> Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

 

>

 

> biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

 

>

 

> mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he

 

>

 

> became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

 

>

 

> mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

 

>

 

> Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

 

>

 

> Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said

 

>

 

> that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get

 

>

 

> to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete

 

>

 

> it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced

 

>

 

> that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

 

>

 

> reading.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 6)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in

 

>

 

> the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims.

 

>

 

> I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we

 

>

 

> respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All

 

>

 

> other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

 

>

 

> towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I

 

>

 

> also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship

 

>

 

> remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used

 

>

 

> bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

 

>

 

> threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had

 

>

 

> to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

 

>

 

> towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but

 

>

 

> yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

 

>

 

> ignominiously.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > -SKB

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Bhaskar Jee,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

 

>

 

> language.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong

 

>

 

> solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which

 

>

 

> weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

 

>

 

> astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

 

>

 

> ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on

 

>

 

> revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India

 

>

 

> really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change.

 

>

 

> She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

 

>

 

> explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be

 

>

 

> my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

 

>

 

> nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

 

>

 

> where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

 

>

 

> handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never

 

>

 

> allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a

 

>

 

> discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were

 

>

 

> never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

 

>

 

> professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher.

 

>

 

> We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I

 

>

 

> do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of

 

>

 

> any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

 

>

 

> singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

 

>

 

> some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

 

>

 

> forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined

 

>

 

> Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these

 

>

 

> forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy

 

>

 

> which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based

 

>

 

> on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

 

>

 

> recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

 

>

 

> science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But

 

>

 

> if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

 

>

 

> going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to

 

>

 

> give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

 

>

 

> astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

 

>

 

> impudence... "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those

 

>

 

> used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my

 

>

 

> work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my

 

>

 

> software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

 

>

 

> wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

 

>

 

> worth testing and reading.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to

 

>

 

> you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

 

>

 

> criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about

 

>

 

> my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

 

>

 

> non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my

 

>

 

> software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

 

>

 

> fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my

 

>

 

> time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

 

>

 

> Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on

 

>

 

> Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong

 

>

 

> brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion.

 

>

 

> Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts

 

>

 

> are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

 

>

 

> like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra,

 

>

 

> sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed.

 

>

 

> Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started

 

>

 

> using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > your

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or

 

>

 

> ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Dear Vinay jee,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian

 

>

 

> culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

 

>

 

> seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that

 

>

 

> you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of

 

>

 

> what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

 

>

 

> played with you, till you left back doors.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant,

 

>

 

> but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg

 

>

 

> has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom

 

>

 

> i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

 

>

 

> leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements

 

>

 

> as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself (

 

>

 

> ??).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same,

 

>

 

> in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous,

 

>

 

> impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which

 

>

 

> these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

 

>

 

> planted firmly on the ground.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

 

>

 

> claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and

 

>

 

> you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the

 

>

 

> torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

 

>

 

> except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers

 

>

 

> ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and

 

>

 

> not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

 

>

 

> acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

 

>

 

> analysing.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually

 

>

 

> what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself

 

>

 

> to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups

 

>

 

> you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

 

>

 

> otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > regards/Bhaskar.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

>

 

> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Bhaskar Jee,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

 

>

 

> liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support

 

>

 

> you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

 

>

 

> certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons

 

>

 

> like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

 

>

 

> moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

 

>

 

> nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as

 

>

 

> you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1

 

>

 

> minute. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

 

>

 

> persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

 

>

 

> Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

 

>

 

> attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

 

>

 

> software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use

 

>

 

> it. Read a recent email to me :

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > praNaam sir,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > the last time(about fonts and vb

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > errors).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > and its accurate till prana

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > dashas.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > normally.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > another time

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

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

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Dear Vinay ji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

 

>

 

> persons who

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

 

>

 

> cannot

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > prove that you know " something " ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost

 

>

 

> on the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean

 

>

 

> who

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just

 

>

 

> broken

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > glass pieces in his kitty.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention

 

>

 

> or

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on

 

>

 

> them ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought

 

>

 

> was a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself

 

>

 

> then

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this

 

>

 

> Group ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have

 

>

 

> been

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the

 

>

 

> broken

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none

 

>

 

> have

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

 

>

 

> prove

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in

 

>

 

> front

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

 

>

 

> convincingly

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > but just rattling in the air.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because

 

>

 

> I just

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I

 

>

 

> could

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

 

>

 

> present

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > set up of mind.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > best wishes,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Bhaskar.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

 

>

 

> ...> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is

 

>

 

> for you.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I have yet to see

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics.

 

>

 

> You

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he

 

>

 

> appears

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates.

 

>

 

> He has

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I

 

>

 

> made

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and

 

>

 

> one

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

 

>

 

> Bhattacharya

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers.

 

>

 

> I

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet.

 

>

 

> When I

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

 

>

 

> Astrology of

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

 

>

 

> discussion on

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need

 

>

 

> to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and

 

>

 

> are

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators

 

>

 

> to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my

 

>

 

> free

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > softwares in future.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > The Dating of Ramayana

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here,

 

>

 

> that

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

 

>

 

> place,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the

 

>

 

> bridge

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

 

>

 

> bridge

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

 

>

 

> believed

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time

 

>

 

> this

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the

 

>

 

> Ramayan

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that

 

>

 

> this

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the

 

>

 

> whole

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

 

>

 

> this to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now

 

>

 

> have to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > & gt%

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

To All :

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya ji is now using less offensive language, hence I

am responding to his points (because he raised doubts about some

important issues) :

 

(1)

He wrongly quotes me that I " cannot cite a single reference tosupport

his (my) Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha " . I gavehim the

name of the one of the most importantreferences which he did not want to

consult and says I cannot cite anyreference. As I said earlier, the very

purpose of my joining anyastrological forum was toshow concrete proofs

of both physical and non-physical astrology in acomparative manner. This

cannot be done in an hostile environmentbeing created by him. I do not

want to discuss thisdifficult topic with aperson who is not seriously

interested in it and is using bad languagefor me, but if other members

here are interested in these topics, theymay view some of my older

contributions to another forum :

http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58522

http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58483

http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58486

 

I later added these ancient topics of mundane astrology to my own

website (cf.http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/sitemap ). I tried in vain

to discussthese things in AIA, mainly due to Chandrahari ji and Sunil

ji, whonever allowed me to discuss anything worthwhile. I thank

Chandrahari jifor forgetting me.

 

(2)

Sunil ji's conjecture about " Surya rishi, who could also have

taughtMayasura " is merely a conjecture, supported by some modern

atheists. Ifsome people believe in Surya Deva as mentioned in original

texts, whySunil ji turns hostile ?

 

3)

I have myself worked on the date of Kalidasa. I also possess a verse

byKalidasa in which the great poet himself told his date, but

modernpublishers omit this last verse. If Sunil ji is really interested

ingenuine research, instead of abusing me, he should search for some

19thcentury publication of Ritusamhaara (not publiushed by any

foreigner).

 

4)

Sunil ji falsely says that I " label any questioning as a personalattack

on (me) " . He is again resorting to a false and uncivil personalattack on

me by misreporting my discovery of 61-year cycle as 60-yearcycle. In

group discussion at IISc, some scientists had asked me aboutconnection

of 60-year Jovian cycle with my 61-year cycle, to which Ireplied that

Jovian cycle is of 60 Jovian years which are equal to 59.3solar years

and is therefore short by 1.7 years which is too much toignore. Hence,

61-year cycle has no connection to Jovian cycle. In mypaper, I mentioned

that many researchers had earlier mentioned 60-yearcycle (I gave 9

references) , but no one had ever mentioned a 61-yearcycle. Sunil ji

says " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter

meet at the same point " , but it is a wrong statement.In 60 Jovian years

equal 59.3 solar years, hence Sun and Jupiter do notcome to same point

after 59.3 solar or 60 Jovian years. Even aschoolboy can understand that

Jupiter has a period of 11.861 years,which amount to 59.3 years in 5

revolutions). The shortfall of 1.7years is negligible for Sunil ji, but

it is over 20 raashis in fact. Howsuch a careless person could have

contributed anything worthwhile tothe world of knowledge is hard to

swallow. Yet he calls himself ascientist. Even if he carried some

research in his fruitful years, henow shows clear signs of aging. Sunil

ji ischarging me of plagiary, just because he fails to understand that

59.3is different from 61. I request members to read my paper at :

http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting\

?t=anon

 

In it, i referred to 60-year cycle with 9 references to earlier

works,none of which mentioned a 61-year cycle and none of them was

definiteabout any 60-year cycle as well, that is why it was called

quasi-60year cycle. Please look at Fig-8 in my paper titled " Annual

IndianRainfall : Long Term Trends " , in which I showed some trends

whichclearly indicate that we get more smooth trends as we go for

longerterms. But no scientist was sure whether this long term trend

should befixed at 60 ,65 or 85 years, there were varying conclusions in

earlier researches. I was thefirst person to change the arrangement of

dataset from year beginningwith January to year beginning with April,

after which a clear proof of61-year cycle was noticed by me as shown in

Fig-2 and same 61-year cycle was noticed by me inother global climatic

phenomena as well, like global pressure and temperature. I amsorry to

inform that Sunil ji is either careless or is deliberatelydistorting my

findings merely to malign me. My work hasno relation to Jupiter's cycle,

yet he falsely wants others to believethat I stole an old concept to

present a new theory. Then, he adds thatI " claim " to have presented my

paper. I never entered into any serviceanywhere, why CAOS, IISc would

have invited me had they not found somemerit in my work ? Sunil ji is

not an expert in this field but isdoubting not only my integrity but

also of CAOS, IISc by inferring thatIISc invited a plagiarist who

presented old theory in new form.

 

In that paper, I provided concrete evidences of a 61-year cycle and

italso proved the existence of a climatic year beginning with April

whicha Japanese scientist Tetsuzo Yasunari had conjectured before me.In

the same paper, I presented my rain forecast which I had earliersent to

615 weather scientists worldwide. Sunil ji gladly forgets tomention that

my rain forecasts were found to be " smart " and " good " byClimate branch

of NASA headquarters :

http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s_Report%3B_%26_my_Paper_acc\

epted_by_CAOS%2C_IISc

 

Instead of showing any interest in learning how these forecasts

weremade, Sunil ji started maligning me, in cooperation with

Chandraharijiand his friend Sreenadhji who used words like " cheat,fool "

etc for me again and again.

 

In my paper to IISc, I did not mention Suryasiddhanta, nor did Iexplain

the methodology behind my rain forecasts, as I clearly stated there that

" Only a brief outline of this concept can be presentedhere, because this

concept is too complex and vast to be presented in asingle paper. "

 

Those who are real experts and are desirous of learning the

secretsbehind climatic teleconnections were pleased with my

contribution, butthose who wanted character assassination just because I

refused toaccepyt that wine is essential in Tantric Astrology could not

find anymerit in my work. Reason behind global climatic teleconnections

isunknown to modern science and scientists are eagerly awaiting any

reliable explanation. I concluded in that paper : " If we pay more

attention to a thorough examination ofraw data of relative rainfall in

order to find hidden patterns ofnature, a whole new world may be opened,

literally, because this newapproach is based upon the theory of two

universes . This second universe is not composed of visible matter but

influences the events of our universe profoundly .Surprisingly, rainfall

to rainfall correlation among various regionswithin a climatic zone is

much more strong and persistent thanpredictor-rainfall correlations ,

and is fully operative even duringchaotic phases . "

 

The last sentence " rainfall to rainfal correlation.... " provides a key

to this problem. It shows that predictor-rainfall relation is not a

cause-consequence relation as believed by a majority of weather

scientists. Currently, we are at the fag end of a " predictable phase "

which is to be followed by a prolonged chaotic phase in which

predictions based on physical predictors will fail to work, as they did

in previous chaotic phase. Only then materialists will be really

interested in non-physical explanation of physical events. Till then,

chaarvaakists may continue to attack and malign me.

 

Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is

not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on

astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as he

claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg, difference

between 59.3 and 61) ?

 

7)

Sunil ji says Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals ;

but he is mistaken. Chandrahariji published his works on Suryasiddhanta

in journals which did not have a single expert of Suryasiddhanta in its

panel , that is why Chandrahariji was able to cheat the panel and put

forth his imaninary concepts as being based on Suryasiddhanta. If a

peer-reviewed journal of nuclear physics publishes a paper on bio-gas, I

will not accept the authenticity of such a journal or such a paper. On

the other hand, my paper was accepted at IISc after review by referrees

whose initial report was sent to me in which some valuable suggestions

were made to improve the presentation of my paper. These referees were

experts in weather science, they knew the worth of my work, which

Sunilji is projecting as a worthless piece of plagiary perhaps due to

his ignorance.

 

8)

Like his earlier remarks, Sunilji is again showing signs of failing

memory and false citations. He says " the physicians and the temple

priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. " Like Kaulji,

Sunilji also misinterprets Manusmriti. Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh,

clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas

who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa, and

astrology. Only distressed persons go to these four places, and ancient

sages regarded it sinful to extort money from distressed persons.

 

Sunilji says he made contribution in science. Whatever be the worth of

his earlier works in science which I do not know, his present writings

lead me to believe that he is utterly incapable of genuine research : I

am saying so with an apology, but I must state the truth. A person

saying " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter

meet at the same point " must have a knowledge of science and mathematics

comparable perhaps to a 7 or 8-year boy who knows there is a difference

of over 610 degrees or over 20 raashis between 61 solar years and 59.305

solar years (=60 Jovian years) and yet claims Sun and Jupiter " meet at

the same point " after 60 years !

 

Sunil ji should forget what I am. Personal remarks about me like " a

great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be " are not conducive to a

healthy discussion on any topic. If Sunilji wants good discussion, he

must refrain from making personal attacks. I could have ignored his

messages had it not contained false and foolish remarks about monsoon

cycles and some other important things.

 

He thinks publishers of Chandrahariji's articles are peers and those who

accept my papers are fools. This partisan attitude is not going to help

him in gaining any knowledge of traditional disciplines (which he does

not want to learn, otherwise he would have refrained from personal

attacks). I ask Sunilji to name a single " peer " among publishers of

Chandrahariji's articles who know how to compute Suryasiddhantic true

planets. These peers cannot go beyond Burgess, who made a mockery of

Suryasiddhanta. I had informed Sunilji that I had filed a lawsuit

against a head of jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University of being ignorant

of traditional astronomy, and I won that case (cf.

http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Credentials ) : that HOD was later

removed. Instead of trying to learn traditional astronomy, Sunilji

continued poking fun at me. It is due to his offensive language that I

withheld this knowledge from him. He is convinced about my

worthlessness, and I am also convinced about his unwillingness. Can we

not forget each other and attend to nobler tasks ??

 

If he continues his offensive, he will receive sound answers. I can

forget personal insults as long as it does does not harm my cause, as I

did in AIA when Chandrahariji abused me for weeks without a single bad

word from me, but I cannot tolerate any baseless offensive against the

cause for which I care.

 

I am sorry to inform that the 61-year climatic cycle was convincingly

presented by me and was accepted by weather experts without any

refutation, but if Sunilji thinks it is a bogus work, why he does not

refute my article logically instead of spreding false rumours about it

?? There is no physical explanation behind this 61-year cycle

(explanation lies in non-physical phenomena which I never explained),

but Sunilji is doubting the very existence of this cycle !! Even if I do

not explain it, the cycle exists and it was not known before pointed it

out. Sunilji should not confuse it with 60-year Jovian cycle. The

60-year Jovian cycle has never been proven to be true by any weather

scientist (please do not change my words : I am not doubting its

existence, I am merely stating that weather scientists have not attested

it so far). Sunilji is denying facts, how can he learn explanations of

those facts ???

 

-VJ

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

, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Dear all.

>

>

>

> 1)

>

> In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

> reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha.

> I shall not insist on that hereafter.

>

> 2)

>

> Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

> has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

> though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move

> away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to

Kunti

> or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

> Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could

also

> have taught Mayasura.

>

> 3)

>

> Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling

> that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how

the

> date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have

> frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

> knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

> about it with proof.

>

> 4)

>

> In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle

> of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to

> give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without

> establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

> appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

> Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper

> on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

> published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4,

25

> August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year

> periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

> cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point)

> could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer

> worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to

> its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles.

> But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way

> his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter

> cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the

> newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as

divine

> truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal

> attack on him.

>

>

>

> 5)

>

> Vinayji says

>

>

>

> Quote

>

>

>

> You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you

> will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

> source of this information, and instead have already started abusing

me after getting this information.

>

>

>

> Unquote

>

>

>

> Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails

> in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

> flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

> playing tricks with him.

>

> 6)

>

> He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others

> do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

> does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by

this

> he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be

> accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability

> to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

> vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

> normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to

> discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran

> in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

>

> 7)

>

> Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that

> I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that

> Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

> Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

> given in his own websites.

>

> 8)

>

> Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to

> assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

> questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not

> claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to

> question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

> misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot

> call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

> astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything

> from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

> student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a

> verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge

of

> the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually

that

> verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

> Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession

> is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

> ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned

that

> astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

> Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

> temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji

> did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested

> against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting

> against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

> There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may

> know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in

> interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

> astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

> genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his

> past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

> present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic

> but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

> towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

> change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

> counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

> approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if

> necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

> people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I

have

> devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

> some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the

> efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his

> energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology.

Jyotish

> shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

> condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I

> think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in

> astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

> least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

> claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

>

>

>

> Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his

admirers as he

> very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am

just

> a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am

> not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot

assert that

> myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution

> so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

> Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison.

> I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity

> to do so, for which I am thankful to them.

>

> However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not

made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a

number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific

and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in

big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents

to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling

your self-claimed vow that you would never lie?

>

>

>

> Regards nevertheless,

>

>

> Sunil. Bhattacharjya.

>

> --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16 wrote:

>

> vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM

>

>

>

>

>

>

To ALL :

>

>

>

> Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add

here

>

> that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show

>

> concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

>

> comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

>

> deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who

has

>

> made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

>

> writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just

out

>

> of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper

" A

>

> New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

>

> (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

to+Rain+Forecast in\

>

> g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made

>

> him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc

(Bangalore)

>

> that I was a cheat ?

>

>

>

> To Sunil ji :

>

>

>

> You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never

>

> did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me.

>

>

>

> Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail

>

> convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other

>

> things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some

of

>

> your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

>

> without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great

poet

>

> Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without

>

> providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

>

> record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the

>

> antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to

make

>

> discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks

me

>

> to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

>

> field of interest, I can only be amused.

>

>

>

> Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

>

> sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

>

> Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they

will

>

> enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

>

> Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

>

> Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical

planets

>

> are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

>

> lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that

Lord

>

> Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do

so

>

> ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

>

> blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false

statements.

>

> Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and

>

> there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such

a

>

> tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

>

> results.

>

>

>

> With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me,

>

> you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want

>

> to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me

a

>

> liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about

>

> Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

>

> proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

>

> misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the

>

> verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward

>

> flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

>

> without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and

>

> instead have already started abusing me after getting this

information.

>

> This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to

>

> science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and

>

> makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world

renowned

>

> institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever

>

> produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

>

>

>

> In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific "

again

>

> and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

>

> astrological credentials (

>

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_

%26_my_Paper_ acc\

>

> epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

>

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials

>

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha

>

> http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

to+Rain+Forecast ing\

>

> ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of

my

>

> paper by CAOS, IISc.

>

>

>

> Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of

>

> evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

>

> veracity and started attacking me.

>

>

>

> Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my

works,

>

> you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

>

> approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

>

> explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss

>

> the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly

>

> fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing

>

> fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and

it

>

> also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone.

>

> Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me

>

> personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

>

> Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

>

> mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

>

> benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

>

> brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never

>

> serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ;

I

>

> wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of

>

> my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends.

Now

>

> you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

>

> topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof

of

>

> what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two

tolas

>

> of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist

on

>

> one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods,

besides

>

> performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life

>

> gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me

??

>

> Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

>

> Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

>

> Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of

>

> interest.

>

>

>

> Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going

to

>

> tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

>

> disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you

>

> again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

>

> benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not

want

>

> to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was

disruption

>

> of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

>

> forums.

>

>

>

> Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in

>

> my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my

>

> supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to

lie,

>

> and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to

be

>

> compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

>

> words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have

>

> an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

>

>

>

> Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

>

> degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it

>

> are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get

>

> anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the

real

>

> giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

>

> acknowledge.

>

>

>

> Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

>

> dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

>

> your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within

your

>

> own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

>

> ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning

from

>

> the root).

>

>

>

> -VJ

>

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

>

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

>

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

> >

>

> > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> > 1)

>

> > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your

>

> Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

>

> imaginary outpourings.

>

> >

>

> > 2)

>

> > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the

>

> group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

>

> >

>

> > -SKB

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

>

> >

>

> > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ...

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Sunilji,

>

> >

>

> > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while

I

>

> answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt

>

> astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

>

> internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

>

> astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent

the

>

> verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

>

> literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the

>

> real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

>

> verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things.

The

>

> point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as

>

> mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false

argument

>

> over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong

>

> interpretation.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

>

> ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

>

> commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments

with

>

> a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

>

> have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

>

> Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical

>

> astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon.

>

> Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

>

> which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical

>

> period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found

no

>

> much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and

physical

>

> eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use

therm

>

> " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

>

> difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

>

> >

>

> > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at

>

> the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference

is

>

> nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon

>

> and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between

the

>

> length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ;

>

> tropical year has less difference).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical

>

> and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I

>

> always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

>

> motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you

conclude

>

> he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses

and

>

> do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

>

> ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

>

> physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

>

> persons, how can I ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish

>

> mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to

believe

>

> that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

>

> physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal

discussion,

>

> I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis

on

>

> the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare

>

> the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

>

> Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

>

> actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

>

> relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

>

> decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

>

> horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

>

> Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no

interest

>

> in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta

>

> is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical

astronomy,

>

> which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to

undertake

>

> an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to

>

> arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

>

> interested

>

> >

>

> > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

>

> precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " ,

I

>

> will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for

using

>

> harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

>

> discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words

for

>

> you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for

>

> non-astrological nonsense.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

>

> >

>

> > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

>

> >

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved

from

>

> east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

>

> Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is

how

>

> it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of

>

> Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) .

>

> When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

>

> changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that

you

>

> have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you

are

>

> going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front

of

>

> you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the

>

> Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated

it

>

> . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy

>

> that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not

sataed

>

> here) appeared to move in the reverse

>

> >

>

> > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

>

> than one Saptasindhu.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the

>

> eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

>

> just ignored that.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have

not

>

> given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

>

> talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he

>

> referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

>

> imaginary locations.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Regards,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

>

> >

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Sunil ji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your

>

> mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

>

> commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

>

> imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns

and

>

> two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

>

> astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times.

But

>

> with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened

>

> and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

>

> intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

>

> Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

proof

>

> of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

>

> perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

>

> practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods,

which

>

> is the only proper way to decide the issue.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery

of

>

> mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a

magical

>

> or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

>

> learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

>

> locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

>

> planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not

>

> read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

>

> eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse

>

> because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided.

>

> But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided

>

> the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

>

> me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other

>

> person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA

and

>

> was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for

ridicule.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn.

It

>

> is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts

of

>

> repute.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did

>

> not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

>

> provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

>

> concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept

>

> of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they

never

>

> called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as

trapidation

>

> or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was

>

> therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

>

> socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I

can

>

> show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last

time,

>

> I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

>

> sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I

>

> gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

>

> treatment.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I

>

> said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I

am

>

> ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time

over

>

> personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to

>

> behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views

>

> are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

>

> works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

>

> form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It

is

>

> neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here

>

> in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

>

> texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

>

> provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

>

> accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to

me.

>

> And without listening properly, how will ever know my

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew

>

> forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to

give

>

> you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters,

>

> including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me

to

>

> supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion

>

> of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari

till

>

> his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be

an

>

> honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested

>

> him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but

failed.

>

> Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his

>

> ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn

that

>

> Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta

>

> and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

>

> Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

>

> Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him

for

>

> shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh

>

> started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a

>

> free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

>

> topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted

>

> to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

>

> existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

>

> tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

>

> " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

>

> missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting

>

> the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering.

>

> There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

but

>

> I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

>

> brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

>

> start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

>

> sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and

>

> there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not

belittling

>

> you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

>

> powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature

,

>

> but

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

>

> tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

>

> want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions.

It

>

> is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or

>

> stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal

feuds,

>

> in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

>

> rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

>

> astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

>

> you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I

am

>

> forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

>

> divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize

>

> me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused

>

> me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

>

> developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about

>

> Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but

there

>

> is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing

>

> you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

>

> astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain

>

> to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

>

> again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

>

> because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i

am

>

> not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and

>

> can substantiate.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Good Wishes,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

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

=========

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 1)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You said

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Quote

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

>

> " torment " Rohini ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Unquote

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

>

> astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both

>

> are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

>

> Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena

when

>

> he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

>

> within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 2)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

>

> travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

>

> Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets

>

> invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said

that

>

> it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe

in

>

> what you say.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 3)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu

a

>

> married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

>

> physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you

have

>

> insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

>

> requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

>

> Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the

required

>

> rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all

to

>

> believe in these claims of yours.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 4)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical

planets

>

> and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any

>

> ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you

>

> want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told

you

>

> so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

>

> through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his

body

>

> until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

>

> identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 5)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give

any

>

> reference to back your statement.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 6)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you

>

> said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good

>

> riddance "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > 7)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your

liking.

>

> you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

>

> question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are

right

>

> or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to

>

> you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors

>

> depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under

wrong

>

> impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name

in

>

> your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that

I

>

> have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine

in

>

> Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are

>

> doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

>

> unopposed?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > -SKB

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > TO ALL :

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge

an

>

> alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

>

> guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time

for

>

> useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

>

> starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

>

> changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another

>

> user may be useful in making some important points clear :

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha,

>

> other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

>

> because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other

language

>

> dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

>

> modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the

material

>

> or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

>

> terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this

>

> world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world

of

>

> deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

>

> words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based

>

> upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world.

>

> Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept

away

>

> from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets.

>

> But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead

>

> thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

>

> different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is

>

> 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million

>

> Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world

rotates

>

> once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world.

In

>

> early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

>

> planets are concerned...

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

>

> modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has

>

> no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the

Sanskrit

>

> word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started

imposing

>

> modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

>

> present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this

modern

>

> method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

>

> Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero

in

>

> 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

that

>

> both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

>

> inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

>

> point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is

no

>

> visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based

>

> upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

>

> degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

>

> Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no

>

> connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

>

> libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the

>

> time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in

>

> Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It

>

> was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

>

> scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

>

> precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and

is

>

> not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

>

> precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the

>

> proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

>

> disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

>

> Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > ---

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that

>

> the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

>

> locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will

you

>

> say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to

>

> possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

>

> Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location)

>

> and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

>

> Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities,

and

>

> everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

>

> themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

>

> Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my

computational

>

> ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

>

> Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

>

> mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog

>

> tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where

>

> my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

>

> professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a

>

> face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the

globe

>

> like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil

Bhattacharya

>

> is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

>

> really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in

>

> my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

>

> decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

>

> Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient

>

> times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras

and

>

> only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

>

> Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

>

> married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

>

> Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

>

> quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner

>

> in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa

>

> said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said

>

> Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

>

> Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

>

> Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is

no

>

> episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief

>

> reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war.

>

> Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one

offspring,

>

> but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama

was

>

> merely a

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

>

> according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

>

> Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

>

> Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real

>

> sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say

>

> so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as

a

>

> mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

>

> ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and

taamasika

>

> foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

>

> Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free

to

>

> eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than

>

> cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine ,

meat,

>

> fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

>

> non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

>

> brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should

>

> not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by

>

> him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I

>

> know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often

>

> abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words

like

>

> " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

from

>

> the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

>

> ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

>

> discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his

deliberately

>

> false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

>

> beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

>

> leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

>

> institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were

hired

>

> by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything

at

>

> Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

>

> IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

>

> which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact

CAOS,

>

> IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me.

>

> He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

in

>

> the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

claims. "

>

> These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji

used

>

> such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his

initial

>

> mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

>

> Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never

thought

>

> that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against

me,

>

> denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that

>

> Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me

just

>

> because I know the practical methods of

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely

>

> projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting

him,

>

> and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the

>

> field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me

>

> obscene messages.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

>

> bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

>

> Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

>

> requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and

Mr

>

> Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter

calmly

>

> instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a

>

> shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing

me.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and

the

>

> moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really

good

>

> in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point

of

>

> no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

>

> shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

>

> launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in

>

> Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance

>

> to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the

>

> answers).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

>

> misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had

>

> he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

>

> should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

>

> summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian,

another

>

> is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book

>

> from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

>

> uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

>

> material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which

>

> modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

>

> springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only

>

> those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

>

> away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these

>

> rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid

of

>

> me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

>

> some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology

as

>

> based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

>

> softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill

Suryasiddhantic

>

> astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will

>

> continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined

tables

>

> originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

>

> astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

>

> " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

>

> reject a thing before testing it.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I

>

> left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and

>

> abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am

a

>

> bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I

>

> have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding

something

>

> useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced

by

>

> force, or by means of abuses.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

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

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

>

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Vinayji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 1)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different

from

>

> the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

>

> you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge

which

>

> you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the

Mahabharata

>

> war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

>

> location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 2)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing

power

>

> like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you

computing

>

> abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

>

> computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a

madaari(ni)?

>

> Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

>

> otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving

exit

>

> from the topic

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that

>

> Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

>

> Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in

Tantra

>

> one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that

Tantra

>

> recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also

the

>

> alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a

drop.

>

> However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas

>

> (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

>

> permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

>

> not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO

>

> before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun

>

> of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did

I

>

> use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty

>

> tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

>

> lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

>

> ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

>

> Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

>

> biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

>

> mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless

he

>

> became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

>

> mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

>

> Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

>

> Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said

>

> that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't

get

>

> to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete

>

> it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am

convinced

>

> that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

>

> reading.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > 6)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

in

>

> the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

claims.

>

> I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we

>

> respected each other even though we did not agree in several things.

All

>

> other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

>

> towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact

I

>

> also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted

scholarship

>

> remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you

used

>

> bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

>

> threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had

>

> to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

>

> towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group

but

>

> yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

>

> ignominiously.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > -SKB

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Bhaskar Jee,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

>

> language.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage

strong

>

> solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which

>

> weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back

doors. "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

>

> astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

>

> ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on

>

> revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what

India

>

> really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change.

>

> She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

>

> explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to

be

>

> my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

>

> nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

>

> where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

>

> handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and

never

>

> allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such

a

>

> discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were

>

> never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

>

> professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a

researcher.

>

> We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I

>

> do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of

>

> any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

>

> singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

>

> some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

>

> forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

joined

>

> Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all

these

>

> forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy

>

> which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to

>

> Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares

based

>

> on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

>

> recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

>

> science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose.

But

>

> if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

>

> going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying

to

>

> give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

>

> astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

>

> impudence... "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those

>

> used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my

>

> work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my

>

> software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

>

> wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

>

> worth testing and reading.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets

to

>

> you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

>

> criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa

about

>

> my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

>

> non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my

>

> software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

>

> fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste

my

>

> time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

>

> Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA

on

>

> Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong

>

> brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a

discussion.

>

> Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric

texts

>

> are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

>

> like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra,

>

> sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed.

>

> Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then

started

>

> using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > your

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me

or

>

> ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Dear Vinay jee,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against

indian

>

> culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

>

> seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that

>

> you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of

>

> what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

>

> played with you, till you left back doors.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as

ignorant,

>

> but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that

Marg

>

> has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person

whom

>

> i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

>

> leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these

statements

>

> as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself

(

>

> ??).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of

same,

>

> in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous,

>

> impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which

>

> these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

>

> planted firmly on the ground.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

>

> claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these,

and

>

> you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed

the

>

> torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

>

> except that by using your software we will become very good

astrologers

>

> ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and

>

> not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

>

> acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

>

> analysing.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study

actually

>

> what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself

>

> to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various

groups

>

> you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

>

> otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > regards/Bhaskar.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

....>

>

> wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Bhaskar Jee,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

>

> liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my

support

>

> you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

>

> certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons

>

> like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

>

> moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

>

> nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as

>

> you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for

1

>

> minute. "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

>

> persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

>

> Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

>

> attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

>

> software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and

use

>

> it. Read a recent email to me :

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > praNaam sir,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being

negative

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > the last time(about fonts and vb

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > errors).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > and its accurate till prana

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > dashas.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > normally.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > another time

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

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

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Dear Vinay ji,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

>

> persons who

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

>

> cannot

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > prove that you know " something " ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost

>

> on the

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not

from

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean

>

> who

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just

>

> broken

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > glass pieces in his kitty.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to

mention

>

> or

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on

>

> them ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought

>

> was a

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove

yourself

>

> then

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of

indian

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this

>

> Group ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have

>

> been

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the

>

> broken

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but

none

>

> have

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

>

> prove

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name

in

>

> front

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

>

> convincingly

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > but just rattling in the air.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed,

because

>

> I just

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because

I

>

> could

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but

have

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

>

> present

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > set up of mind.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have

started

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > best wishes,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Bhaskar.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

>

> ...> wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is

>

> for you.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > I have yet to see

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or

Mathematics.

>

> You

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he

>

> appears

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his

certificates.

>

> He has

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says

I

>

> made

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and

>

> one

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

>

> Bhattacharya

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to

abusers.

>

> I

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep

quiet.

>

> When I

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

>

> Astrology of

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

>

> discussion on

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no

need

>

> to

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some

free

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and

>

> are

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the

moderators

>

> to

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell

my

>

> free

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > softwares in future.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > -VJ

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > The Dating of Ramayana

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here,

>

> that

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

>

> place,

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the

>

> bridge

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

>

> bridge

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

>

> believed

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the

time

>

> this

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the

>

> Ramayan

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that

>

> this

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what

the

>

> whole

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

>

> this to

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology

?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now

>

> have to

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > > & gt%

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Vinay ji,

 

//Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh,clearly says that only those persons

should be regarded as Chaandaalas who make a living out of Vedic Yajna,

poojaa in temples, chikitsaa, and astrology//

 

I have requested you previously too, and doing it yet once again, to

please give me the relevant shloka numbers in both MBh of Vyasa, as well

as Manusrmiti by Manu.

 

Please do not give any other explanation-coments-contents apart from

what is being asked for.

 

regards,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16

wrote:

>

> To All :

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya ji is now using less offensive language, hence

I

> am responding to his points (because he raised doubts about some

> important issues) :

>

> (1)

> He wrongly quotes me that I " cannot cite a single reference tosupport

> his (my) Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha " . I gavehim the

> name of the one of the most importantreferences which he did not want

to

> consult and says I cannot cite anyreference. As I said earlier, the

very

> purpose of my joining anyastrological forum was toshow concrete proofs

> of both physical and non-physical astrology in acomparative manner.

This

> cannot be done in an hostile environmentbeing created by him. I do not

> want to discuss thisdifficult topic with aperson who is not seriously

> interested in it and is using bad languagefor me, but if other members

> here are interested in these topics, theymay view some of my older

> contributions to another forum :

> http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58522

> http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58483

> http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58486

>

> I later added these ancient topics of mundane astrology to my own

> website (cf.http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/sitemap ). I tried in vain

> to discussthese things in AIA, mainly due to Chandrahari ji and Sunil

> ji, whonever allowed me to discuss anything worthwhile. I thank

> Chandrahari jifor forgetting me.

>

> (2)

> Sunil ji's conjecture about " Surya rishi, who could also have

> taughtMayasura " is merely a conjecture, supported by some modern

> atheists. Ifsome people believe in Surya Deva as mentioned in original

> texts, whySunil ji turns hostile ?

>

> 3)

> I have myself worked on the date of Kalidasa. I also possess a verse

> byKalidasa in which the great poet himself told his date, but

> modernpublishers omit this last verse. If Sunil ji is really

interested

> ingenuine research, instead of abusing me, he should search for some

> 19thcentury publication of Ritusamhaara (not publiushed by any

> foreigner).

>

> 4)

> Sunil ji falsely says that I " label any questioning as a

personalattack

> on (me) " . He is again resorting to a false and uncivil personalattack

on

> me by misreporting my discovery of 61-year cycle as 60-yearcycle. In

> group discussion at IISc, some scientists had asked me aboutconnection

> of 60-year Jovian cycle with my 61-year cycle, to which Ireplied that

> Jovian cycle is of 60 Jovian years which are equal to 59.3solar years

> and is therefore short by 1.7 years which is too much toignore. Hence,

> 61-year cycle has no connection to Jovian cycle. In mypaper, I

mentioned

> that many researchers had earlier mentioned 60-yearcycle (I gave 9

> references) , but no one had ever mentioned a 61-yearcycle. Sunil ji

> says " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter

> meet at the same point " , but it is a wrong statement.In 60 Jovian

years

> equal 59.3 solar years, hence Sun and Jupiter do notcome to same point

> after 59.3 solar or 60 Jovian years. Even aschoolboy can understand

that

> Jupiter has a period of 11.861 years,which amount to 59.3 years in 5

> revolutions). The shortfall of 1.7years is negligible for Sunil ji,

but

> it is over 20 raashis in fact. Howsuch a careless person could have

> contributed anything worthwhile tothe world of knowledge is hard to

> swallow. Yet he calls himself ascientist. Even if he carried some

> research in his fruitful years, henow shows clear signs of aging.

Sunil

> ji ischarging me of plagiary, just because he fails to understand that

> 59.3is different from 61. I request members to read my paper at :

>

http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting\

\

> ?t=anon

>

> In it, i referred to 60-year cycle with 9 references to earlier

> works,none of which mentioned a 61-year cycle and none of them was

> definiteabout any 60-year cycle as well, that is why it was called

> quasi-60year cycle. Please look at Fig-8 in my paper titled " Annual

> IndianRainfall : Long Term Trends " , in which I showed some trends

> whichclearly indicate that we get more smooth trends as we go for

> longerterms. But no scientist was sure whether this long term trend

> should befixed at 60 ,65 or 85 years, there were varying conclusions

in

> earlier researches. I was thefirst person to change the arrangement of

> dataset from year beginningwith January to year beginning with April,

> after which a clear proof of61-year cycle was noticed by me as shown

in

> Fig-2 and same 61-year cycle was noticed by me inother global climatic

> phenomena as well, like global pressure and temperature. I amsorry to

> inform that Sunil ji is either careless or is deliberatelydistorting

my

> findings merely to malign me. My work hasno relation to Jupiter's

cycle,

> yet he falsely wants others to believethat I stole an old concept to

> present a new theory. Then, he adds thatI " claim " to have presented my

> paper. I never entered into any serviceanywhere, why CAOS, IISc would

> have invited me had they not found somemerit in my work ? Sunil ji is

> not an expert in this field but isdoubting not only my integrity but

> also of CAOS, IISc by inferring thatIISc invited a plagiarist who

> presented old theory in new form.

>

> In that paper, I provided concrete evidences of a 61-year cycle and

> italso proved the existence of a climatic year beginning with April

> whicha Japanese scientist Tetsuzo Yasunari had conjectured before

me.In

> the same paper, I presented my rain forecast which I had earliersent

to

> 615 weather scientists worldwide. Sunil ji gladly forgets tomention

that

> my rain forecasts were found to be " smart " and " good " byClimate branch

> of NASA headquarters :

>

http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s_Report%3B_%26_my_Paper_acc\

\

> epted_by_CAOS%2C_IISc

>

> Instead of showing any interest in learning how these forecasts

> weremade, Sunil ji started maligning me, in cooperation with

> Chandraharijiand his friend Sreenadhji who used words like

" cheat,fool "

> etc for me again and again.

>

> In my paper to IISc, I did not mention Suryasiddhanta, nor did

Iexplain

> the methodology behind my rain forecasts, as I clearly stated there

that

> " Only a brief outline of this concept can be presentedhere, because

this

> concept is too complex and vast to be presented in asingle paper. "

>

> Those who are real experts and are desirous of learning the

> secretsbehind climatic teleconnections were pleased with my

> contribution, butthose who wanted character assassination just because

I

> refused toaccepyt that wine is essential in Tantric Astrology could

not

> find anymerit in my work. Reason behind global climatic

teleconnections

> isunknown to modern science and scientists are eagerly awaiting any

> reliable explanation. I concluded in that paper : " If we pay more

> attention to a thorough examination ofraw data of relative rainfall in

> order to find hidden patterns ofnature, a whole new world may be

opened,

> literally, because this newapproach is based upon the theory of two

> universes . This second universe is not composed of visible matter but

> influences the events of our universe profoundly .Surprisingly,

rainfall

> to rainfall correlation among various regionswithin a climatic zone is

> much more strong and persistent thanpredictor-rainfall correlations ,

> and is fully operative even duringchaotic phases . "

>

> The last sentence " rainfall to rainfal correlation.... " provides a key

> to this problem. It shows that predictor-rainfall relation is not a

> cause-consequence relation as believed by a majority of weather

> scientists. Currently, we are at the fag end of a " predictable phase "

> which is to be followed by a prolonged chaotic phase in which

> predictions based on physical predictors will fail to work, as they

did

> in previous chaotic phase. Only then materialists will be really

> interested in non-physical explanation of physical events. Till then,

> chaarvaakists may continue to attack and malign me.

>

> Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is

> not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on

> astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as

he

> claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg,

difference

> between 59.3 and 61) ?

>

> 7)

> Sunil ji says Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals

;

> but he is mistaken. Chandrahariji published his works on

Suryasiddhanta

> in journals which did not have a single expert of Suryasiddhanta in

its

> panel , that is why Chandrahariji was able to cheat the panel and put

> forth his imaninary concepts as being based on Suryasiddhanta. If a

> peer-reviewed journal of nuclear physics publishes a paper on bio-gas,

I

> will not accept the authenticity of such a journal or such a paper. On

> the other hand, my paper was accepted at IISc after review by

referrees

> whose initial report was sent to me in which some valuable suggestions

> were made to improve the presentation of my paper. These referees were

> experts in weather science, they knew the worth of my work, which

> Sunilji is projecting as a worthless piece of plagiary perhaps due to

> his ignorance.

>

> 8)

> Like his earlier remarks, Sunilji is again showing signs of failing

> memory and false citations. He says " the physicians and the temple

> priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. " Like Kaulji,

> Sunilji also misinterprets Manusmriti. Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh,

> clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas

> who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa,

and

> astrology. Only distressed persons go to these four places, and

ancient

> sages regarded it sinful to extort money from distressed persons.

>

> Sunilji says he made contribution in science. Whatever be the worth of

> his earlier works in science which I do not know, his present writings

> lead me to believe that he is utterly incapable of genuine research :

I

> am saying so with an apology, but I must state the truth. A person

> saying " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the

Jupiter

> meet at the same point " must have a knowledge of science and

mathematics

> comparable perhaps to a 7 or 8-year boy who knows there is a

difference

> of over 610 degrees or over 20 raashis between 61 solar years and

59.305

> solar years (=60 Jovian years) and yet claims Sun and Jupiter " meet at

> the same point " after 60 years !

>

> Sunil ji should forget what I am. Personal remarks about me like " a

> great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be " are not conducive to

a

> healthy discussion on any topic. If Sunilji wants good discussion, he

> must refrain from making personal attacks. I could have ignored his

> messages had it not contained false and foolish remarks about monsoon

> cycles and some other important things.

>

> He thinks publishers of Chandrahariji's articles are peers and those

who

> accept my papers are fools. This partisan attitude is not going to

help

> him in gaining any knowledge of traditional disciplines (which he does

> not want to learn, otherwise he would have refrained from personal

> attacks). I ask Sunilji to name a single " peer " among publishers of

> Chandrahariji's articles who know how to compute Suryasiddhantic true

> planets. These peers cannot go beyond Burgess, who made a mockery of

> Suryasiddhanta. I had informed Sunilji that I had filed a lawsuit

> against a head of jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University of being

ignorant

> of traditional astronomy, and I won that case (cf.

> http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Credentials ) : that HOD was

later

> removed. Instead of trying to learn traditional astronomy, Sunilji

> continued poking fun at me. It is due to his offensive language that I

> withheld this knowledge from him. He is convinced about my

> worthlessness, and I am also convinced about his unwillingness. Can we

> not forget each other and attend to nobler tasks ??

>

> If he continues his offensive, he will receive sound answers. I can

> forget personal insults as long as it does does not harm my cause, as

I

> did in AIA when Chandrahariji abused me for weeks without a single bad

> word from me, but I cannot tolerate any baseless offensive against the

> cause for which I care.

>

> I am sorry to inform that the 61-year climatic cycle was convincingly

> presented by me and was accepted by weather experts without any

> refutation, but if Sunilji thinks it is a bogus work, why he does not

> refute my article logically instead of spreding false rumours about it

> ?? There is no physical explanation behind this 61-year cycle

> (explanation lies in non-physical phenomena which I never explained),

> but Sunilji is doubting the very existence of this cycle !! Even if I

do

> not explain it, the cycle exists and it was not known before pointed

it

> out. Sunilji should not confuse it with 60-year Jovian cycle. The

> 60-year Jovian cycle has never been proven to be true by any weather

> scientist (please do not change my words : I am not doubting its

> existence, I am merely stating that weather scientists have not

attested

> it so far). Sunilji is denying facts, how can he learn explanations of

> those facts ???

>

> -VJ

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

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote:

> >

> > Dear all.

> >

> >

> >

> > 1)

> >

> > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

> > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of

Jyotisha.

> > I shall not insist on that hereafter.

> >

> > 2)

> >

> > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

> > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

> > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to

move

> > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to

> Kunti

> > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

> > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could

> also

> > have taught Mayasura.

> >

> > 3)

> >

> > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is

telling

> > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how

> the

> > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could

have

> > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

> > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

> > about it with proof.

> >

> > 4)

> >

> > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year

cycle

> > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted

to

> > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without

> > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

> > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

> > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper

> > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

> > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4,

> 25

> > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year

> > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

> > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same

point)

> > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any

astrologer

> > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes

to

> > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year

cycles.

> > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what

way

> > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year

Jupiter

> > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the

> > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as

> divine

> > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a

personal

> > attack on him.

> >

> >

> >

> > 5)

> >

> > Vinayji says

> >

> >

> >

> > Quote

> >

> >

> >

> > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now

you

> > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

> > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing

> me after getting this information.

> >

> >

> >

> > Unquote

> >

> >

> >

> > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first

mails

> > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

> > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

> > playing tricks with him.

> >

> > 6)

> >

> > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others.

Others

> > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

> > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by

> this

> > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be

> > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my

inability

> > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

> > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

> > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation

to

> > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a

veteran

> > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

> >

> > 7)

> >

> > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not

that

> > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate

that

> > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

> > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

> > given in his own websites.

> >

> > 8)

> >

> > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to

> > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

> > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do

not

> > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right

to

> > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

> > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we

cannot

> > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

> > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied

everything

> > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

> > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted

a

> > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge

> of

> > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually

> that

> > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

> > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any

profession

> > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

> > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned

> that

> > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

> > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

> > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies.

Kaulji

> > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only

protested

> > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am

protesting

> > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

> > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He

may

> > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in

> > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

> > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

> > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from

his

> > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

> > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not

fatalistic

> > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

> > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

> > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

> > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

> > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail

if

> > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

> > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I

> have

> > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

> > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the

> > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his

> > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology.

> Jyotish

> > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

> > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I

> > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work

in

> > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

> > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

> > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

> >

> >

> >

> > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his

> admirers as he

> > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am

> just

> > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I

am

> > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot

> assert that

> > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any

contribution

> > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

> > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such

comparison.

> > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an

opportunity

> > to do so, for which I am thankful to them.

> >

> > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not

> made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a

> number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International

Scientific

> and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in

> big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of

patents

> to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you

fulfilling

> your self-claimed vow that you would never lie?

> >

> >

> >

> > Regards nevertheless,

> >

> >

> > Sunil. Bhattacharjya.

> >

> > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

> >

> > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > To ALL :

> >

> >

> >

> > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add

> here

> >

> > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to

show

> >

> > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

> >

> > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

> >

> > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who

> has

> >

> > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

> >

> > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just

> out

> >

> > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper

> " A

> >

> > New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

> >

> > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

> to+Rain+Forecast in\

> >

> > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India

made

> >

> > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc

> (Bangalore)

> >

> > that I was a cheat ?

> >

> >

> >

> > To Sunil ji :

> >

> >

> >

> > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you

never

> >

> > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on

me.

> >

> >

> >

> > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent

mail

> >

> > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or

other

> >

> > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and

some

> of

> >

> > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

> >

> > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great

> poet

> >

> > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " ,

without

> >

> > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

> >

> > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including

the

> >

> > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to

> make

> >

> > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person

asks

> me

> >

> > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

> >

> > field of interest, I can only be amused.

> >

> >

> >

> > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

> >

> > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

> >

> > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they

> will

> >

> > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

> >

> > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical

> planets

> >

> > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

> >

> > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that

> Lord

> >

> > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun

do

> so

> >

> > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

> >

> > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false

> statements.

> >

> > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya,

and

> >

> > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of

such

> a

> >

> > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

> >

> > results.

> >

> >

> >

> > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with

me,

> >

> > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately

want

> >

> > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling

me

> a

> >

> > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied

about

> >

> > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

> >

> > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

> >

> > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of

the

> >

> > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of

eastward

> >

> > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

> >

> > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information,

and

> >

> > instead have already started abusing me after getting this

> information.

> >

> > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution

to

> >

> > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree

and

> >

> > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world

> renowned

> >

> > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you

ever

> >

> > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

> >

> >

> >

> > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific "

> again

> >

> > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

> >

> > astrological credentials (

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_

> %26_my_Paper_ acc\

> >

> > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha

> >

> > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

> to+Rain+Forecast ing\

> >

> > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of

> my

> >

> > paper by CAOS, IISc.

> >

> >

> >

> > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness

of

> >

> > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

> >

> > veracity and started attacking me.

> >

> >

> >

> > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my

> works,

> >

> > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

> >

> > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

> >

> > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to

discuss

> >

> > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my

supposedly

> >

> > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was

producing

> >

> > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth

and

> it

> >

> > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of

someone.

> >

> > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking

me

> >

> > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

> >

> > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

> >

> > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

> >

> > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

> >

> > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were

never

> >

> > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field

;

> I

> >

> > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage

of

> >

> > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends.

> Now

> >

> > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

> >

> > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof

> of

> >

> > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two

> tolas

> >

> > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I

subsist

> on

> >

> > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods,

> besides

> >

> > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of

life

> >

> > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to

me

> ??

> >

> > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

> >

> > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

> >

> > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields

of

> >

> > interest.

> >

> >

> >

> > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not

going

> to

> >

> > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

> >

> > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told

you

> >

> > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

> >

> > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not

> want

> >

> > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was

> disruption

> >

> > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

> >

> > forums.

> >

> >

> >

> > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails

in

> >

> > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show

my

> >

> > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to

> lie,

> >

> > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to

> be

> >

> > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

> >

> > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you

have

> >

> > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

> >

> >

> >

> > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

> >

> > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of

it

> >

> > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never

get

> >

> > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the

> real

> >

> > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

> >

> > acknowledge.

> >

> >

> >

> > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

> >

> > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

> >

> > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within

> your

> >

> > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

> >

> > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning

> from

> >

> > the root).

> >

> >

> >

> > -VJ

> >

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

> >

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> >

> > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 1)

> >

> > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about

your

> >

> > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

> >

> > imaginary outpourings.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 2)

> >

> > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to

the

> >

> > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ...

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunilji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words

while

> I

> >

> > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to

disrupt

> >

> > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

> >

> > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

> >

> > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent

> the

> >

> > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

> >

> > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be

the

> >

> > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

> >

> > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things.

> The

> >

> > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta

as

> >

> > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false

> argument

> >

> > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly

wrong

> >

> > interpretation.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

> >

> > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

> >

> > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments

> with

> >

> > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

> >

> > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of

physical

> >

> > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and

Moon.

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

> >

> > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to

synodical

> >

> > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley

found

> no

> >

> > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and

> physical

> >

> > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use

> therm

> >

> > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

> >

> > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

> >

> > >

> >

> > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases

at

> >

> > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference

> is

> >

> > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic

Moon

> >

> > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between

> the

> >

> > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal

;

> >

> > tropical year has less difference).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in

physical

> >

> > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why

I

> >

> > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

> >

> > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you

> conclude

> >

> > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses

> and

> >

> > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

> >

> > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

> >

> > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

> >

> > persons, how can I ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your

foolish

> >

> > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to

> believe

> >

> > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

> >

> > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal

> discussion,

> >

> > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis

> on

> >

> > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and

compare

> >

> > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

> >

> > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

> >

> > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

> >

> > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

> >

> > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

> >

> > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

> >

> > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no

> interest

> >

> > in astrological investigation of astrological entities.

Suryasiddhanta

> >

> > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical

> astronomy,

> >

> > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to

> undertake

> >

> > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes

to

> >

> > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

> >

> > interested

> >

> > >

> >

> > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

> >

> > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY "

,

> I

> >

> > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for

> using

> >

> > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

> >

> > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words

> for

> >

> > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place

for

> >

> > non-astrological nonsense.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved

> from

> >

> > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

> >

> > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is

> how

> >

> > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream

of

> >

> > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu)

..

> >

> > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

> >

> > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that

> you

> >

> > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you

> are

> >

> > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in

front

> of

> >

> > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in

the

> >

> > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you

mistranslated

> it

> >

> > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so

stormy

> >

> > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not

> sataed

> >

> > here) appeared to move in the reverse

> >

> > >

> >

> > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

> >

> > than one Saptasindhu.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of

the

> >

> > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

> >

> > just ignored that.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have

> not

> >

> > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

> >

> > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that

he

> >

> > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

> >

> > imaginary locations.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Regards,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil ji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering

your

> >

> > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

> >

> > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

> >

> > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns

> and

> >

> > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

> >

> > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times.

> But

> >

> > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has

weakened

> >

> > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

> >

> > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

> >

> > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

> proof

> >

> > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

> >

> > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

> >

> > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods,

> which

> >

> > is the only proper way to decide the issue.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery

> of

> >

> > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a

> magical

> >

> > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

> >

> > learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

> >

> > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

> >

> > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not

> >

> > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

> >

> > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the

verse

> >

> > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I

provided.

> >

> > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I

provided

> >

> > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks

against

> >

> > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any

other

> >

> > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA

> and

> >

> > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for

> ridicule.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your

inventiomn.

> It

> >

> > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts

> of

> >

> > repute.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you

did

> >

> > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

> >

> > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

> >

> > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a

concept

> >

> > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they

> never

> >

> > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as

> trapidation

> >

> > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and

was

> >

> > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

> >

> > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I

> can

> >

> > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last

> time,

> >

> > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

> >

> > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as

I

> >

> > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

> >

> > treatment.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what

I

> >

> > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs

I

> am

> >

> > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time

> over

> >

> > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you

to

> >

> > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my

views

> >

> > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

> >

> > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

> >

> > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It

> is

> >

> > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts

here

> >

> > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

> >

> > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

> >

> > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

> >

> > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to

> me.

> >

> > And without listening properly, how will ever know my

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin

anew

> >

> > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to

> give

> >

> > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless

matters,

> >

> > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me

> to

> >

> > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low

opinion

> >

> > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari

> till

> >

> > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be

> an

> >

> > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh

requested

> >

> > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but

> failed.

> >

> > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss

his

> >

> > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn

> that

> >

> > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of

Suryasiddhanta

> >

> > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his

views

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him

> for

> >

> > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and

Sreenadh

> >

> > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided

a

> >

> > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

> >

> > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was

diverted

> >

> > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

> >

> > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

> >

> > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

> >

> > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

> >

> > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by

diverting

> >

> > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before

answering.

> >

> > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

> but

> >

> > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

> >

> > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

> >

> > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

> >

> > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum

and

> >

> > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not

> belittling

> >

> > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

> >

> > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English

literature

> ,

> >

> > but

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

> >

> > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

> >

> > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions.

> It

> >

> > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology,

or

> >

> > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal

> feuds,

> >

> > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

> >

> > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

> >

> > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not

from

> >

> > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me,

I

> am

> >

> > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

> >

> > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you

eulogize

> >

> > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you

abused

> >

> > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

> >

> > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices

about

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but

> there

> >

> > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not

abusing

> >

> > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

> >

> > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in

vain

> >

> > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

> >

> > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric

astrology,

> >

> > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i

> am

> >

> > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well

and

> >

> > can substantiate.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Good Wishes,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

> =========

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 1)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You said

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Quote

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

> >

> > " torment " Rohini ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Unquote

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

> >

> > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as

both

> >

> > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

> >

> > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena

> when

> >

> > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

> >

> > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 2)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

> >

> > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

> >

> > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She

gets

> >

> > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said

> that

> >

> > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe

> in

> >

> > what you say.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 3)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to

Manu

> a

> >

> > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

> >

> > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you

> have

> >

> > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

> >

> > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

> >

> > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the

> required

> >

> > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all

> to

> >

> > believe in these claims of yours.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 4)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical

> planets

> >

> > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in

any

> >

> > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do

you

> >

> > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told

> you

> >

> > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

> >

> > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his

> body

> >

> > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

> >

> > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 5)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give

> any

> >

> > reference to back your statement.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 6)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When

you

> >

> > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good

> >

> > riddance "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 7)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your

> liking.

> >

> > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

> >

> > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are

> right

> >

> > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known

to

> >

> > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these

professors

> >

> > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under

> wrong

> >

> > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my

name

> in

> >

> > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me

that

> I

> >

> > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine

> in

> >

> > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you

are

> >

> > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

> >

> > unopposed?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > TO ALL :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to

forge

> an

> >

> > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

> >

> > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time

> for

> >

> > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

> >

> > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

> >

> > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to

another

> >

> > user may be useful in making some important points clear :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is

Saurpaksha,

> >

> > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

> >

> > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other

> language

> >

> > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

> >

> > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the

> material

> >

> > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

> >

> > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with

this

> >

> > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

world

> of

> >

> > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

> >

> > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally

based

> >

> > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal

world.

> >

> > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept

> away

> >

> > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for

planets.

> >

> > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical

dead

> >

> > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

> >

> > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun

is

> >

> > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5

million

> >

> > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world

> rotates

> >

> > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world.

> In

> >

> > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

> >

> > planets are concerned...

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

> >

> > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy

has

> >

> > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the

> Sanskrit

> >

> > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started

> imposing

> >

> > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

> >

> > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this

> modern

> >

> > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

> >

> > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be

zero

> in

> >

> > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

> that

> >

> > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

> >

> > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

> >

> > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There

is

> no

> >

> > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is

based

> >

> > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

> >

> > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

> >

> > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had

no

> >

> > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

> >

> > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in

the

> >

> > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers

in

> >

> > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus.

It

> >

> > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

> >

> > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

> >

> > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and

> is

> >

> > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

> >

> > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is

the

> >

> > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

> >

> > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

> >

> > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ---

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say

that

> >

> > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

> >

> > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will

> you

> >

> > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim

to

> >

> > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

> >

> > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

location)

> >

> > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

> >

> > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities,

> and

> >

> > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

> >

> > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

> >

> > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my

> computational

> >

> > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

> >

> > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

> >

> > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and

antilog

> >

> > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university

where

> >

> > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

> >

> > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want

a

> >

> > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the

> globe

> >

> > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil

> Bhattacharya

> >

> > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

> >

> > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses

in

> >

> > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

> >

> > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

> >

> > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

ancient

> >

> > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras

> and

> >

> > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

> >

> > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

> >

> > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

> >

> > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

> >

> > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted

manner

> >

> > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

Ashwatthaamaa

> >

> > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

said

> >

> > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari,

while

> >

> > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

> >

> > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is

> no

> >

> > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a

brief

> >

> > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during

war.

> >

> > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one

> offspring,

> >

> > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama

> was

> >

> > merely a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

> >

> > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

> >

> > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

> >

> > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a

real

> >

> > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee

say

> >

> > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya

as

> a

> >

> > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

> >

> > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and

> taamasika

> >

> > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

> >

> > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free

> to

> >

> > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse

than

> >

> > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine ,

> meat,

> >

> > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

> >

> > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to

a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

> >

> > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he

should

> >

> > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused

by

> >

> > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as

I

> >

> > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and

often

> >

> > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words

> like

> >

> > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

> from

> >

> > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

> >

> > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

> >

> > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his

> deliberately

> >

> > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

> >

> > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when

he

> >

> > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

> >

> > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were

> hired

> >

> > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything

> at

> >

> > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

> >

> > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

> >

> > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact

> CAOS,

> >

> > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign

me.

> >

> > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

> in

> >

> > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

> claims. "

> >

> > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji

> used

> >

> > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his

> initial

> >

> > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

> >

> > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never

> thought

> >

> > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against

> me,

> >

> > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized

that

> >

> > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me

> just

> >

> > because I know the practical methods of

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and

falsely

> >

> > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting

> him,

> >

> > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left

the

> >

> > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent

me

> >

> > obscene messages.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

> >

> > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

> >

> > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

> >

> > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and

> Mr

> >

> > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter

> calmly

> >

> > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for

a

> >

> > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing

> me.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and

> the

> >

> > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really

> good

> >

> > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a

point

> of

> >

> > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

> >

> > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

> >

> > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and

in

> >

> > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a

chance

> >

> > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

the

> >

> > answers).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

> >

> > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me.

Had

> >

> > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

> >

> > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

> >

> > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian,

> another

> >

> > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my

book

> >

> > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

> >

> > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

> >

> > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge

which

> >

> > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

> >

> > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only

> >

> > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

> >

> > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these

> >

> > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get

rid

> of

> >

> > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

> >

> > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional

astrology

> as

> >

> > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

> >

> > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill

> Suryasiddhantic

> >

> > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and

will

> >

> > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined

> tables

> >

> > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

> >

> > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

> >

> > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

> >

> > reject a thing before testing it.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya.

I

> >

> > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges

and

> >

> > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I

am

> a

> >

> > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ?

I

> >

> > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding

> something

> >

> > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced

> by

> >

> > force, or by means of abuses.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> >

> > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 1)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different

> from

> >

> > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

> >

> > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge

> which

> >

> > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the

> Mahabharata

> >

> > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

> >

> > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 2)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing

> power

> >

> > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you

> computing

> >

> > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

> >

> > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a

> madaari(ni)?

> >

> > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

> >

> > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving

> exit

> >

> > from the topic

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying

that

> >

> > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

> >

> > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in

> Tantra

> >

> > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that

> Tantra

> >

> > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also

> the

> >

> > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a

> drop.

> >

> > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only

two-Tolas

> >

> > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

> >

> > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please

do

> >

> > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted

WHO

> >

> > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap

fun

> >

> > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word

did

> I

> >

> > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty

> >

> > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

> >

> > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In

the

> >

> > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

> >

> > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

> >

> > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

> >

> > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

unless

> he

> >

> > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool

his

> >

> > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

> >

> > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

> >

> > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you

said

> >

> > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't

> get

> >

> > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to

delete

> >

> > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am

> convinced

> >

> > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

> >

> > reading.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 6)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

> in

> >

> > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

> claims.

> >

> > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and

we

> >

> > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things.

> All

> >

> > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

> >

> > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In

fact

> I

> >

> > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted

> scholarship

> >

> > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you

> used

> >

> > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

> >

> > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you

had

> >

> > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very

tolerant

> >

> > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group

> but

> >

> > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

> >

> > ignominiously.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Bhaskar Jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

> >

> > language.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage

> strong

> >

> > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg,

which

> >

> > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back

> doors. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

> >

> > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

> >

> > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but

on

> >

> > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what

> India

> >

> > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can

change.

> >

> > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

> >

> > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you

to

> be

> >

> > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

> >

> > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only

forum

> >

> > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

> >

> > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and

> never

> >

> > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started

such

> a

> >

> > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you

were

> >

> > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to

know

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

> >

> > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a

> researcher.

> >

> > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because

I

> >

> > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber

of

> >

> > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

> >

> > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

> >

> > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

> >

> > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

> joined

> >

> > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all

> these

> >

> > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern

astronomy

> >

> > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison

to

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares

> based

> >

> > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

> >

> > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

> >

> > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose.

> But

> >

> > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

> >

> > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying

> to

> >

> > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

> >

> > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

> >

> > impudence... "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from

those

> >

> > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on

my

> >

> > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing

my

> >

> > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

> >

> > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

> >

> > worth testing and reading.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets

> to

> >

> > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

> >

> > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa

> about

> >

> > my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

> >

> > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using

my

> >

> > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

> >

> > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste

> my

> >

> > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

> >

> > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in

AIA

> on

> >

> > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a

lifelong

> >

> > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a

> discussion.

> >

> > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric

> texts

> >

> > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

> >

> > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi

chakra,

> >

> > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was

destroyed.

> >

> > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then

> started

> >

> > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > your

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me

> or

> >

> > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Dear Vinay jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against

> indian

> >

> > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

> >

> > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see

that

> >

> > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs

of

> >

> > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

> >

> > played with you, till you left back doors.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as

> ignorant,

> >

> > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that

> Marg

> >

> > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person

> whom

> >

> > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

> >

> > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these

> statements

> >

> > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your

goodeself

> (

> >

> > ??).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of

> same,

> >

> > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me

Pompous,

> >

> > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology,

which

> >

> > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

> >

> > planted firmly on the ground.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

> >

> > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these,

> and

> >

> > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed

> the

> >

> > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give

us,

> >

> > except that by using your software we will become very good

> astrologers

> >

> > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence,

and

> >

> > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

> >

> > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

> >

> > analysing.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study

> actually

> >

> > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved

yourself

> >

> > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various

> groups

> >

> > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

> >

> > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > regards/Bhaskar.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

> ...>

> >

> > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar Jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

> >

> > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my

> support

> >

> > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

> >

> > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant

persons

> >

> > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

> >

> > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

> >

> > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works,

as

> >

> > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only

for

> 1

> >

> > minute. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

> >

> > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

> >

> > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

> >

> > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

> >

> > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and

> use

> >

> > it. Read a recent email to me :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > praNaam sir,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being

> negative

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > errors).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > and its accurate till prana

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > dashas.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > normally.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > another time

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Dear Vinay ji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

> >

> > persons who

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

> >

> > cannot

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > prove that you know " something " ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the

roost

> >

> > on the

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my

knowledge.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not

> from

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I

mean

> >

> > who

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has

just

> >

> > broken

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > glass pieces in his kitty.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to

> mention

> >

> > or

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours

on

> >

> > them ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we

thought

> >

> > was a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove

> yourself

> >

> > then

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of

> indian

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of

this

> >

> > Group ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would

have

> >

> > been

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from

the

> >

> > broken

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but

> none

> >

> > have

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

> >

> > prove

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our

name

> in

> >

> > front

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

> >

> > convincingly

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > but just rattling in the air.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed,

> because

> >

> > I just

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute,

because

> I

> >

> > could

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but

> have

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

> >

> > present

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > set up of mind.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have

> started

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > best wishes,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

> >

> > ...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message

is

> >

> > for you.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I have yet to see

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or

> Mathematics.

> >

> > You

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now

he

> >

> > appears

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his

> certificates.

> >

> > He has

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and

says

> I

> >

> > made

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta

and

> >

> > one

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

> >

> > Bhattacharya

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to

> abusers.

> >

> > I

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep

> quiet.

> >

> > When I

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

> >

> > Astrology of

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

> >

> > discussion on

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no

> need

> >

> > to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some

> free

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use,

and

> >

> > are

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the

> moderators

> >

> > to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell

> my

> >

> > free

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > softwares in future.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana

here,

> >

> > that

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

> >

> > place,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then

the

> >

> > bridge

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

> >

> > bridge

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

> >

> > believed

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the

> time

> >

> > this

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with

the

> >

> > Ramayan

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming

that

> >

> > this

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what

> the

> >

> > whole

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

> >

> > this to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of

astrology

> ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of

Jyotish

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would

now

> >

> > have to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > & gt%

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear All,

 

My request to you is that please read Vinayji's paper on the 61 year-cycle and

find out for yourself if he could really establish what he claims to have done.

He has not given any substantive data to support his claim. He has not given any

dates of any particular years in his paper to show that it is exactly 61 years

and no more no less.  But in case of the Jovian cycles he tells you as to how it

differs from 60 years in terms of fraction of year. The 60-year monsoon cycle

comes after 60 years on an average. For example the monsoon comes to Mumbai of

6th June but it is not  that every year it comes there exactly on that same

that. Vinayji failed to establish any exact-61-year cycle in his paper as he has

skillfully avoided any dates and gave no repeat cycles. The paper is vague

unlike the paper I quoted of the two scientists where they gave data in a

graphical form of repeat cycles and one can see the correctness of the claims

there. Vinayji  has not

proved anything concretely in his paper other than what is already known. His

claim of exactly 61 years is not correct. One will have to give data for several

such  exactly consecutively occurring  61-year cycles over a period of at least

two or three centuries to show that it really occurs at exactly 61- year

intervals, with precise dates. Untill that is done any work like this is just

tentative and does not disprove the 60-year cycle. He does not even know how to

write a scientific paper properly and to  report authentically. He has to

realise that any paper cannot claim to be  valuable just because it has been

presented. First let him send any paper to a reputed journal and get it

accepted.

 

I am sure he does not know  the date of Kalidasa as cannot write a single para

to state what he thinks is the date of Kalidasa and he now wants all of you, who

are interested to know the true date of kalidasa, to read Ritusamhara. He wants

to evade the issue that way. by asking the group members to read the

ritusamhara. His logic is poor and he is evasive.

 

Vinayji is wrong when he says that INSA (India National Science Academy) papers

are not peer-reviewed. Chandrahariji has published several papers in

peer-reviewed journals and Vinayji has none.

 

Vinayji says

 

Quote

 

Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is not a

veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on astrological topics ?

If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as he claims, why he fails to

understand school level concepts (eg, difference between 59.3 and 61) ?

 

Unquote

 

Then why he complains that I discuss astrology with others and not with him? For

information of Vinayji when did I say that I am a Vetaran of Environmental

science alone?

He does not know to write a paper. Just by vaguely saying about one cycle of 61

years (that too without giving dates) he thinks that he has proved the 61-year

cycle. What can be more reprehensible than that.

 

Regards,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

--- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

 

vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16

Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

Sunday, April 5, 2009, 10:41 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To All :

 

 

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya ji is now using less offensive language, hence I

 

am responding to his points (because he raised doubts about some

 

important issues) :

 

 

 

(1)

 

He wrongly quotes me that I " cannot cite a single reference tosupport

 

his (my) Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha " . I gavehim the

 

name of the one of the most importantreferences which he did not want to

 

consult and says I cannot cite anyreference. As I said earlier, the very

 

purpose of my joining anyastrological forum was toshow concrete proofs

 

of both physical and non-physical astrology in acomparative manner. This

 

cannot be done in an hostile environmentbeing created by him. I do not

 

want to discuss thisdifficult topic with aperson who is not seriously

 

interested in it and is using bad languagefor me, but if other members

 

here are interested in these topics, theymay view some of my older

 

contributions to another forum :

 

http://www.mysticbo ard.com/viewtopi c.php?t=58522

 

http://www.mysticbo ard.com/viewtopi c.php?t=58483

 

http://www.mysticbo ard.com/viewtopi c.php?t=58486

 

 

 

I later added these ancient topics of mundane astrology to my own

 

website (cf.http://jyotirvid ya.wetpaint. com/sitemap ). I tried in vain

 

to discussthese things in AIA, mainly due to Chandrahari ji and Sunil

 

ji, whonever allowed me to discuss anything worthwhile. I thank

 

Chandrahari jifor forgetting me.

 

 

 

(2)

 

Sunil ji's conjecture about " Surya rishi, who could also have

 

taughtMayasura " is merely a conjecture, supported by some modern

 

atheists. Ifsome people believe in Surya Deva as mentioned in original

 

texts, whySunil ji turns hostile ?

 

 

 

3)

 

I have myself worked on the date of Kalidasa. I also possess a verse

 

byKalidasa in which the great poet himself told his date, but

 

modernpublishers omit this last verse. If Sunil ji is really interested

 

ingenuine research, instead of abusing me, he should search for some

 

19thcentury publication of Ritusamhaara (not publiushed by any

 

foreigner).

 

 

 

4)

 

Sunil ji falsely says that I " label any questioning as a personalattack

 

on (me) " . He is again resorting to a false and uncivil personalattack on

 

me by misreporting my discovery of 61-year cycle as 60-yearcycle. In

 

group discussion at IISc, some scientists had asked me aboutconnection

 

of 60-year Jovian cycle with my 61-year cycle, to which Ireplied that

 

Jovian cycle is of 60 Jovian years which are equal to 59.3solar years

 

and is therefore short by 1.7 years which is too much toignore. Hence,

 

61-year cycle has no connection to Jovian cycle. In mypaper, I mentioned

 

that many researchers had earlier mentioned 60-yearcycle (I gave 9

 

references) , but no one had ever mentioned a 61-yearcycle. Sunil ji

 

says " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter

 

meet at the same point " , but it is a wrong statement.In 60 Jovian years

 

equal 59.3 solar years, hence Sun and Jupiter do notcome to same point

 

after 59.3 solar or 60 Jovian years. Even aschoolboy can understand that

 

Jupiter has a period of 11.861 years,which amount to 59.3 years in 5

 

revolutions) . The shortfall of 1.7years is negligible for Sunil ji, but

 

it is over 20 raashis in fact. Howsuch a careless person could have

 

contributed anything worthwhile tothe world of knowledge is hard to

 

swallow. Yet he calls himself ascientist. Even if he carried some

 

research in his fruitful years, henow shows clear signs of aging. Sunil

 

ji ischarging me of plagiary, just because he fails to understand that

 

59.3is different from 61. I request members to read my paper at :

 

http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\

 

?t=anon

 

 

 

In it, i referred to 60-year cycle with 9 references to earlier

 

works,none of which mentioned a 61-year cycle and none of them was

 

definiteabout any 60-year cycle as well, that is why it was called

 

quasi-60year cycle. Please look at Fig-8 in my paper titled " Annual

 

IndianRainfall : Long Term Trends " , in which I showed some trends

 

whichclearly indicate that we get more smooth trends as we go for

 

longerterms. But no scientist was sure whether this long term trend

 

should befixed at 60 ,65 or 85 years, there were varying conclusions in

 

earlier researches. I was thefirst person to change the arrangement of

 

dataset from year beginningwith January to year beginning with April,

 

after which a clear proof of61-year cycle was noticed by me as shown in

 

Fig-2 and same 61-year cycle was noticed by me inother global climatic

 

phenomena as well, like global pressure and temperature. I amsorry to

 

inform that Sunil ji is either careless or is deliberatelydistort ing my

 

findings merely to malign me. My work hasno relation to Jupiter's cycle,

 

yet he falsely wants others to believethat I stole an old concept to

 

present a new theory. Then, he adds thatI " claim " to have presented my

 

paper. I never entered into any serviceanywhere, why CAOS, IISc would

 

have invited me had they not found somemerit in my work ? Sunil ji is

 

not an expert in this field but isdoubting not only my integrity but

 

also of CAOS, IISc by inferring thatIISc invited a plagiarist who

 

presented old theory in new form.

 

 

 

In that paper, I provided concrete evidences of a 61-year cycle and

 

italso proved the existence of a climatic year beginning with April

 

whicha Japanese scientist Tetsuzo Yasunari had conjectured before me.In

 

the same paper, I presented my rain forecast which I had earliersent to

 

615 weather scientists worldwide. Sunil ji gladly forgets tomention that

 

my rain forecasts were found to be " smart " and " good " byClimate branch

 

of NASA headquarters :

 

http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ acc\

 

epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

 

 

 

Instead of showing any interest in learning how these forecasts

 

weremade, Sunil ji started maligning me, in cooperation with

 

Chandraharijiand his friend Sreenadhji who used words like " cheat,fool "

 

etc for me again and again.

 

 

 

In my paper to IISc, I did not mention Suryasiddhanta, nor did Iexplain

 

the methodology behind my rain forecasts, as I clearly stated there that

 

" Only a brief outline of this concept can be presentedhere, because this

 

concept is too complex and vast to be presented in asingle paper. "

 

 

 

Those who are real experts and are desirous of learning the

 

secretsbehind climatic teleconnections were pleased with my

 

contribution, butthose who wanted character assassination just because I

 

refused toaccepyt that wine is essential in Tantric Astrology could not

 

find anymerit in my work. Reason behind global climatic teleconnections

 

isunknown to modern science and scientists are eagerly awaiting any

 

reliable explanation. I concluded in that paper : " If we pay more

 

attention to a thorough examination ofraw data of relative rainfall in

 

order to find hidden patterns ofnature, a whole new world may be opened,

 

literally, because this newapproach is based upon the theory of two

 

universes . This second universe is not composed of visible matter but

 

influences the events of our universe profoundly .Surprisingly, rainfall

 

to rainfall correlation among various regionswithin a climatic zone is

 

much more strong and persistent thanpredictor- rainfall correlations ,

 

and is fully operative even duringchaotic phases . "

 

 

 

The last sentence " rainfall to rainfal correlation. ... " provides a key

 

to this problem. It shows that predictor-rainfall relation is not a

 

cause-consequence relation as believed by a majority of weather

 

scientists. Currently, we are at the fag end of a " predictable phase "

 

which is to be followed by a prolonged chaotic phase in which

 

predictions based on physical predictors will fail to work, as they did

 

in previous chaotic phase. Only then materialists will be really

 

interested in non-physical explanation of physical events. Till then,

 

chaarvaakists may continue to attack and malign me.

 

 

 

Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is

 

not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on

 

astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as he

 

claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg, difference

 

between 59.3 and 61) ?

 

 

 

7)

 

Sunil ji says Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals ;

 

but he is mistaken. Chandrahariji published his works on Suryasiddhanta

 

in journals which did not have a single expert of Suryasiddhanta in its

 

panel , that is why Chandrahariji was able to cheat the panel and put

 

forth his imaninary concepts as being based on Suryasiddhanta. If a

 

peer-reviewed journal of nuclear physics publishes a paper on bio-gas, I

 

will not accept the authenticity of such a journal or such a paper. On

 

the other hand, my paper was accepted at IISc after review by referrees

 

whose initial report was sent to me in which some valuable suggestions

 

were made to improve the presentation of my paper. These referees were

 

experts in weather science, they knew the worth of my work, which

 

Sunilji is projecting as a worthless piece of plagiary perhaps due to

 

his ignorance.

 

 

 

8)

 

Like his earlier remarks, Sunilji is again showing signs of failing

 

memory and false citations. He says " the physicians and the temple

 

priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. " Like Kaulji,

 

Sunilji also misinterprets Manusmriti. Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh,

 

clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas

 

who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa, and

 

astrology. Only distressed persons go to these four places, and ancient

 

sages regarded it sinful to extort money from distressed persons.

 

 

 

Sunilji says he made contribution in science. Whatever be the worth of

 

his earlier works in science which I do not know, his present writings

 

lead me to believe that he is utterly incapable of genuine research : I

 

am saying so with an apology, but I must state the truth. A person

 

saying " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter

 

meet at the same point " must have a knowledge of science and mathematics

 

comparable perhaps to a 7 or 8-year boy who knows there is a difference

 

of over 610 degrees or over 20 raashis between 61 solar years and 59.305

 

solar years (=60 Jovian years) and yet claims Sun and Jupiter " meet at

 

the same point " after 60 years !

 

 

 

Sunil ji should forget what I am. Personal remarks about me like " a

 

great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be " are not conducive to a

 

healthy discussion on any topic. If Sunilji wants good discussion, he

 

must refrain from making personal attacks. I could have ignored his

 

messages had it not contained false and foolish remarks about monsoon

 

cycles and some other important things.

 

 

 

He thinks publishers of Chandrahariji' s articles are peers and those who

 

accept my papers are fools. This partisan attitude is not going to help

 

him in gaining any knowledge of traditional disciplines (which he does

 

not want to learn, otherwise he would have refrained from personal

 

attacks). I ask Sunilji to name a single " peer " among publishers of

 

Chandrahariji' s articles who know how to compute Suryasiddhantic true

 

planets. These peers cannot go beyond Burgess, who made a mockery of

 

Suryasiddhanta. I had informed Sunilji that I had filed a lawsuit

 

against a head of jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University of being ignorant

 

of traditional astronomy, and I won that case (cf.

 

http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials ) : that HOD was later

 

removed. Instead of trying to learn traditional astronomy, Sunilji

 

continued poking fun at me. It is due to his offensive language that I

 

withheld this knowledge from him. He is convinced about my

 

worthlessness, and I am also convinced about his unwillingness. Can we

 

not forget each other and attend to nobler tasks ??

 

 

 

If he continues his offensive, he will receive sound answers. I can

 

forget personal insults as long as it does does not harm my cause, as I

 

did in AIA when Chandrahariji abused me for weeks without a single bad

 

word from me, but I cannot tolerate any baseless offensive against the

 

cause for which I care.

 

 

 

I am sorry to inform that the 61-year climatic cycle was convincingly

 

presented by me and was accepted by weather experts without any

 

refutation, but if Sunilji thinks it is a bogus work, why he does not

 

refute my article logically instead of spreding false rumours about it

 

?? There is no physical explanation behind this 61-year cycle

 

(explanation lies in non-physical phenomena which I never explained),

 

but Sunilji is doubting the very existence of this cycle !! Even if I do

 

not explain it, the cycle exists and it was not known before pointed it

 

out. Sunilji should not confuse it with 60-year Jovian cycle. The

 

60-year Jovian cycle has never been proven to be true by any weather

 

scientist (please do not change my words : I am not doubting its

 

existence, I am merely stating that weather scientists have not attested

 

it so far). Sunilji is denying facts, how can he learn explanations of

 

those facts ???

 

 

 

-VJ

 

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

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya

 

<sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

 

>

 

> Dear all.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> 1)

 

>

 

> In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

 

> reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha.

 

> I shall not insist on that hereafter.

 

>

 

> 2)

 

>

 

> Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

 

> has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

 

> though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move

 

> away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to

 

Kunti

 

> or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

 

> Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could

 

also

 

> have taught Mayasura.

 

>

 

> 3)

 

>

 

> Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling

 

> that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how

 

the

 

> date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have

 

> frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

 

> knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

 

> about it with proof.

 

>

 

> 4)

 

>

 

> In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle

 

> of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to

 

> give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without

 

> establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

 

> appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

 

> Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper

 

> on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

 

> published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4,

 

25

 

> August,2003) , where the authors were saying about the 60-year

 

> periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

 

> cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point)

 

> could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer

 

> worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to

 

> its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles.

 

> But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way

 

> his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter

 

> cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the

 

> newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as

 

divine

 

> truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal

 

> attack on him.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> 5)

 

>

 

> Vinayji says

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Quote

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you

 

> will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

 

> source of this information, and instead have already started abusing

 

me after getting this information.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Unquote

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails

 

> in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

 

> flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

 

> playing tricks with him.

 

>

 

> 6)

 

>

 

> He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others

 

> do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

 

> does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by

 

this

 

> he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be

 

> accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability

 

> to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

 

> vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

 

> normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to

 

> discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran

 

> in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

 

>

 

> 7)

 

>

 

> Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that

 

> I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that

 

> Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

 

> Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

 

> given in his own websites.

 

>

 

> 8)

 

>

 

> Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to

 

> assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

 

> questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not

 

> claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to

 

> question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

 

> misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot

 

> call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

 

> astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything

 

> from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

 

> student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a

 

> verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge

 

of

 

> the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually

 

that

 

> verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

 

> Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession

 

> is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

 

> ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned

 

that

 

> astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

 

> Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

 

> temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji

 

> did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested

 

> against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting

 

> against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

 

> There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may

 

> know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in

 

> interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

 

> astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

 

> genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his

 

> past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

 

> present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic

 

> but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

 

> towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

 

> change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

 

> counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

 

> approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if

 

> necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

 

> people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I

 

have

 

> devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

 

> some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the

 

> efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his

 

> energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology.

 

Jyotish

 

> shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

 

> condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I

 

> think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in

 

> astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

 

> least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

 

> claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his

 

admirers as he

 

> very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am

 

just

 

> a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am

 

> not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot

 

assert that

 

> myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution

 

> so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

 

> Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison.

 

> I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity

 

> to do so, for which I am thankful to them.

 

>

 

> However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not

 

made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a

 

number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific

 

and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in

 

big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents

 

to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling

 

your self-claimed vow that you would never lie?

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Regards nevertheless,

 

>

 

>

 

> Sunil. Bhattacharjya.

 

>

 

> --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

 

>

 

> vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ ...

 

> Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> To ALL :

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add

 

here

 

>

 

> that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show

 

>

 

> concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

 

>

 

> comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

 

>

 

> deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who

 

has

 

>

 

> made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

 

>

 

> writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just

 

out

 

>

 

> of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper

 

" A

 

>

 

> New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

 

>

 

> (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

 

to+Rain+Forecast in\

 

>

 

> g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made

 

>

 

> him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc

 

(Bangalore)

 

>

 

> that I was a cheat ?

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> To Sunil ji :

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never

 

>

 

> did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail

 

>

 

> convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other

 

>

 

> things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some

 

of

 

>

 

> your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

 

>

 

> without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great

 

poet

 

>

 

> Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without

 

>

 

> providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

 

>

 

> record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the

 

>

 

> antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to

 

make

 

>

 

> discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks

 

me

 

>

 

> to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

 

>

 

> field of interest, I can only be amused.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

 

>

 

> sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

 

>

 

> Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they

 

will

 

>

 

> enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

 

>

 

> Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical

 

planets

 

>

 

> are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

 

>

 

> lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that

 

Lord

 

>

 

> Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do

 

so

 

>

 

> ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

 

>

 

> blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false

 

statements.

 

>

 

> Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and

 

>

 

> there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such

 

a

 

>

 

> tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

 

>

 

> results.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me,

 

>

 

> you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want

 

>

 

> to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me

 

a

 

>

 

> liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about

 

>

 

> Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

 

>

 

> proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

 

>

 

> misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the

 

>

 

> verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward

 

>

 

> flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

 

>

 

> without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and

 

>

 

> instead have already started abusing me after getting this

 

information.

 

>

 

> This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to

 

>

 

> science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and

 

>

 

> makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world

 

renowned

 

>

 

> institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever

 

>

 

> produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific "

 

again

 

>

 

> and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

 

>

 

> astrological credentials (

 

>

 

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_

 

%26_my_Paper_ acc\

 

>

 

> epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

 

>

 

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials

 

>

 

> http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha

 

>

 

> http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

 

to+Rain+Forecast ing\

 

>

 

> ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of

 

my

 

>

 

> paper by CAOS, IISc.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of

 

>

 

> evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

 

>

 

> veracity and started attacking me.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my

 

works,

 

>

 

> you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

 

>

 

> approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

 

>

 

> explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss

 

>

 

> the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly

 

>

 

> fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing

 

>

 

> fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and

 

it

 

>

 

> also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone.

 

>

 

> Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me

 

>

 

> personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

 

>

 

> Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

 

>

 

> mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

 

>

 

> benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

 

>

 

> brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never

 

>

 

> serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ;

 

I

 

>

 

> wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of

 

>

 

> my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends.

 

Now

 

>

 

> you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

 

>

 

> topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof

 

of

 

>

 

> what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two

 

tolas

 

>

 

> of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist

 

on

 

>

 

> one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods,

 

besides

 

>

 

> performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life

 

>

 

> gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me

 

??

 

>

 

> Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

 

>

 

> Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

 

>

 

> Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of

 

>

 

> interest.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going

 

to

 

>

 

> tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

 

>

 

> disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you

 

>

 

> again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

 

>

 

> benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not

 

want

 

>

 

> to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was

 

disruption

 

>

 

> of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

 

>

 

> forums.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in

 

>

 

> my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my

 

>

 

> supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to

 

lie,

 

>

 

> and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to

 

be

 

>

 

> compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

 

>

 

> words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have

 

>

 

> an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

 

>

 

> degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it

 

>

 

> are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get

 

>

 

> anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the

 

real

 

>

 

> giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

 

>

 

> acknowledge.

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

 

>

 

> dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

 

>

 

> your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within

 

your

 

>

 

> own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

 

>

 

> ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning

 

from

 

>

 

> the root).

 

>

 

>

 

>

 

> -VJ

 

>

 

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

 

>

 

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

 

>

 

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinayji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 1)

 

>

 

> > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your

 

>

 

> Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

 

>

 

> imaginary outpourings.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 2)

 

>

 

> > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the

 

>

 

> group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -SKB

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ...

 

>

 

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunilji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while

 

I

 

>

 

> answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt

 

>

 

> astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

 

>

 

> internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

 

>

 

> astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent

 

the

 

>

 

> verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

 

>

 

> literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the

 

>

 

> real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

 

>

 

> verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things.

 

The

 

>

 

> point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as

 

>

 

> mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false

 

argument

 

>

 

> over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong

 

>

 

> interpretation.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

 

>

 

> ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

 

>

 

> commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments

 

with

 

>

 

> a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

 

>

 

> have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical

 

>

 

> astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon.

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

 

>

 

> which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical

 

>

 

> period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found

 

no

 

>

 

> much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and

 

physical

 

>

 

> eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use

 

therm

 

>

 

> " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

 

>

 

> difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at

 

>

 

> the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference

 

is

 

>

 

> nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon

 

>

 

> and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between

 

the

 

>

 

> length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ;

 

>

 

> tropical year has less difference).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical

 

>

 

> and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I

 

>

 

> always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

 

>

 

> motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you

 

conclude

 

>

 

> he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses

 

and

 

>

 

> do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

 

>

 

> ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

 

>

 

> physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

 

>

 

> persons, how can I ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish

 

>

 

> mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to

 

believe

 

>

 

> that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

 

>

 

> physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal

 

discussion,

 

>

 

> I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis

 

on

 

>

 

> the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare

 

>

 

> the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

 

>

 

> Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

 

>

 

> actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

 

>

 

> relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

 

>

 

> decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

 

>

 

> horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

 

>

 

> Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no

 

interest

 

>

 

> in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta

 

>

 

> is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical

 

astronomy,

 

>

 

> which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to

 

undertake

 

>

 

> an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to

 

>

 

> arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

 

>

 

> interested

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

 

>

 

> precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " ,

 

I

 

>

 

> will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for

 

using

 

>

 

> harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

 

>

 

> discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words

 

for

 

>

 

> you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for

 

>

 

> non-astrological nonsense.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinayji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved

 

from

 

>

 

> east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

 

>

 

> Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is

 

how

 

>

 

> it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of

 

>

 

> Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) .

 

>

 

> When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

 

>

 

> changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that

 

you

 

>

 

> have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you

 

are

 

>

 

> going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front

 

of

 

>

 

> you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the

 

>

 

> Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated

 

it

 

>

 

> . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy

 

>

 

> that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not

 

sataed

 

>

 

> here) appeared to move in the reverse

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

 

>

 

> than one Saptasindhu.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the

 

>

 

> eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

 

>

 

> just ignored that.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have

 

not

 

>

 

> given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

 

>

 

> talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he

 

>

 

> referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

 

>

 

> imaginary locations.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Regards,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunil ji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your

 

>

 

> mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

 

>

 

> commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

 

>

 

> imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns

 

and

 

>

 

> two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

 

>

 

> astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times.

 

But

 

>

 

> with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened

 

>

 

> and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

 

>

 

> intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

 

>

 

> Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

 

proof

 

>

 

> of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

 

>

 

> perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

 

>

 

> practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods,

 

which

 

>

 

> is the only proper way to decide the issue.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery

 

of

 

>

 

> mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a

 

magical

 

>

 

> or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

 

>

 

> learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

 

>

 

> locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

 

>

 

> planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not

 

>

 

> read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

 

>

 

> eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse

 

>

 

> because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided.

 

>

 

> But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided

 

>

 

> the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against

 

>

 

> me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other

 

>

 

> person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA

 

and

 

>

 

> was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for

 

ridicule.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn.

 

It

 

>

 

> is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts

 

of

 

>

 

> repute.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did

 

>

 

> not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

 

>

 

> provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

 

>

 

> concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept

 

>

 

> of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they

 

never

 

>

 

> called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as

 

trapidation

 

>

 

> or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was

 

>

 

> therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

 

>

 

> socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I

 

can

 

>

 

> show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last

 

time,

 

>

 

> I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

 

>

 

> sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I

 

>

 

> gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

 

>

 

> treatment.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I

 

>

 

> said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I

 

am

 

>

 

> ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time

 

over

 

>

 

> personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to

 

>

 

> behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views

 

>

 

> are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

 

>

 

> works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

 

>

 

> form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It

 

is

 

>

 

> neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here

 

>

 

> in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

 

>

 

> texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

 

>

 

> provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

 

>

 

> accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to

 

me.

 

>

 

> And without listening properly, how will ever know my

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew

 

>

 

> forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to

 

give

 

>

 

> you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters,

 

>

 

> including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me

 

to

 

>

 

> supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion

 

>

 

> of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari

 

till

 

>

 

> his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be

 

an

 

>

 

> honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested

 

>

 

> him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but

 

failed.

 

>

 

> Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his

 

>

 

> ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn

 

that

 

>

 

> Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta

 

>

 

> and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him

 

for

 

>

 

> shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh

 

>

 

> started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a

 

>

 

> free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

 

>

 

> topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted

 

>

 

> to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

 

>

 

> existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

 

>

 

> tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

 

>

 

> " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

 

>

 

> missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting

 

>

 

> the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering.

 

>

 

> There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

 

but

 

>

 

> I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

 

>

 

> brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

 

>

 

> start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

 

>

 

> sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and

 

>

 

> there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not

 

belittling

 

>

 

> you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

 

>

 

> powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature

 

,

 

>

 

> but

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

 

>

 

> tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

 

>

 

> want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions.

 

It

 

>

 

> is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or

 

>

 

> stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal

 

feuds,

 

>

 

> in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

 

>

 

> rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

 

>

 

> astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from

 

>

 

> you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I

 

am

 

>

 

> forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

 

>

 

> divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize

 

>

 

> me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused

 

>

 

> me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

 

>

 

> developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but

 

there

 

>

 

> is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing

 

>

 

> you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

 

>

 

> astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain

 

>

 

> to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

 

>

 

> again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology,

 

>

 

> because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i

 

am

 

>

 

> not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and

 

>

 

> can substantiate.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Good Wishes,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

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

 

=========

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Vinayji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 1)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You said

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Quote

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

 

>

 

> " torment " Rohini ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Unquote

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

 

>

 

> astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both

 

>

 

> are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

 

>

 

> Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena

 

when

 

>

 

> he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

 

>

 

> within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 2)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

 

>

 

> travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

 

>

 

> Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets

 

>

 

> invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said

 

that

 

>

 

> it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe

 

in

 

>

 

> what you say.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 3)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu

 

a

 

>

 

> married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

 

>

 

> physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you

 

have

 

>

 

> insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

 

>

 

> requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

 

>

 

> Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the

 

required

 

>

 

> rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all

 

to

 

>

 

> believe in these claims of yours.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 4)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical

 

planets

 

>

 

> and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any

 

>

 

> ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you

 

>

 

> want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told

 

you

 

>

 

> so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

 

>

 

> through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his

 

body

 

>

 

> until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

 

>

 

> identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 5)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give

 

any

 

>

 

> reference to back your statement.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 6)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you

 

>

 

> said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good

 

>

 

> riddance "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > 7)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your

 

liking.

 

>

 

> you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

 

>

 

> question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are

 

right

 

>

 

> or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to

 

>

 

> you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors

 

>

 

> depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under

 

wrong

 

>

 

> impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name

 

in

 

>

 

> your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that

 

I

 

>

 

> have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine

 

in

 

>

 

> Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are

 

>

 

> doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

 

>

 

> unopposed?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -SKB

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > TO ALL :

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge

 

an

 

>

 

> alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

 

>

 

> guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time

 

for

 

>

 

> useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

 

>

 

> starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

 

>

 

> changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another

 

>

 

> user may be useful in making some important points clear :

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha,

 

>

 

> other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

 

>

 

> because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other

 

language

 

>

 

> dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

 

>

 

> modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the

 

material

 

>

 

> or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

 

>

 

> terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this

 

>

 

> world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world

 

of

 

>

 

> deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

 

>

 

> words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based

 

>

 

> upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world.

 

>

 

> Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept

 

away

 

>

 

> from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets.

 

>

 

> But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead

 

>

 

> thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

 

>

 

> different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is

 

>

 

> 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million

 

>

 

> Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world

 

rotates

 

>

 

> once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world.

 

In

 

>

 

> early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

 

>

 

> planets are concerned...

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

 

>

 

> modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has

 

>

 

> no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the

 

Sanskrit

 

>

 

> word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started

 

imposing

 

>

 

> modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

 

>

 

> present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this

 

modern

 

>

 

> method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

 

>

 

> Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero

 

in

 

>

 

> 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

 

that

 

>

 

> both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

 

>

 

> inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

 

>

 

> point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is

 

no

 

>

 

> visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based

 

>

 

> upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

 

>

 

> degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

 

>

 

> Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no

 

>

 

> connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

 

>

 

> libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the

 

>

 

> time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in

 

>

 

> Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It

 

>

 

> was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

 

>

 

> scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

 

>

 

> precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and

 

is

 

>

 

> not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

 

>

 

> precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the

 

>

 

> proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

 

>

 

> disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

 

>

 

> Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > ---

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that

 

>

 

> the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

 

>

 

> locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will

 

you

 

>

 

> say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to

 

>

 

> possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

 

>

 

> Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location)

 

>

 

> and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

 

>

 

> Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities,

 

and

 

>

 

> everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

 

>

 

> themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

 

>

 

> Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my

 

computational

 

>

 

> ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

 

>

 

> Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

 

>

 

> mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog

 

>

 

> tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where

 

>

 

> my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

 

>

 

> professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a

 

>

 

> face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the

 

globe

 

>

 

> like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil

 

Bhattacharya

 

>

 

> is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

 

>

 

> really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in

 

>

 

> my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

 

>

 

> decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

 

>

 

> Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient

 

>

 

> times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras

 

and

 

>

 

> only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

 

>

 

> Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

 

>

 

> married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

 

>

 

> Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

 

>

 

> quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner

 

>

 

> in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa

 

>

 

> said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said

 

>

 

> Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while

 

>

 

> Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

 

>

 

> Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is

 

no

 

>

 

> episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief

 

>

 

> reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war.

 

>

 

> Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one

 

offspring,

 

>

 

> but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama

 

was

 

>

 

> merely a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

 

>

 

> according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

 

>

 

> Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

 

>

 

> Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real

 

>

 

> sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say

 

>

 

> so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as

 

a

 

>

 

> mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

 

>

 

> ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and

 

taamasika

 

>

 

> foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

 

>

 

> Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free

 

to

 

>

 

> eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than

 

>

 

> cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine ,

 

meat,

 

>

 

> fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

 

>

 

> non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

 

>

 

> brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should

 

>

 

> not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by

 

>

 

> him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I

 

>

 

> know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often

 

>

 

> abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words

 

like

 

>

 

> " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

 

from

 

>

 

> the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

 

>

 

> ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

 

>

 

> discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his

 

deliberately

 

>

 

> false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

 

>

 

> beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he

 

>

 

> leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

 

>

 

> institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were

 

hired

 

>

 

> by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything

 

at

 

>

 

> Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

 

>

 

> IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

 

>

 

> which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact

 

CAOS,

 

>

 

> IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me.

 

>

 

> He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

 

in

 

>

 

> the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

 

claims. "

 

>

 

> These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji

 

used

 

>

 

> such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his

 

initial

 

>

 

> mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

 

>

 

> Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never

 

thought

 

>

 

> that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against

 

me,

 

>

 

> denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that

 

>

 

> Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me

 

just

 

>

 

> because I know the practical methods of

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely

 

>

 

> projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting

 

him,

 

>

 

> and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the

 

>

 

> field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me

 

>

 

> obscene messages.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

 

>

 

> bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

 

>

 

> Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

 

>

 

> requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and

 

Mr

 

>

 

> Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter

 

calmly

 

>

 

> instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a

 

>

 

> shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing

 

me.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and

 

the

 

>

 

> moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really

 

good

 

>

 

> in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point

 

of

 

>

 

> no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

 

>

 

> shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

 

>

 

> launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in

 

>

 

> Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance

 

>

 

> to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the

 

>

 

> answers).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

 

>

 

> misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had

 

>

 

> he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

 

>

 

> should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

 

>

 

> summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian,

 

another

 

>

 

> is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book

 

>

 

> from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

 

>

 

> uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

 

>

 

> material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which

 

>

 

> modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

 

>

 

> springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only

 

>

 

> those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

 

>

 

> away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these

 

>

 

> rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid

 

of

 

>

 

> me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

 

>

 

> some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology

 

as

 

>

 

> based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

 

>

 

> softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill

 

Suryasiddhantic

 

>

 

> astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will

 

>

 

> continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined

 

tables

 

>

 

> originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

 

>

 

> astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

 

>

 

> " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

 

>

 

> reject a thing before testing it.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I

 

>

 

> left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and

 

>

 

> abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am

 

a

 

>

 

> bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I

 

>

 

> have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding

 

something

 

>

 

> useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced

 

by

 

>

 

> force, or by means of abuses.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

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

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

 

>

 

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Vinayji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 1)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different

 

from

 

>

 

> the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

 

>

 

> you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge

 

which

 

>

 

> you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the

 

Mahabharata

 

>

 

> war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

 

>

 

> location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 2)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing

 

power

 

>

 

> like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you

 

computing

 

>

 

> abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

 

>

 

> computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a

 

madaari(ni)?

 

>

 

> Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

 

>

 

> otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving

 

exit

 

>

 

> from the topic

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that

 

>

 

> Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

 

>

 

> Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in

 

Tantra

 

>

 

> one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that

 

Tantra

 

>

 

> recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also

 

the

 

>

 

> alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a

 

drop.

 

>

 

> However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas

 

>

 

> (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

 

>

 

> permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do

 

>

 

> not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO

 

>

 

> before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun

 

>

 

> of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did

 

I

 

>

 

> use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty

 

>

 

> tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

 

>

 

> lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

 

>

 

> ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

 

>

 

> Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

 

>

 

> biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

 

>

 

> mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless

 

he

 

>

 

> became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his

 

>

 

> mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

 

>

 

> Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

 

>

 

> Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said

 

>

 

> that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't

 

get

 

>

 

> to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete

 

>

 

> it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am

 

convinced

 

>

 

> that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

 

>

 

> reading.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > 6)

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

 

in

 

>

 

> the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

 

claims.

 

>

 

> I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we

 

>

 

> respected each other even though we did not agree in several things.

 

All

 

>

 

> other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

 

>

 

> towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact

 

I

 

>

 

> also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted

 

scholarship

 

>

 

> remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you

 

used

 

>

 

> bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

 

>

 

> threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had

 

>

 

> to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant

 

>

 

> towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group

 

but

 

>

 

> yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

 

>

 

> ignominiously.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > -SKB

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Bhaskar Jee,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

 

>

 

> language.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage

 

strong

 

>

 

> solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which

 

>

 

> weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back

 

doors. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

 

>

 

> astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

 

>

 

> ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on

 

>

 

> revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what

 

India

 

>

 

> really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change.

 

>

 

> She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

 

>

 

> explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to

 

be

 

>

 

> my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

 

>

 

> nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum

 

>

 

> where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

 

>

 

> handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and

 

never

 

>

 

> allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such

 

a

 

>

 

> discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were

 

>

 

> never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

 

>

 

> professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a

 

researcher.

 

>

 

> We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I

 

>

 

> do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of

 

>

 

> any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

 

>

 

> singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

 

>

 

> some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

 

>

 

> forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

 

joined

 

>

 

> Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all

 

these

 

>

 

> forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy

 

>

 

> which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to

 

>

 

> Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares

 

based

 

>

 

> on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

 

>

 

> recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

 

>

 

> science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose.

 

But

 

>

 

> if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

 

>

 

> going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying

 

to

 

>

 

> give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

 

>

 

> astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

 

>

 

> impudence... "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those

 

>

 

> used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my

 

>

 

> work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my

 

>

 

> software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

 

>

 

> wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

 

>

 

> worth testing and reading.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets

 

to

 

>

 

> you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

 

>

 

> criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa

 

about

 

>

 

> my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

 

>

 

> non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my

 

>

 

> software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

 

>

 

> fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste

 

my

 

>

 

> time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

 

>

 

> Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA

 

on

 

>

 

> Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong

 

>

 

> brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a

 

discussion.

 

>

 

> Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric

 

texts

 

>

 

> are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

 

>

 

> like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra,

 

>

 

> sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed.

 

>

 

> Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then

 

started

 

>

 

> using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > your

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me

 

or

 

>

 

> ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Dear Vinay jee,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against

 

indian

 

>

 

> culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

 

>

 

> seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that

 

>

 

> you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of

 

>

 

> what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

 

>

 

> played with you, till you left back doors.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as

 

ignorant,

 

>

 

> but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that

 

Marg

 

>

 

> has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person

 

whom

 

>

 

> i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

 

>

 

> leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these

 

statements

 

>

 

> as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself

 

(

 

>

 

> ??).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of

 

same,

 

>

 

> in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous,

 

>

 

> impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which

 

>

 

> these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

 

>

 

> planted firmly on the ground.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

 

>

 

> claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these,

 

and

 

>

 

> you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed

 

the

 

>

 

> torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us,

 

>

 

> except that by using your software we will become very good

 

astrologers

 

>

 

> ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and

 

>

 

> not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

 

>

 

> acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

 

>

 

> analysing.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study

 

actually

 

>

 

> what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself

 

>

 

> to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various

 

groups

 

>

 

> you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

 

>

 

> otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > regards/Bhaskar.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

 

....>

 

>

 

> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Bhaskar Jee,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

 

>

 

> liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my

 

support

 

>

 

> you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

 

>

 

> certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons

 

>

 

> like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

 

>

 

> moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

 

>

 

> nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as

 

>

 

> you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for

 

1

 

>

 

> minute. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

 

>

 

> persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

 

>

 

> Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

 

>

 

> attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

 

>

 

> software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and

 

use

 

>

 

> it. Read a recent email to me :

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > praNaam sir,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being

 

negative

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > the last time(about fonts and vb

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > errors).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > and its accurate till prana

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > dashas.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > normally.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > another time

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

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

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Dear Vinay ji,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

 

>

 

> persons who

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

 

>

 

> cannot

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > prove that you know " something " ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost

 

>

 

> on the

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not

 

from

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean

 

>

 

> who

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just

 

>

 

> broken

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > glass pieces in his kitty.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to

 

mention

 

>

 

> or

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on

 

>

 

> them ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought

 

>

 

> was a

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove

 

yourself

 

>

 

> then

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of

 

indian

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this

 

>

 

> Group ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have

 

>

 

> been

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the

 

>

 

> broken

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but

 

none

 

>

 

> have

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

 

>

 

> prove

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name

 

in

 

>

 

> front

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

 

>

 

> convincingly

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > but just rattling in the air.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed,

 

because

 

>

 

> I just

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because

 

I

 

>

 

> could

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but

 

have

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

 

>

 

> present

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > set up of mind.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have

 

started

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > best wishes,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Bhaskar.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

 

>

 

> ...> wrote:

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is

 

>

 

> for you.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > I have yet to see

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or

 

Mathematics.

 

>

 

> You

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he

 

>

 

> appears

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his

 

certificates.

 

>

 

> He has

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says

 

I

 

>

 

> made

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and

 

>

 

> one

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

 

>

 

> Bhattacharya

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to

 

abusers.

 

>

 

> I

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep

 

quiet.

 

>

 

> When I

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

 

>

 

> Astrology of

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

 

>

 

> discussion on

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no

 

need

 

>

 

> to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some

 

free

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and

 

>

 

> are

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the

 

moderators

 

>

 

> to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell

 

my

 

>

 

> free

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > softwares in future.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > -VJ

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > The Dating of Ramayana

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here,

 

>

 

> that

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

 

>

 

> place,

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the

 

>

 

> bridge

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

 

>

 

> bridge

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

 

>

 

> believed

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the

 

time

 

>

 

> this

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the

 

>

 

> Ramayan

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that

 

>

 

> this

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what

 

the

 

>

 

> whole

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

 

>

 

> this to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology

 

?

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now

 

>

 

> have to

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> > > > & gt%

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

 

>

 

> >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Vinay ji,

 

I have not entered the thread for some time because I understood the

futility of the same, since nothing is expounded here except invitations

to your site through various means.

 

Most of the astrologers in these Groups are doing astrology for a

living, so they are " Chandalas " as per your dictum (Since you have yet

to prove that Vyasji or Manu said so) . I do not understand that what a

good man like you then, is doing in this assembly of chandalas. Why must

you try to impress upon Chandalas of your great academic achievemnets.

Why do you need recognitions here in these groups ? Why dont you find

exalted groups where people who are of very intelligent levels , and

not chandalas, are present in the groups.

 

Vinayji You are going the same way where Kaulji went. Nobody regards him

seriously anymore for he has always spoken against astrologers ,Vedas,

ancestors and the great men of india. Which is why he does not demand

respect or an ear anymore though he may be having probably better

astronomical knowledge then most of us . You are now following the same

footsteps. You want some praise, respect, and recognitions in the

assembly of astrologers, whom you call as " Chandalas " ? This is ironic .

This is also akin to going to a Doctor for treatment who charges you

money for the treatment, but whom you cannot call a " Chandala " out of

fear. But here you are free to do so . This is hypocritical behaviour

and must be shunned immediately. You will go to Tirupati and the great

temples of india, but will not have the guts to tell the Poojari there

that " You are a Chandala " because you accept this money for your living.

You will get a Pooja and a Yagna done for marriage of some family member

but will not tell the Pundit whom you give " Dakshina " , that You are a

Chandala. This is hypocrticial.

 

You also mentioned about only the distressed persons going to temples or

getting poojas done ? Mr.Vinay speak only for yourself and not on behalf

of others. I have always gone to the temple to thank the Lord for what

he has given me, and I have also done poojas, Homa performed when I had

nothing in particular to ask from God, but just done so so that the air

at Home is purified, and some money reaches a Brahmins pockets which is

the duty of every grihasta.

 

I do not find Mr.Sunilji abusing anybody and at anytime, except you

abusing everyone who does not accept, whatever you wish to convey, which

is still not understood uptil now.

 

Your lengthy mails nothing to me, I ask for actual action instead of

essays, and thesis which leads nowhere. Your lengthy mails are talks of

those theroetical teachers who want to teach one how to swim, but who

themselves have never stepped in water. Or you must have heard the story

of a Big Preacher trying to teach the boatsman about God, but when heavy

rains came and the boat overturned all that big talk went to nought

since the Preacher did not know how to swim, had himself no faith in the

Lord, and was thus drowned while the humble boatsman swam to the shore.

 

My Dear people like me who do not have so much Titles and degrees (like

you possess and invite everybody to see on your wesbite on every

pretext you may cling hold to), people like me are much better , because

I have something to offer which i did - How to calculate the planetary

positions for any date sitting in a closed room with no aids of any

kind, but just with use of Sanskrit formulas . People like you have got

lots of knowledge , many Titles, many papers, many great acheievments,

but unfortunately nothing to offer, but just a waste of precious time.

 

Before you would like to resume discussions with me, prove that I am a

" Chandala " first. I will then prove that I am not, and we will then

begun discussions on what you claim to know the best.

 

regards/Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16

wrote:

>

> To All :

>

> Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya ji is now using less offensive language, hence

I

> am responding to his points (because he raised doubts about some

> important issues) :

>

> (1)

> He wrongly quotes me that I " cannot cite a single reference tosupport

> his (my) Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha " . I gavehim the

> name of the one of the most importantreferences which he did not want

to

> consult and says I cannot cite anyreference. As I said earlier, the

very

> purpose of my joining anyastrological forum was toshow concrete proofs

> of both physical and non-physical astrology in acomparative manner.

This

> cannot be done in an hostile environmentbeing created by him. I do not

> want to discuss thisdifficult topic with aperson who is not seriously

> interested in it and is using bad languagefor me, but if other members

> here are interested in these topics, theymay view some of my older

> contributions to another forum :

> http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58522

> http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58483

> http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58486

>

> I later added these ancient topics of mundane astrology to my own

> website (cf.http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/sitemap ). I tried in vain

> to discussthese things in AIA, mainly due to Chandrahari ji and Sunil

> ji, whonever allowed me to discuss anything worthwhile. I thank

> Chandrahari jifor forgetting me.

>

> (2)

> Sunil ji's conjecture about " Surya rishi, who could also have

> taughtMayasura " is merely a conjecture, supported by some modern

> atheists. Ifsome people believe in Surya Deva as mentioned in original

> texts, whySunil ji turns hostile ?

>

> 3)

> I have myself worked on the date of Kalidasa. I also possess a verse

> byKalidasa in which the great poet himself told his date, but

> modernpublishers omit this last verse. If Sunil ji is really

interested

> ingenuine research, instead of abusing me, he should search for some

> 19thcentury publication of Ritusamhaara (not publiushed by any

> foreigner).

>

> 4)

> Sunil ji falsely says that I " label any questioning as a

personalattack

> on (me) " . He is again resorting to a false and uncivil personalattack

on

> me by misreporting my discovery of 61-year cycle as 60-yearcycle. In

> group discussion at IISc, some scientists had asked me aboutconnection

> of 60-year Jovian cycle with my 61-year cycle, to which Ireplied that

> Jovian cycle is of 60 Jovian years which are equal to 59.3solar years

> and is therefore short by 1.7 years which is too much toignore. Hence,

> 61-year cycle has no connection to Jovian cycle. In mypaper, I

mentioned

> that many researchers had earlier mentioned 60-yearcycle (I gave 9

> references) , but no one had ever mentioned a 61-yearcycle. Sunil ji

> says " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter

> meet at the same point " , but it is a wrong statement.In 60 Jovian

years

> equal 59.3 solar years, hence Sun and Jupiter do notcome to same point

> after 59.3 solar or 60 Jovian years. Even aschoolboy can understand

that

> Jupiter has a period of 11.861 years,which amount to 59.3 years in 5

> revolutions). The shortfall of 1.7years is negligible for Sunil ji,

but

> it is over 20 raashis in fact. Howsuch a careless person could have

> contributed anything worthwhile tothe world of knowledge is hard to

> swallow. Yet he calls himself ascientist. Even if he carried some

> research in his fruitful years, henow shows clear signs of aging.

Sunil

> ji ischarging me of plagiary, just because he fails to understand that

> 59.3is different from 61. I request members to read my paper at :

>

http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting\

\

> ?t=anon

>

> In it, i referred to 60-year cycle with 9 references to earlier

> works,none of which mentioned a 61-year cycle and none of them was

> definiteabout any 60-year cycle as well, that is why it was called

> quasi-60year cycle. Please look at Fig-8 in my paper titled " Annual

> IndianRainfall : Long Term Trends " , in which I showed some trends

> whichclearly indicate that we get more smooth trends as we go for

> longerterms. But no scientist was sure whether this long term trend

> should befixed at 60 ,65 or 85 years, there were varying conclusions

in

> earlier researches. I was thefirst person to change the arrangement of

> dataset from year beginningwith January to year beginning with April,

> after which a clear proof of61-year cycle was noticed by me as shown

in

> Fig-2 and same 61-year cycle was noticed by me inother global climatic

> phenomena as well, like global pressure and temperature. I amsorry to

> inform that Sunil ji is either careless or is deliberatelydistorting

my

> findings merely to malign me. My work hasno relation to Jupiter's

cycle,

> yet he falsely wants others to believethat I stole an old concept to

> present a new theory. Then, he adds thatI " claim " to have presented my

> paper. I never entered into any serviceanywhere, why CAOS, IISc would

> have invited me had they not found somemerit in my work ? Sunil ji is

> not an expert in this field but isdoubting not only my integrity but

> also of CAOS, IISc by inferring thatIISc invited a plagiarist who

> presented old theory in new form.

>

> In that paper, I provided concrete evidences of a 61-year cycle and

> italso proved the existence of a climatic year beginning with April

> whicha Japanese scientist Tetsuzo Yasunari had conjectured before

me.In

> the same paper, I presented my rain forecast which I had earliersent

to

> 615 weather scientists worldwide. Sunil ji gladly forgets tomention

that

> my rain forecasts were found to be " smart " and " good " byClimate branch

> of NASA headquarters :

>

http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s_Report%3B_%26_my_Paper_acc\

\

> epted_by_CAOS%2C_IISc

>

> Instead of showing any interest in learning how these forecasts

> weremade, Sunil ji started maligning me, in cooperation with

> Chandraharijiand his friend Sreenadhji who used words like

" cheat,fool "

> etc for me again and again.

>

> In my paper to IISc, I did not mention Suryasiddhanta, nor did

Iexplain

> the methodology behind my rain forecasts, as I clearly stated there

that

> " Only a brief outline of this concept can be presentedhere, because

this

> concept is too complex and vast to be presented in asingle paper. "

>

> Those who are real experts and are desirous of learning the

> secretsbehind climatic teleconnections were pleased with my

> contribution, butthose who wanted character assassination just because

I

> refused toaccepyt that wine is essential in Tantric Astrology could

not

> find anymerit in my work. Reason behind global climatic

teleconnections

> isunknown to modern science and scientists are eagerly awaiting any

> reliable explanation. I concluded in that paper : " If we pay more

> attention to a thorough examination ofraw data of relative rainfall in

> order to find hidden patterns ofnature, a whole new world may be

opened,

> literally, because this newapproach is based upon the theory of two

> universes . This second universe is not composed of visible matter but

> influences the events of our universe profoundly .Surprisingly,

rainfall

> to rainfall correlation among various regionswithin a climatic zone is

> much more strong and persistent thanpredictor-rainfall correlations ,

> and is fully operative even duringchaotic phases . "

>

> The last sentence " rainfall to rainfal correlation.... " provides a key

> to this problem. It shows that predictor-rainfall relation is not a

> cause-consequence relation as believed by a majority of weather

> scientists. Currently, we are at the fag end of a " predictable phase "

> which is to be followed by a prolonged chaotic phase in which

> predictions based on physical predictors will fail to work, as they

did

> in previous chaotic phase. Only then materialists will be really

> interested in non-physical explanation of physical events. Till then,

> chaarvaakists may continue to attack and malign me.

>

> Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is

> not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on

> astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as

he

> claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg,

difference

> between 59.3 and 61) ?

>

> 7)

> Sunil ji says Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals

;

> but he is mistaken. Chandrahariji published his works on

Suryasiddhanta

> in journals which did not have a single expert of Suryasiddhanta in

its

> panel , that is why Chandrahariji was able to cheat the panel and put

> forth his imaninary concepts as being based on Suryasiddhanta. If a

> peer-reviewed journal of nuclear physics publishes a paper on bio-gas,

I

> will not accept the authenticity of such a journal or such a paper. On

> the other hand, my paper was accepted at IISc after review by

referrees

> whose initial report was sent to me in which some valuable suggestions

> were made to improve the presentation of my paper. These referees were

> experts in weather science, they knew the worth of my work, which

> Sunilji is projecting as a worthless piece of plagiary perhaps due to

> his ignorance.

>

> 8)

> Like his earlier remarks, Sunilji is again showing signs of failing

> memory and false citations. He says " the physicians and the temple

> priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. " Like Kaulji,

> Sunilji also misinterprets Manusmriti. Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh,

> clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas

> who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa,

and

> astrology. Only distressed persons go to these four places, and

ancient

> sages regarded it sinful to extort money from distressed persons.

>

> Sunilji says he made contribution in science. Whatever be the worth of

> his earlier works in science which I do not know, his present writings

> lead me to believe that he is utterly incapable of genuine research :

I

> am saying so with an apology, but I must state the truth. A person

> saying " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the

Jupiter

> meet at the same point " must have a knowledge of science and

mathematics

> comparable perhaps to a 7 or 8-year boy who knows there is a

difference

> of over 610 degrees or over 20 raashis between 61 solar years and

59.305

> solar years (=60 Jovian years) and yet claims Sun and Jupiter " meet at

> the same point " after 60 years !

>

> Sunil ji should forget what I am. Personal remarks about me like " a

> great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be " are not conducive to

a

> healthy discussion on any topic. If Sunilji wants good discussion, he

> must refrain from making personal attacks. I could have ignored his

> messages had it not contained false and foolish remarks about monsoon

> cycles and some other important things.

>

> He thinks publishers of Chandrahariji's articles are peers and those

who

> accept my papers are fools. This partisan attitude is not going to

help

> him in gaining any knowledge of traditional disciplines (which he does

> not want to learn, otherwise he would have refrained from personal

> attacks). I ask Sunilji to name a single " peer " among publishers of

> Chandrahariji's articles who know how to compute Suryasiddhantic true

> planets. These peers cannot go beyond Burgess, who made a mockery of

> Suryasiddhanta. I had informed Sunilji that I had filed a lawsuit

> against a head of jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University of being

ignorant

> of traditional astronomy, and I won that case (cf.

> http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Credentials ) : that HOD was

later

> removed. Instead of trying to learn traditional astronomy, Sunilji

> continued poking fun at me. It is due to his offensive language that I

> withheld this knowledge from him. He is convinced about my

> worthlessness, and I am also convinced about his unwillingness. Can we

> not forget each other and attend to nobler tasks ??

>

> If he continues his offensive, he will receive sound answers. I can

> forget personal insults as long as it does does not harm my cause, as

I

> did in AIA when Chandrahariji abused me for weeks without a single bad

> word from me, but I cannot tolerate any baseless offensive against the

> cause for which I care.

>

> I am sorry to inform that the 61-year climatic cycle was convincingly

> presented by me and was accepted by weather experts without any

> refutation, but if Sunilji thinks it is a bogus work, why he does not

> refute my article logically instead of spreding false rumours about it

> ?? There is no physical explanation behind this 61-year cycle

> (explanation lies in non-physical phenomena which I never explained),

> but Sunilji is doubting the very existence of this cycle !! Even if I

do

> not explain it, the cycle exists and it was not known before pointed

it

> out. Sunilji should not confuse it with 60-year Jovian cycle. The

> 60-year Jovian cycle has never been proven to be true by any weather

> scientist (please do not change my words : I am not doubting its

> existence, I am merely stating that weather scientists have not

attested

> it so far). Sunilji is denying facts, how can he learn explanations of

> those facts ???

>

> -VJ

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

> , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote:

> >

> > Dear all.

> >

> >

> >

> > 1)

> >

> > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single

> > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of

Jyotisha.

> > I shall not insist on that hereafter.

> >

> > 2)

> >

> > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi

> > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also

> > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to

move

> > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to

> Kunti

> > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called

> > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could

> also

> > have taught Mayasura.

> >

> > 3)

> >

> > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is

telling

> > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how

> the

> > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could

have

> > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he

> > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group

> > about it with proof.

> >

> > 4)

> >

> > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year

cycle

> > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted

to

> > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without

> > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no

> > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that

> > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper

> > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta,

> > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4,

> 25

> > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year

> > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter

> > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same

point)

> > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any

astrologer

> > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes

to

> > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year

cycles.

> > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what

way

> > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year

Jupiter

> > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the

> > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as

> divine

> > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a

personal

> > attack on him.

> >

> >

> >

> > 5)

> >

> > Vinayji says

> >

> >

> >

> > Quote

> >

> >

> >

> > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now

you

> > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the

> > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing

> me after getting this information.

> >

> >

> >

> > Unquote

> >

> >

> >

> > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first

mails

> > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started

> > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is

> > playing tricks with him.

> >

> > 6)

> >

> > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others.

Others

> > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji

> > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by

> this

> > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be

> > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my

inability

> > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a

> > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the

> > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation

to

> > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a

veteran

> > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore.

> >

> > 7)

> >

> > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not

that

> > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate

that

> > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against

> > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or

> > given in his own websites.

> >

> > 8)

> >

> > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to

> > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask

> > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do

not

> > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right

to

> > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and

> > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we

cannot

> > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt

> > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied

everything

> > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a

> > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted

a

> > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge

> of

> > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually

> that

> > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are

> > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any

profession

> > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the

> > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned

> that

> > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and

> > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the

> > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies.

Kaulji

> > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only

protested

> > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am

protesting

> > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization.

> > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He

may

> > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in

> > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu

> > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A

> > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from

his

> > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that

> > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not

fatalistic

> > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work

> > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to

> > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some

> > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that

> > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail

if

> > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But

> > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I

> have

> > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides

> > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the

> > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his

> > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology.

> Jyotish

> > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on

> > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I

> > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work

in

> > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at

> > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not

> > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be.

> >

> >

> >

> > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his

> admirers as he

> > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am

> just

> > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I

am

> > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot

> assert that

> > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any

contribution

> > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis

> > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such

comparison.

> > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an

opportunity

> > to do so, for which I am thankful to them.

> >

> > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not

> made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a

> number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International

Scientific

> and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in

> big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of

patents

> to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you

fulfilling

> your self-claimed vow that you would never lie?

> >

> >

> >

> > Regards nevertheless,

> >

> >

> > Sunil. Bhattacharjya.

> >

> > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

> >

> > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@

> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > To ALL :

> >

> >

> >

> > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add

> here

> >

> > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to

show

> >

> > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a

> >

> > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment

> >

> > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who

> has

> >

> > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he

> >

> > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just

> out

> >

> > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper

> " A

> >

> > New Approach to Rain Forecasting "

> >

> > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

> to+Rain+Forecast in\

> >

> > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India

made

> >

> > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc

> (Bangalore)

> >

> > that I was a cheat ?

> >

> >

> >

> > To Sunil ji :

> >

> >

> >

> > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you

never

> >

> > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on

me.

> >

> >

> >

> > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent

mail

> >

> > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or

other

> >

> > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and

some

> of

> >

> > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions

> >

> > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great

> poet

> >

> > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " ,

without

> >

> > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted

> >

> > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including

the

> >

> > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to

> make

> >

> > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person

asks

> me

> >

> > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his

> >

> > field of interest, I can only be amused.

> >

> >

> >

> > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older

> >

> > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any

> >

> > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they

> will

> >

> > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like

> >

> > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical

> planets

> >

> > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and

> >

> > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that

> Lord

> >

> > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun

do

> so

> >

> > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why

> >

> > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false

> statements.

> >

> > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya,

and

> >

> > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of

such

> a

> >

> > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its

> >

> > results.

> >

> >

> >

> > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with

me,

> >

> > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately

want

> >

> > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling

me

> a

> >

> > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied

about

> >

> > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the

> >

> > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I

> >

> > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of

the

> >

> > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of

eastward

> >

> > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays,

> >

> > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information,

and

> >

> > instead have already started abusing me after getting this

> information.

> >

> > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution

to

> >

> > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree

and

> >

> > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world

> renowned

> >

> > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you

ever

> >

> > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ?

> >

> >

> >

> > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific "

> again

> >

> > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as

> >

> > astrological credentials (

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_

> %26_my_Paper_ acc\

> >

> > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials

> >

> > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha

> >

> > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+

> to+Rain+Forecast ing\

> >

> > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of

> my

> >

> > paper by CAOS, IISc.

> >

> >

> >

> > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness

of

> >

> > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my

> >

> > veracity and started attacking me.

> >

> >

> >

> > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my

> works,

> >

> > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were

> >

> > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to

> >

> > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to

discuss

> >

> > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my

supposedly

> >

> > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was

producing

> >

> > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth

and

> it

> >

> > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of

someone.

> >

> > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking

me

> >

> > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric

> >

> > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in

> >

> > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the

> >

> > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong

> >

> > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were

never

> >

> > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field

;

> I

> >

> > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage

of

> >

> > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends.

> Now

> >

> > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological

> >

> > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof

> of

> >

> > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two

> tolas

> >

> > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I

subsist

> on

> >

> > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods,

> besides

> >

> > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of

life

> >

> > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to

me

> ??

> >

> > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian

> >

> > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the

> >

> > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields

of

> >

> > interest.

> >

> >

> >

> > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not

going

> to

> >

> > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to

> >

> > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told

you

> >

> > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the

> >

> > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not

> want

> >

> > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was

> disruption

> >

> > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all

> >

> > forums.

> >

> >

> >

> > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails

in

> >

> > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show

my

> >

> > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to

> lie,

> >

> > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to

> be

> >

> > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my

> >

> > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you

have

> >

> > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life.

> >

> >

> >

> > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been

> >

> > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of

it

> >

> > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never

get

> >

> > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the

> real

> >

> > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to

> >

> > acknowledge.

> >

> >

> >

> > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists,

> >

> > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search

> >

> > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within

> your

> >

> > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi "

> >

> > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning

> from

> >

> > the root).

> >

> >

> >

> > -VJ

> >

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

> >

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> >

> > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 1)

> >

> > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about

your

> >

> > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your

> >

> > imaginary outpourings.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 2)

> >

> > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to

the

> >

> > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue?

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ...

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunilji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words

while

> I

> >

> > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to

disrupt

> >

> > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in

> >

> > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to

> >

> > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent

> the

> >

> > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the

> >

> > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be

the

> >

> > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that

> >

> > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things.

> The

> >

> > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta

as

> >

> > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false

> argument

> >

> > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly

wrong

> >

> > interpretation.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your

> >

> > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western

> >

> > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments

> with

> >

> > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon

> >

> > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of

physical

> >

> > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and

Moon.

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days,

> >

> > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to

synodical

> >

> > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley

found

> no

> >

> > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and

> physical

> >

> > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use

> therm

> >

> > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much

> >

> > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great

> >

> > >

> >

> > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases

at

> >

> > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference

> is

> >

> > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic

Moon

> >

> > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between

> the

> >

> > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal

;

> >

> > tropical year has less difference).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in

physical

> >

> > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why

I

> >

> > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and

> >

> > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you

> conclude

> >

> > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses

> and

> >

> > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the

> >

> > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the

> >

> > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such

> >

> > persons, how can I ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your

foolish

> >

> > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to

> believe

> >

> > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not

> >

> > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal

> discussion,

> >

> > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis

> on

> >

> > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and

compare

> >

> > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of

> >

> > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to

> >

> > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such

> >

> > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted

> >

> > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya

> >

> > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss

> >

> > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no

> interest

> >

> > in astrological investigation of astrological entities.

Suryasiddhanta

> >

> > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical

> astronomy,

> >

> > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to

> undertake

> >

> > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes

to

> >

> > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be

> >

> > interested

> >

> > >

> >

> > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my

> >

> > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY "

,

> I

> >

> > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for

> using

> >

> > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological

> >

> > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words

> for

> >

> > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place

for

> >

> > non-astrological nonsense.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved

> from

> >

> > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of

> >

> > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is

> how

> >

> > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream

of

> >

> > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu)

..

> >

> > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati

> >

> > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that

> you

> >

> > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you

> are

> >

> > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in

front

> of

> >

> > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in

the

> >

> > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you

mistranslated

> it

> >

> > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so

stormy

> >

> > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not

> sataed

> >

> > here) appeared to move in the reverse

> >

> > >

> >

> > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more

> >

> > than one Saptasindhu.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of

the

> >

> > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you

> >

> > just ignored that.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have

> not

> >

> > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa

> >

> > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that

he

> >

> > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your

> >

> > imaginary locations.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Regards,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil ji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering

your

> >

> > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western

> >

> > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my

> >

> > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns

> and

> >

> > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian

> >

> > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times.

> But

> >

> > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has

weakened

> >

> > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no

> >

> > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in

> >

> > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only

> proof

> >

> > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly

> >

> > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through

> >

> > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods,

> which

> >

> > is the only proper way to decide the issue.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery

> of

> >

> > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a

> magical

> >

> > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of

> >

> > learning these tables by rote in my school days ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate

> >

> > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the

> >

> > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not

> >

> > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about

> >

> > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the

verse

> >

> > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I

provided.

> >

> > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I

provided

> >

> > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks

against

> >

> > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any

other

> >

> > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA

> and

> >

> > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for

> ridicule.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your

inventiomn.

> It

> >

> > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts

> of

> >

> > repute.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you

did

> >

> > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should

> >

> > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a

> >

> > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a

concept

> >

> > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they

> never

> >

> > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as

> trapidation

> >

> > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and

was

> >

> > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the

> >

> > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I

> can

> >

> > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last

> time,

> >

> > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop

> >

> > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as

I

> >

> > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special

> >

> > treatment.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what

I

> >

> > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs

I

> am

> >

> > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time

> over

> >

> > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you

to

> >

> > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my

views

> >

> > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best

> >

> > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but

> >

> > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It

> is

> >

> > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts

here

> >

> > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these

> >

> > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to

> >

> > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being

> >

> > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to

> me.

> >

> > And without listening properly, how will ever know my

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin

anew

> >

> > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to

> give

> >

> > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless

matters,

> >

> > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me

> to

> >

> > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low

opinion

> >

> > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari

> till

> >

> > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be

> an

> >

> > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh

requested

> >

> > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but

> failed.

> >

> > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss

his

> >

> > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn

> that

> >

> > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of

Suryasiddhanta

> >

> > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his

views

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him

> for

> >

> > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and

Sreenadh

> >

> > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided

a

> >

> > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new

> >

> > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was

diverted

> >

> > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of

> >

> > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on

> >

> > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only

> >

> > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are

> >

> > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by

diverting

> >

> > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before

answering.

> >

> > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future,

> but

> >

> > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a

> >

> > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again

> >

> > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is

> >

> > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum

and

> >

> > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not

> belittling

> >

> > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and

> >

> > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English

literature

> ,

> >

> > but

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot

> >

> > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you

> >

> > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions.

> It

> >

> > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology,

or

> >

> > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal

> feuds,

> >

> > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please

> >

> > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing

> >

> > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not

from

> >

> > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me,

I

> am

> >

> > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to

> >

> > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you

eulogize

> >

> > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you

abused

> >

> > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software

> >

> > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices

about

> >

> > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but

> there

> >

> > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not

abusing

> >

> > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to

> >

> > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in

vain

> >

> > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic

> >

> > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric

astrology,

> >

> > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i

> am

> >

> > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well

and

> >

> > can substantiate.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Good Wishes,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

> =========

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 1)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You said

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Quote

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can

> >

> > " torment " Rohini ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Unquote

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both

> >

> > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as

both

> >

> > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in

> >

> > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena

> when

> >

> > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses

> >

> > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 2)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to

> >

> > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it.

> >

> > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She

gets

> >

> > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said

> that

> >

> > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe

> in

> >

> > what you say.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 3)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to

Manu

> a

> >

> > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his

> >

> > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you

> have

> >

> > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the

> >

> > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long

> >

> > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the

> required

> >

> > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all

> to

> >

> > believe in these claims of yours.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 4)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical

> planets

> >

> > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in

any

> >

> > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do

you

> >

> > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told

> you

> >

> > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move

> >

> > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his

> body

> >

> > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical

> >

> > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 5)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give

> any

> >

> > reference to back your statement.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 6)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When

you

> >

> > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good

> >

> > riddance "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > 7)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your

> liking.

> >

> > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should

> >

> > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are

> right

> >

> > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known

to

> >

> > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these

professors

> >

> > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under

> wrong

> >

> > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my

name

> in

> >

> > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me

that

> I

> >

> > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine

> in

> >

> > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you

are

> >

> > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone

> >

> > unopposed?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > TO ALL :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to

forge

> an

> >

> > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here,

> >

> > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time

> for

> >

> > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by

> >

> > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be

> >

> > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to

another

> >

> > user may be useful in making some important points clear :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is

Saurpaksha,

> >

> > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users,

> >

> > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other

> language

> >

> > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in

> >

> > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the

> material

> >

> > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian

> >

> > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with

this

> >

> > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher

world

> of

> >

> > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian

> >

> > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally

based

> >

> > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal

world.

> >

> > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept

> away

> >

> > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for

planets.

> >

> > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical

dead

> >

> > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is

> >

> > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun

is

> >

> > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5

million

> >

> > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world

> rotates

> >

> > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world.

> In

> >

> > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of

> >

> > planets are concerned...

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of

> >

> > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy

has

> >

> > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the

> Sanskrit

> >

> > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started

> imposing

> >

> > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into

> >

> > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this

> modern

> >

> > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star

> >

> > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be

zero

> in

> >

> > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded

> that

> >

> > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the

> >

> > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting

> >

> > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There

is

> no

> >

> > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is

based

> >

> > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high

> >

> > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/

> >

> > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had

no

> >

> > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or

> >

> > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in

the

> >

> > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers

in

> >

> > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus.

It

> >

> > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical

> >

> > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of

> >

> > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and

> is

> >

> > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly,

> >

> > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is

the

> >

> > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor

> >

> > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities.

> >

> > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > ---

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say

that

> >

> > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual

> >

> > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will

> you

> >

> > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim

to

> >

> > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the

> >

> > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

location)

> >

> > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< <<

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ?

> >

> > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities,

> and

> >

> > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make

> >

> > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in

> >

> > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my

> computational

> >

> > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala

> >

> > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of

> >

> > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and

antilog

> >

> > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university

where

> >

> > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those

> >

> > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want

a

> >

> > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the

> globe

> >

> > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil

> Bhattacharya

> >

> > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he

> >

> > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses

in

> >

> > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will

> >

> > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong

> >

> > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the

ancient

> >

> > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras

> and

> >

> > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<<

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a

> >

> > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were

> >

> > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married

> >

> > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya

> >

> > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted

manner

> >

> > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when

Ashwatthaamaa

> >

> > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna

said

> >

> > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari,

while

> >

> > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari.

> >

> > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is

> no

> >

> > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a

brief

> >

> > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during

war.

> >

> > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one

> offspring,

> >

> > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama

> was

> >

> > merely a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama

> >

> > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord

> >

> > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained

> >

> > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a

real

> >

> > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee

say

> >

> > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya

as

> a

> >

> > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal

> >

> > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and

> taamasika

> >

> > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health

> >

> > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free

> to

> >

> > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse

than

> >

> > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine ,

> meat,

> >

> > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a

> >

> > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to

a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate

> >

> > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he

should

> >

> > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused

by

> >

> > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as

I

> >

> > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and

often

> >

> > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words

> like

> >

> > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit

> from

> >

> > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left

> >

> > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy

> >

> > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his

> deliberately

> >

> > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the

> >

> > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when

he

> >

> > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific

> >

> > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were

> hired

> >

> > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything

> at

> >

> > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_

> >

> > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper

> >

> > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact

> CAOS,

> >

> > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign

me.

> >

> > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

> in

> >

> > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

> claims. "

> >

> > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji

> used

> >

> > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his

> initial

> >

> > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of

> >

> > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never

> thought

> >

> > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against

> me,

> >

> > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized

that

> >

> > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me

> just

> >

> > because I know the practical methods of

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and

falsely

> >

> > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting

> him,

> >

> > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left

the

> >

> > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent

me

> >

> > obscene messages.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used

> >

> > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. "

> >

> > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I

> >

> > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and

> Mr

> >

> > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter

> calmly

> >

> > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for

a

> >

> > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing

> me.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and

> the

> >

> > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really

> good

> >

> > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a

point

> of

> >

> > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a

> >

> > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji

> >

> > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and

in

> >

> > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a

chance

> >

> > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing

the

> >

> > answers).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is

> >

> > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me.

Had

> >

> > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I

> >

> > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English

> >

> > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian,

> another

> >

> > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my

book

> >

> > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be

> >

> > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that

> >

> > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge

which

> >

> > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test

> >

> > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only

> >

> > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep

> >

> > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these

> >

> > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get

rid

> of

> >

> > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have

> >

> > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional

astrology

> as

> >

> > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of

> >

> > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill

> Suryasiddhantic

> >

> > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and

will

> >

> > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined

> tables

> >

> > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the

> >

> > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as

> >

> > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not

> >

> > reject a thing before testing it.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya.

I

> >

> > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges

and

> >

> > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I

am

> a

> >

> > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ?

I

> >

> > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding

> something

> >

> > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced

> by

> >

> > force, or by means of abuses.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

> >

> > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Vinayji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 1)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different

> from

> >

> > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with

> >

> > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge

> which

> >

> > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the

> Mahabharata

> >

> > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical

> >

> > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 2)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing

> power

> >

> > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you

> computing

> >

> > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her

> >

> > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a

> madaari(ni)?

> >

> > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than

> >

> > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving

> exit

> >

> > from the topic

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying

that

> >

> > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the

> >

> > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in

> Tantra

> >

> > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that

> Tantra

> >

> > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also

> the

> >

> > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a

> drop.

> >

> > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only

two-Tolas

> >

> > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine

> >

> > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please

do

> >

> > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted

WHO

> >

> > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap

fun

> >

> > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word

did

> I

> >

> > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty

> >

> > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a

> >

> > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In

the

> >

> > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient

> >

> > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the

> >

> > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his

> >

> > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die

unless

> he

> >

> > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool

his

> >

> > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the

> >

> > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the

> >

> > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you

said

> >

> > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't

> get

> >

> > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to

delete

> >

> > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am

> convinced

> >

> > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth

> >

> > reading.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > 6)

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words

> in

> >

> > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall

> claims.

> >

> > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and

we

> >

> > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things.

> All

> >

> > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite

> >

> > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In

fact

> I

> >

> > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted

> scholarship

> >

> > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you

> used

> >

> > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you

> >

> > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you

had

> >

> > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very

tolerant

> >

> > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group

> but

> >

> > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left

> >

> > ignominiously.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > -SKB

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Bhaskar Jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul

> >

> > language.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage

> strong

> >

> > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg,

which

> >

> > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back

> doors. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of

> >

> > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that

> >

> > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but

on

> >

> > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what

> India

> >

> > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can

change.

> >

> > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never

> >

> > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you

to

> be

> >

> > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove

> >

> > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only

forum

> >

> > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a

> >

> > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and

> never

> >

> > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started

such

> a

> >

> > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you

were

> >

> > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to

know

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a

> >

> > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a

> researcher.

> >

> > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because

I

> >

> > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber

of

> >

> > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later

> >

> > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later,

> >

> > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other

> >

> > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I

> joined

> >

> > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all

> these

> >

> > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern

astronomy

> >

> > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison

to

> >

> > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares

> based

> >

> > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a

> >

> > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical

> >

> > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose.

> But

> >

> > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not

> >

> > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying

> to

> >

> > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good

> >

> > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and

> >

> > impudence... "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from

those

> >

> > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on

my

> >

> > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing

my

> >

> > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you

> >

> > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not

> >

> > worth testing and reading.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets

> to

> >

> > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first

> >

> > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa

> about

> >

> > my method. why should I waste my time over you ??

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a

> >

> > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using

my

> >

> > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons

> >

> > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste

> my

> >

> > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil

> >

> > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in

AIA

> on

> >

> > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a

lifelong

> >

> > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a

> discussion.

> >

> > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric

> texts

> >

> > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known,

> >

> > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi

chakra,

> >

> > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was

destroyed.

> >

> > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then

> started

> >

> > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > your

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me

> or

> >

> > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Dear Vinay jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against

> indian

> >

> > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after

> >

> > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see

that

> >

> > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs

of

> >

> > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and

> >

> > played with you, till you left back doors.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as

> ignorant,

> >

> > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that

> Marg

> >

> > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person

> whom

> >

> > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it

> >

> > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these

> statements

> >

> > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your

goodeself

> (

> >

> > ??).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of

> same,

> >

> > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me

Pompous,

> >

> > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology,

which

> >

> > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet

> >

> > planted firmly on the ground.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall

> >

> > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these,

> and

> >

> > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed

> the

> >

> > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give

us,

> >

> > except that by using your software we will become very good

> astrologers

> >

> > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence,

and

> >

> > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge

> >

> > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and

> >

> > analysing.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study

> actually

> >

> > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved

yourself

> >

> > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various

> groups

> >

> > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty,

> >

> > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > regards/Bhaskar.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

> ...>

> >

> > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar Jee,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of

> >

> > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my

> support

> >

> > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my

> >

> > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant

persons

> >

> > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose

> >

> > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have

> >

> > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works,

as

> >

> > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only

for

> 1

> >

> > minute. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

> >

> > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ?

> >

> > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who

> >

> > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the

> >

> > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and

> use

> >

> > it. Read a recent email to me :

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > praNaam sir,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being

> negative

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > errors).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > and its accurate till prana

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > dashas.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds).

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > normally.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken..

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > another time

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

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

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Dear Vinay ji,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " .

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the

> >

> > persons who

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You

> >

> > cannot

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > prove that you know " something " ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the

roost

> >

> > on the

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my

knowledge.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not

> from

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I

mean

> >

> > who

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has

just

> >

> > broken

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > glass pieces in his kitty.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to

> mention

> >

> > or

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours

on

> >

> > them ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we

thought

> >

> > was a

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove

> yourself

> >

> > then

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of

> indian

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of

this

> >

> > Group ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would

have

> >

> > been

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from

the

> >

> > broken

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but

> none

> >

> > have

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to

> >

> > prove

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our

name

> in

> >

> > front

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss

> >

> > convincingly

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > but just rattling in the air.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed,

> because

> >

> > I just

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute,

because

> I

> >

> > could

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but

> have

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your

> >

> > present

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > set up of mind.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have

> started

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > best wishes,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Bhaskar.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@

> >

> > ...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message

is

> >

> > for you.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > I have yet to see

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or

> Mathematics.

> >

> > You

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. "

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now

he

> >

> > appears

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his

> certificates.

> >

> > He has

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and

says

> I

> >

> > made

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta

and

> >

> > one

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil

> >

> > Bhattacharya

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to

> abusers.

> >

> > I

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep

> quiet.

> >

> > When I

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane

> >

> > Astrology of

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any

> >

> > discussion on

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no

> need

> >

> > to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some

> free

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use,

and

> >

> > are

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the

> moderators

> >

> > to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell

> my

> >

> > free

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > softwares in future.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > -VJ

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana

here,

> >

> > that

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one

> >

> > place,

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then

the

> >

> > bridge

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams

> >

> > bridge

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be

> >

> > believed

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the

> time

> >

> > this

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with

the

> >

> > Ramayan

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming

that

> >

> > this

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what

> the

> >

> > whole

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than

> >

> > this to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of

astrology

> ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of

Jyotish

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would

now

> >

> > have to

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings .

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > > > & gt%

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all,

 

Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by

volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request you all

to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it ever had

any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various venues (read

fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined

initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter away

their precious time and energy.

 

Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and

agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few months now, I

do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay Jha ji’s

knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination to go

through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a

diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth.

 

We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay

profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what I (and

some others like me) can handle with some level of justification. Moreover,

this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our core

subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms of

history and astronomy.

 

Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core

interest.

 

Regards

Neelam

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Neelamji,

 

I had already opted out of this thread some time back, but came back

again, as it was repeatedly mentioned again and again that all

Astrologers who accept money are " Chandalas " . I had ignored this comment

once or twice, but this coming again and again, demands the reader to

ask for an explanation.

 

I am yet to receive the refrence for the above quoted term from the MBh

and Manusmriti. I also hoppe that the refrence is given alongwith the

cotext in which it was spoken so as it can be guaged as to why this

comment was made in the first place, if it was made at all in the

aforesaid texts. Because I can sense some twisting and misinterpretaion

done here to suit individual purpose and lend support to ones own claims

of nothing tangible.

 

About the Poojaris, doing Pooja and accepting money also being called as

Chandalas, and the surgeons who charge fees for their Chikitsa, also I

am wondering why has this not been put up on the National Channels, that

they are actually Chandalas.

 

I would not mind with the current state of affairs, to being put in the

" minority " section so that i could also take great many advantages

awarded to these sections, from the present day government since i am a

Chandala.

 

regards/Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07

wrote:

>

> Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all,

>

> Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by

> volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request

you all

> to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it ever

had

> any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various venues

(read

> fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined

> initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter

away

> their precious time and energy.

>

> Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and

> agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few

months now, I

> do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay

Jha ji's

> knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination

to go

> through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a

> diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth.

>

> We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay

> profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what I

(and

> some others like me) can handle with some level of justification.

Moreover,

> this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our

core

> subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms of

> history and astronomy.

>

> Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core

> interest.

>

> Regards

> Neelam

>

>

>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Bhaskar ji,

 

Your resistance is understandable. It is painful to see a scholar like Vinay

ji use such terminology which has no basis in any Shastra and so also in

modern way of thinking. As far as I know, astrologers are forbidden to ask

or accept an unjustified amount for their services. Though going by the

flexibility granted to us in the desh-kaal-patra tenet, what is ‘justified’

would also need to be defined for this modern materialistic kaal and modern

astro-paatras.

 

Till astrology remains a poor-man’s, or a beggar’s profession, we cannot

hope to have modern, intelligent and competent human resource adopting

astrology as a branch of studies or profession.

 

While Chandalas (with due respect to them), in the modern era may be more

suited to pack the political and bureaucratic corridors, I would like to see

astrologers come up like technocrats and doctors, happily and ungrudgingly

doing justice to their rewarding (also monetarily) advisory role.

 

Regards

Neelam

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

TO ALL :

 

An astrological issue of great importance is being declared to be

non-astrological.

 

I am amused to find the same team here united against me without any

reason and with abuses, which fruatrated my attempts to discuss anything

worthwhile in AIA. I am surprised at their teamspirit and want to point

out the underlying causes which is the cementing force uniting them, and

what harm they are doing to astrology.

 

First of all, I will like to answer Bhaskarji's charge that I am abusing

all astrologers as chaandaalas without providing any refernce to

Manusmriti and MBh. In answer, I am quoting recent mail of Sunilji in

this thread " Kaulji said that the astrologers are Chandalas without

knowing that any dishonest person in any profession is a Chandala. He

did not accept that astrology was known in the ancient times in India

though he himself said that Manu mentioned that astrologers are not to

be invited to participate in Devakarya and Pitrikarya and he was

withholding the fact the physicians and the temple priest are also not

to be invited for ...... "

 

It was Kaulji who said all astrologers are chaandaalas according to

Manusmriti. Sunilji corerected him by adding that according to Manu not

only all astrologers but all physicians and all temple priests are also

chaandaalas. I countered this misinterpretation of Manusmriti by

Sunilji, and said that only those astrologers, physicians and priests

were declared to be chaandaalas who made a living out of these

professions. This is literal meaning. In my view, astrologers and others

need money to live in this world and therefore have a right to accept

dakshinaa. I know a large number of pandits who adhere to this principle

and accept dakshinaa but do not ask for fees. I could have accepted

dakshinaas had I not been provided with alternative source for

livlihood. Hence, the real sense of manusmriti must have been that only

thugs are chaandaalas who pose as astrologers & c but are actually after

the pockets of their clients. It is strange that Bhaskarji is forgiving

Sunulji who made false and derogatory remarks against all astrologers

& c, and is inciting all members here on false pretexts. I merely

corrected Sunilji who was making a misinterpretation. Why Bhaskarji does

not ask Sunilji to provide the verse, which will make it clear who is

lying about Manusmriti and who is leveling false charge on me ? Instead,

Bhaskarji call me a hypocrite and concludes that I have " nothing to

offer " .

 

Neelamji joined the fray against me, as she did in AIA, concluding that

my mails have " any nugget of worth " , repeating Bhaskarji's charge that I

am good for nothing, and sympathising with Bhaskarji's false charges

against me that I call all astrologers as chaandaalas ( " It is painful to

see a scholar like Vinay ji use such terminology which has no basis in

any Shastra " ). I am being charged of what was actually said by Sunilji,

whom Neelamji hails as a good umpire to judge me (earlier she had hailed

Chandrahariji who could pass a verdict on me). Now, Sreenadhji has also

joined in this fray ( cf.

http://dir./message/22847 : " Does

those parasites in search of a free meal will feed the family of the

astrologer or what?! " . Although I adhere to strict rules of sanyasa, I

need not beg for free meals because I have permanent source of income.

But I am a parasite, because I distribute my works freely !! These same

people have abused all astrologers who are now falsely blaming me for

doing so, I only corrected the reference. These people do not know how

to quote, how to read and how to behave in a forum.

 

Neelam Gupta is a liar because she charges me of offering " a second line

of predictive astrology " . I had made it clear in AIA and in my website

that I strictly adhere to Parashara's predictive astrology (BPHS & c).

Why she is leveling a false charge on me ? These persons want to ban

( " shun " as bhaskarji said) a person like me who is advocating the rules

of sages in the field of Vedic Astrrology. Neelam Gupta should ask

Sunilji to stop diverting the discussion away from astrology. Instead,

she is accusing me of this diversion. I never liked any discussion on

history, because I am basically a software developer and lengthy

discussion not related to current problems of practical astrology

hampers my work. But those very persons are charging me of diversion who

are themselves guilty of diverting the topic on astrology to history or

to wine and even to sex (I have in store previous mails of these

fellows, some of which contained nothing but obscene abuses to my mother

and sister). In AIA, I had also quoted a message from PVR Narasimhaji,

supported by Sanjay Rath ji, which said that the team of Chandrahariji

is too dogmatic to listen to others. This same team is after my flesh

and blood now.

 

Lastly, I must answer the useless message of Sunilji who is hellbent on

diverting astrological discussions to other things merely with a view to

malign me and get me banned.He wants a discussion on my technical paper

on weather forecasting and teleconnections in an astrological forum. How

many members here know the meaning of " teleconnections " in weather

science ? I am sorry to note that Sunilji regards a difference of 1.7

years as merely " a fraction of a year " !! He rejects the very existence

of 61-year ctcle because he fails to understand a scientific paper. His

first charge is I had " not given any substantive data " . I worked on

already existing data of IITM ,Pune which I cited in reference-10 which

were originally for 1871-1978 but are constantly being updated (I also

used 1813-2007 dataset from IITM, but it was only for ISMR and not for

whole years, hence I could not use it properly). Sunilji can get these

datasest from IITM (Pune) and check for himself whether I worked without

authentic data or not. Why should I fill up my paper with data well

known to weather scientists ? I was asked my referees to remove well

known items in order to present only new things. I lucidly explained in

my paper how I used and analyzed that dataset.

 

His second charge is that I gave no repeat cycles and gave no dates of

any particular year in my paper. Either his eyesight is defective or his

intentions are far from sincere. I gave comparison of two cycles in six

figures, of three cycles in one figure and of four cycles in one figure

( Fig-1,2,3,4,6,7,9) . Annual data of only 136 years are availabe in the

case of India, which could facilitate comparision of only two whole

cycles of 61 years, and partial comparison of three cycles (1813-2007

dataset can give more span but less reliability due lack of whole year's

data). Surprisingly, Sunilji asks me to work on " at least two or three

centuries " ; he does not even know that rainfall data for India does not

exist for so long periods. Clearly, he is a novice in this field, but

Neelamji thanks him for " volunteering to be the good umpire " ! The

referees of IISc or experts of NASA were unfit, and a chemist like

Sunilji should judge my work ! Why he does not inform the referees of

CAOS, IISc that they erred in selecting my paper ?

 

Sunilji falsely says that my paper does not give years clearly. My paper

(

http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting

) says : " 1957 AD is numbered 87 (= 1957 - 1870 ) and will be found in

the second series in blue . When the second curve was superimposed upon

the first one, shape of both waveforms coincided in a majority of cases

when the gap between both series was chosen to be 61 years. Waveform of

1891-1923 ( year nos. 21-53 ) had an similarity in shape with that of

1952-1984 ( year numbers 82-114) in 25 out of 33 years , only 8 years

were out of phase. " Even a cursory glance at Fig-2 in my paper will

convince any unbiased onlooker that annual rainfall waveform replicate

the waveform of 61-years away for 50% of the time, even if we change 61

to 60 or to 62, this replication will cease. Why Sunilji deliberately

falsifies an important discovery is not difficult to guess. He has a

prejuduce for 60-year Jovian cycle, and cannot accept any new fact

against his prejudice. The Jovian cycle is quite different from the

solar cycle of 61 years. Due to his prejudices, Sunilji is deliberately

falsifying data and facts. He says about me " He does not even know how

to write a scientific paper properly and to report authentically. "

Unfortunately, it is Sunilji whio does not even know how to read a

scientific paper properly and to report honestly.

 

As for the date of Kalidasa, I do not know his arguments for his dating

of Kalidasa in 8th century BC. I have no access to his full paper, I got

a passage quoted in another person's work. Hence, I neither accept nor

refute his dating. But my knowledge of Sunilji's " scientific " temper

leads me to suspect his dating has no substantiation. He had said that

Suryasiddhanta had one hundred thousand verses. He makes wild statements

and does not cite sources. I am repeating my earlier statement that the

true date of Kalidasa can be judged only by procuring some old prints of

Ritusamhara which contained a verse at the end stating the date and

tithi, but era was not stated ; later publishers omitted this verse

because they thought a text of literature should not contain a

mathematical verse about dating written in archaic astrological

language. I have a photocopy of that page, the worn out book is in the

possession of an elderly person. Unfortunately, Sunilji pokes fun at all

my statements without any reason. It is asign of his bizarre

" scientific " attitude !

 

He is misguided by his ignorance in saying " Vinayji is wrong when he

says that INSA (India National Science Academy) papers are not

peer-reviewed. " I never said Chandrahariji's papers were not published

in peer-reviewed journals, I said that Chandrahariji published his wrong

interprewtations of Suryasiddhanta in journals whose panel included

peers of other disciplines, not a singlr expert of Suryasiddhanta was

there. I can prove this statement in a court of law, as I have already

done. There is no other cure for liars who pose as experts of texts

which they do not understand. Neelamji is a light minded person who

thinks the fundamental texts of Indian astrology should not be discussed

and monsoon-cycles have nothiong to do with astrology. If she has no

interest in serious issues, she can keep away from these topics and

forget me. But no, the friends of Chandrahariji have a mission : they

want to modify the meaning of Suryasiddhanta which is not possible as

long as I am here. Hence, I must be hanged or fired.

 

Friends, wait for some time. I am going to dispel all this fog created

by a small team (from AIA), for which I need some time, for translating

my works into English. Ancient Indian mundane astrology was a great

science, which I want to bring to fore ; it will help in individual

horoscopy as well. I have discovered nothing new. What Neelamji wants to

ban is not " my " method, my only crime is that I made a free software out

of this ancient method, which forms the bedrock of Jyotishaachaarya

curriculum in all Sanskrit universities. Some supposedly " scientific "

persons think all ancient things must be discarded, hence this hue and

cry against me without even testing my free software !! Let them forget

me and my software, why waste so much of time over me ?

 

-VJ

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

, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07

wrote:

>

> Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all,

>

> Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by

> volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request

you all

> to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it ever

had

> any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various venues

(read

> fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined

> initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter

away

> their precious time and energy.

>

> Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and

> agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few

months now, I

> do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay

Jha ji's

> knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination

to go

> through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a

> diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth.

>

> We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay

> profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what I

(and

> some others like me) can handle with some level of justification.

Moreover,

> this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our

core

> subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms of

> history and astronomy.

>

> Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core

> interest.

>

> Regards

> Neelam

>

>

>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Dear Vinay ji,

 

Well now you have retracted your statements made against Astrologers,

Poojaris and chikitsaks.

 

If You have not said so then I take my words back.

 

Nobody is after your blood Mr.Vinay. and nobody has formed any team, and

nobody is against you. On the contrary those whom you consider as a

team, we also have a lots of differences of opinions between each other,

but we let those rest after 1-2 mails, do not make it a issue, do not

elongate it, and respect each other by moving to some new thread etc.

None of us are perfect so we do not want to strain relations but more

interested in mantaining the same.

 

I have read the Manusmriti when I was a child and will read it again if

anyone wishes me to challenge this stand of the astrologers, Pundits and

the chikitsakas being called as " Chandalas " is mentioned there in.

 

You may be a good man, a Brahmachari, a Sanyasin, and much more, and you

may become more greater by giving all a free software which helps them

become better astrologers for whom the software works. I have no

argument here.

 

But why should we only use your software and then realise that you have

come up with some great matter of astrological importance which never

was , or never will be realised by anyone again. Why cant you explain in

simple words what you have discovered and how it helps in predictive

astrology.

 

What changes are there in your software which others do not have ? Is it

just your taking particular number of days as one year and basing the

Vimsottari calculations based on that ? Or is there more than this ?

What is it ?

 

Why cant you explain the above instead of endless talks on subjects and

people which does not matter to astrology rather disturbs the moods and

spoils the relations and calls for more agitated responses ?

 

regards,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

..

 

 

, " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16

wrote:

>

> TO ALL :

>

> An astrological issue of great importance is being declared to be

> non-astrological.

>

> I am amused to find the same team here united against me without any

> reason and with abuses, which fruatrated my attempts to discuss

anything

> worthwhile in AIA. I am surprised at their teamspirit and want to

point

> out the underlying causes which is the cementing force uniting them,

and

> what harm they are doing to astrology.

>

> First of all, I will like to answer Bhaskarji's charge that I am

abusing

> all astrologers as chaandaalas without providing any refernce to

> Manusmriti and MBh. In answer, I am quoting recent mail of Sunilji in

> this thread " Kaulji said that the astrologers are Chandalas without

> knowing that any dishonest person in any profession is a Chandala. He

> did not accept that astrology was known in the ancient times in India

> though he himself said that Manu mentioned that astrologers are not to

> be invited to participate in Devakarya and Pitrikarya and he was

> withholding the fact the physicians and the temple priest are also not

> to be invited for ...... "

>

> It was Kaulji who said all astrologers are chaandaalas according to

> Manusmriti. Sunilji corerected him by adding that according to Manu

not

> only all astrologers but all physicians and all temple priests are

also

> chaandaalas. I countered this misinterpretation of Manusmriti by

> Sunilji, and said that only those astrologers, physicians and priests

> were declared to be chaandaalas who made a living out of these

> professions. This is literal meaning. In my view, astrologers and

others

> need money to live in this world and therefore have a right to accept

> dakshinaa. I know a large number of pandits who adhere to this

principle

> and accept dakshinaa but do not ask for fees. I could have accepted

> dakshinaas had I not been provided with alternative source for

> livlihood. Hence, the real sense of manusmriti must have been that

only

> thugs are chaandaalas who pose as astrologers & c but are actually

after

> the pockets of their clients. It is strange that Bhaskarji is

forgiving

> Sunulji who made false and derogatory remarks against all astrologers

> & c, and is inciting all members here on false pretexts. I merely

> corrected Sunilji who was making a misinterpretation. Why Bhaskarji

does

> not ask Sunilji to provide the verse, which will make it clear who is

> lying about Manusmriti and who is leveling false charge on me ?

Instead,

> Bhaskarji call me a hypocrite and concludes that I have " nothing to

> offer " .

>

> Neelamji joined the fray against me, as she did in AIA, concluding

that

> my mails have " any nugget of worth " , repeating Bhaskarji's charge that

I

> am good for nothing, and sympathising with Bhaskarji's false charges

> against me that I call all astrologers as chaandaalas ( " It is painful

to

> see a scholar like Vinay ji use such terminology which has no basis in

> any Shastra " ). I am being charged of what was actually said by

Sunilji,

> whom Neelamji hails as a good umpire to judge me (earlier she had

hailed

> Chandrahariji who could pass a verdict on me). Now, Sreenadhji has

also

> joined in this fray ( cf.

> http://dir./message/22847 : " Does

> those parasites in search of a free meal will feed the family of the

> astrologer or what?! " . Although I adhere to strict rules of sanyasa, I

> need not beg for free meals because I have permanent source of income.

> But I am a parasite, because I distribute my works freely !! These

same

> people have abused all astrologers who are now falsely blaming me for

> doing so, I only corrected the reference. These people do not know how

> to quote, how to read and how to behave in a forum.

>

> Neelam Gupta is a liar because she charges me of offering " a second

line

> of predictive astrology " . I had made it clear in AIA and in my website

> that I strictly adhere to Parashara's predictive astrology (BPHS & c).

> Why she is leveling a false charge on me ? These persons want to ban

> ( " shun " as bhaskarji said) a person like me who is advocating the

rules

> of sages in the field of Vedic Astrrology. Neelam Gupta should ask

> Sunilji to stop diverting the discussion away from astrology. Instead,

> she is accusing me of this diversion. I never liked any discussion on

> history, because I am basically a software developer and lengthy

> discussion not related to current problems of practical astrology

> hampers my work. But those very persons are charging me of diversion

who

> are themselves guilty of diverting the topic on astrology to history

or

> to wine and even to sex (I have in store previous mails of these

> fellows, some of which contained nothing but obscene abuses to my

mother

> and sister). In AIA, I had also quoted a message from PVR Narasimhaji,

> supported by Sanjay Rath ji, which said that the team of Chandrahariji

> is too dogmatic to listen to others. This same team is after my flesh

> and blood now.

>

> Lastly, I must answer the useless message of Sunilji who is hellbent

on

> diverting astrological discussions to other things merely with a view

to

> malign me and get me banned.He wants a discussion on my technical

paper

> on weather forecasting and teleconnections in an astrological forum.

How

> many members here know the meaning of " teleconnections " in weather

> science ? I am sorry to note that Sunilji regards a difference of 1.7

> years as merely " a fraction of a year " !! He rejects the very existence

> of 61-year ctcle because he fails to understand a scientific paper.

His

> first charge is I had " not given any substantive data " . I worked on

> already existing data of IITM ,Pune which I cited in reference-10

which

> were originally for 1871-1978 but are constantly being updated (I also

> used 1813-2007 dataset from IITM, but it was only for ISMR and not for

> whole years, hence I could not use it properly). Sunilji can get these

> datasest from IITM (Pune) and check for himself whether I worked

without

> authentic data or not. Why should I fill up my paper with data well

> known to weather scientists ? I was asked my referees to remove well

> known items in order to present only new things. I lucidly explained

in

> my paper how I used and analyzed that dataset.

>

> His second charge is that I gave no repeat cycles and gave no dates of

> any particular year in my paper. Either his eyesight is defective or

his

> intentions are far from sincere. I gave comparison of two cycles in

six

> figures, of three cycles in one figure and of four cycles in one

figure

> ( Fig-1,2,3,4,6,7,9) . Annual data of only 136 years are availabe in

the

> case of India, which could facilitate comparision of only two whole

> cycles of 61 years, and partial comparison of three cycles (1813-2007

> dataset can give more span but less reliability due lack of whole

year's

> data). Surprisingly, Sunilji asks me to work on " at least two or three

> centuries " ; he does not even know that rainfall data for India does

not

> exist for so long periods. Clearly, he is a novice in this field, but

> Neelamji thanks him for " volunteering to be the good umpire " ! The

> referees of IISc or experts of NASA were unfit, and a chemist like

> Sunilji should judge my work ! Why he does not inform the referees of

> CAOS, IISc that they erred in selecting my paper ?

>

> Sunilji falsely says that my paper does not give years clearly. My

paper

> (

>

http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting

> ) says : " 1957 AD is numbered 87 (= 1957 - 1870 ) and will be found in

> the second series in blue . When the second curve was superimposed

upon

> the first one, shape of both waveforms coincided in a majority of

cases

> when the gap between both series was chosen to be 61 years. Waveform

of

> 1891-1923 ( year nos. 21-53 ) had an similarity in shape with that of

> 1952-1984 ( year numbers 82-114) in 25 out of 33 years , only 8 years

> were out of phase. " Even a cursory glance at Fig-2 in my paper will

> convince any unbiased onlooker that annual rainfall waveform replicate

> the waveform of 61-years away for 50% of the time, even if we change

61

> to 60 or to 62, this replication will cease. Why Sunilji deliberately

> falsifies an important discovery is not difficult to guess. He has a

> prejuduce for 60-year Jovian cycle, and cannot accept any new fact

> against his prejudice. The Jovian cycle is quite different from the

> solar cycle of 61 years. Due to his prejudices, Sunilji is

deliberately

> falsifying data and facts. He says about me " He does not even know how

> to write a scientific paper properly and to report authentically. "

> Unfortunately, it is Sunilji whio does not even know how to read a

> scientific paper properly and to report honestly.

>

> As for the date of Kalidasa, I do not know his arguments for his

dating

> of Kalidasa in 8th century BC. I have no access to his full paper, I

got

> a passage quoted in another person's work. Hence, I neither accept nor

> refute his dating. But my knowledge of Sunilji's " scientific " temper

> leads me to suspect his dating has no substantiation. He had said that

> Suryasiddhanta had one hundred thousand verses. He makes wild

statements

> and does not cite sources. I am repeating my earlier statement that

the

> true date of Kalidasa can be judged only by procuring some old prints

of

> Ritusamhara which contained a verse at the end stating the date and

> tithi, but era was not stated ; later publishers omitted this verse

> because they thought a text of literature should not contain a

> mathematical verse about dating written in archaic astrological

> language. I have a photocopy of that page, the worn out book is in the

> possession of an elderly person. Unfortunately, Sunilji pokes fun at

all

> my statements without any reason. It is asign of his bizarre

> " scientific " attitude !

>

> He is misguided by his ignorance in saying " Vinayji is wrong when he

> says that INSA (India National Science Academy) papers are not

> peer-reviewed. " I never said Chandrahariji's papers were not published

> in peer-reviewed journals, I said that Chandrahariji published his

wrong

> interprewtations of Suryasiddhanta in journals whose panel included

> peers of other disciplines, not a singlr expert of Suryasiddhanta was

> there. I can prove this statement in a court of law, as I have already

> done. There is no other cure for liars who pose as experts of texts

> which they do not understand. Neelamji is a light minded person who

> thinks the fundamental texts of Indian astrology should not be

discussed

> and monsoon-cycles have nothiong to do with astrology. If she has no

> interest in serious issues, she can keep away from these topics and

> forget me. But no, the friends of Chandrahariji have a mission : they

> want to modify the meaning of Suryasiddhanta which is not possible as

> long as I am here. Hence, I must be hanged or fired.

>

> Friends, wait for some time. I am going to dispel all this fog created

> by a small team (from AIA), for which I need some time, for

translating

> my works into English. Ancient Indian mundane astrology was a great

> science, which I want to bring to fore ; it will help in individual

> horoscopy as well. I have discovered nothing new. What Neelamji wants

to

> ban is not " my " method, my only crime is that I made a free software

out

> of this ancient method, which forms the bedrock of Jyotishaachaarya

> curriculum in all Sanskrit universities. Some supposedly " scientific "

> persons think all ancient things must be discarded, hence this hue and

> cry against me without even testing my free software !! Let them

forget

> me and my software, why waste so much of time over me ?

>

> -VJ

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

> , neelam gupta neelamgupta07@

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all,

> >

> > Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by

> > volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request

> you all

> > to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it

ever

> had

> > any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various

venues

> (read

> > fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined

> > initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter

> away

> > their precious time and energy.

> >

> > Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and

> > agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few

> months now, I

> > do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay

> Jha ji's

> > knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination

> to go

> > through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a

> > diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth.

> >

> > We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay

> > profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what

I

> (and

> > some others like me) can handle with some level of justification.

> Moreover,

> > this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our

> core

> > subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms

of

> > history and astronomy.

> >

> > Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core

> > interest.

> >

> > Regards

> > Neelam

> >

> >

> >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Bhaskar ji,

I requested Sunilji again and again not to drag me into history or astronomy,

not because I was not interested in history or astronomy, but because it is an

astrological forum where I wanted to discuss only simple astrological topics.

But he would not relent. Let this thread be reserved for these useless charges

and counter-charges, and let us begin a new thread for discussing astrological

problems, without any personal attacks or diversions.

I am starting that new thread with a title : " Some Cardinal Problems of

Astrology " . I request you to join, but I also request you to see that this topic

is not destroyed as so many earlier attempts were destoyed with personal

attacks. I have no acrimony against you, Sunilji, Neelamji, Sreenadhji etc,

because I know they are all misunderstanding me. All of them want good astrology

; I also want the same. Where is the difference ? The difference lies in an

unwillingness to listen. It can be solved by shutting one's ears. They can

refuse to listen to me. Why quarrel with me ? If someone imagines he can mute my

voice he is utterly mistaken. I have just begun on the internet. I have not

opened all my cards, which will become yours the moment you try to understaqnd

and use my cards, because my cards are not mine. I discovered nothing new.

Good Wishes,

-VJ

 

 

 

________________________________

Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish

 

Monday, April 6, 2009 5:04:53 PM

Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>

 

 

 

Dear Vinay ji,

 

Well now you have retracted your statements made against Astrologers,

Poojaris and chikitsaks.

 

If You have not said so then I take my words back.

 

Nobody is after your blood Mr.Vinay. and nobody has formed any team, and

nobody is against you. On the contrary those whom you consider as a

team, we also have a lots of differences of opinions between each other,

but we let those rest after 1-2 mails, do not make it a issue, do not

elongate it, and respect each other by moving to some new thread etc.

None of us are perfect so we do not want to strain relations but more

interested in mantaining the same.

 

I have read the Manusmriti when I was a child and will read it again if

anyone wishes me to challenge this stand of the astrologers, Pundits and

the chikitsakas being called as " Chandalas " is mentioned there in.

 

You may be a good man, a Brahmachari, a Sanyasin, and much more, and you

may become more greater by giving all a free software which helps them

become better astrologers for whom the software works. I have no

argument here.

 

But why should we only use your software and then realise that you have

come up with some great matter of astrological importance which never

was , or never will be realised by anyone again. Why cant you explain in

simple words what you have discovered and how it helps in predictive

astrology.

 

What changes are there in your software which others do not have ? Is it

just your taking particular number of days as one year and basing the

Vimsottari calculations based on that ? Or is there more than this ?

What is it ?

 

Why cant you explain the above instead of endless talks on subjects and

people which does not matter to astrology rather disturbs the moods and

spoils the relations and calls for more agitated responses ?

 

regards,

 

Bhaskar.

 

..

 

, " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

wrote:

>

> TO ALL :

>

> An astrological issue of great importance is being declared to be

> non-astrological.

>

> I am amused to find the same team here united against me without any

> reason and with abuses, which fruatrated my attempts to discuss

anything

> worthwhile in AIA. I am surprised at their teamspirit and want to

point

> out the underlying causes which is the cementing force uniting them,

and

> what harm they are doing to astrology.

>

> First of all, I will like to answer Bhaskarji's charge that I am

abusing

> all astrologers as chaandaalas without providing any refernce to

> Manusmriti and MBh. In answer, I am quoting recent mail of Sunilji in

> this thread " Kaulji said that the astrologers are Chandalas without

> knowing that any dishonest person in any profession is a Chandala. He

> did not accept that astrology was known in the ancient times in India

> though he himself said that Manu mentioned that astrologers are not to

> be invited to participate in Devakarya and Pitrikarya and he was

> withholding the fact the physicians and the temple priest are also not

> to be invited for ...... "

>

> It was Kaulji who said all astrologers are chaandaalas according to

> Manusmriti. Sunilji corerected him by adding that according to Manu

not

> only all astrologers but all physicians and all temple priests are

also

> chaandaalas. I countered this misinterpretation of Manusmriti by

> Sunilji, and said that only those astrologers, physicians and priests

> were declared to be chaandaalas who made a living out of these

> professions. This is literal meaning. In my view, astrologers and

others

> need money to live in this world and therefore have a right to accept

> dakshinaa. I know a large number of pandits who adhere to this

principle

> and accept dakshinaa but do not ask for fees. I could have accepted

> dakshinaas had I not been provided with alternative source for

> livlihood. Hence, the real sense of manusmriti must have been that

only

> thugs are chaandaalas who pose as astrologers & c but are actually

after

> the pockets of their clients. It is strange that Bhaskarji is

forgiving

> Sunulji who made false and derogatory remarks against all astrologers

> & c, and is inciting all members here on false pretexts. I merely

> corrected Sunilji who was making a misinterpretation. Why Bhaskarji

does

> not ask Sunilji to provide the verse, which will make it clear who is

> lying about Manusmriti and who is leveling false charge on me ?

Instead,

> Bhaskarji call me a hypocrite and concludes that I have " nothing to

> offer " .

>

> Neelamji joined the fray against me, as she did in AIA, concluding

that

> my mails have " any nugget of worth " , repeating Bhaskarji's charge that

I

> am good for nothing, and sympathising with Bhaskarji's false charges

> against me that I call all astrologers as chaandaalas ( " It is painful

to

> see a scholar like Vinay ji use such terminology which has no basis in

> any Shastra " ). I am being charged of what was actually said by

Sunilji,

> whom Neelamji hails as a good umpire to judge me (earlier she had

hailed

> Chandrahariji who could pass a verdict on me). Now, Sreenadhji has

also

> joined in this fray ( cf.

> http://dir.groups. / group/JyotishGro up/message/ 22847 : " Does

> those parasites in search of a free meal will feed the family of the

> astrologer or what?! " . Although I adhere to strict rules of sanyasa, I

> need not beg for free meals because I have permanent source of income.

> But I am a parasite, because I distribute my works freely !! These

same

> people have abused all astrologers who are now falsely blaming me for

> doing so, I only corrected the reference. These people do not know how

> to quote, how to read and how to behave in a forum.

>

> Neelam Gupta is a liar because she charges me of offering " a second

line

> of predictive astrology " . I had made it clear in AIA and in my website

> that I strictly adhere to Parashara's predictive astrology (BPHS & c).

> Why she is leveling a false charge on me ? These persons want to ban

> ( " shun " as bhaskarji said) a person like me who is advocating the

rules

> of sages in the field of Vedic Astrrology. Neelam Gupta should ask

> Sunilji to stop diverting the discussion away from astrology. Instead,

> she is accusing me of this diversion. I never liked any discussion on

> history, because I am basically a software developer and lengthy

> discussion not related to current problems of practical astrology

> hampers my work. But those very persons are charging me of diversion

who

> are themselves guilty of diverting the topic on astrology to history

or

> to wine and even to sex (I have in store previous mails of these

> fellows, some of which contained nothing but obscene abuses to my

mother

> and sister). In AIA, I had also quoted a message from PVR Narasimhaji,

> supported by Sanjay Rath ji, which said that the team of Chandrahariji

> is too dogmatic to listen to others. This same team is after my flesh

> and blood now.

>

> Lastly, I must answer the useless message of Sunilji who is hellbent

on

> diverting astrological discussions to other things merely with a view

to

> malign me and get me banned.He wants a discussion on my technical

paper

> on weather forecasting and teleconnections in an astrological forum.

How

> many members here know the meaning of " teleconnections " in weather

> science ? I am sorry to note that Sunilji regards a difference of 1.7

> years as merely " a fraction of a year " !! He rejects the very existence

> of 61-year ctcle because he fails to understand a scientific paper.

His

> first charge is I had " not given any substantive data " . I worked on

> already existing data of IITM ,Pune which I cited in reference-10

which

> were originally for 1871-1978 but are constantly being updated (I also

> used 1813-2007 dataset from IITM, but it was only for ISMR and not for

> whole years, hence I could not use it properly). Sunilji can get these

> datasest from IITM (Pune) and check for himself whether I worked

without

> authentic data or not. Why should I fill up my paper with data well

> known to weather scientists ? I was asked my referees to remove well

> known items in order to present only new things. I lucidly explained

in

> my paper how I used and analyzed that dataset.

>

> His second charge is that I gave no repeat cycles and gave no dates of

> any particular year in my paper. Either his eyesight is defective or

his

> intentions are far from sincere. I gave comparison of two cycles in

six

> figures, of three cycles in one figure and of four cycles in one

figure

> ( Fig-1,2,3,4, 6,7,9) . Annual data of only 136 years are availabe in

the

> case of India, which could facilitate comparision of only two whole

> cycles of 61 years, and partial comparison of three cycles (1813-2007

> dataset can give more span but less reliability due lack of whole

year's

> data). Surprisingly, Sunilji asks me to work on " at least two or three

> centuries " ; he does not even know that rainfall data for India does

not

> exist for so long periods. Clearly, he is a novice in this field, but

> Neelamji thanks him for " volunteering to be the good umpire " ! The

> referees of IISc or experts of NASA were unfit, and a chemist like

> Sunilji should judge my work ! Why he does not inform the referees of

> CAOS, IISc that they erred in selecting my paper ?

>

> Sunilji falsely says that my paper does not give years clearly. My

paper

> (

>

http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing

> ) says : " 1957 AD is numbered 87 (= 1957 - 1870 ) and will be found in

> the second series in blue . When the second curve was superimposed

upon

> the first one, shape of both waveforms coincided in a majority of

cases

> when the gap between both series was chosen to be 61 years. Waveform

of

> 1891-1923 ( year nos. 21-53 ) had an similarity in shape with that of

> 1952-1984 ( year numbers 82-114) in 25 out of 33 years , only 8 years

> were out of phase. " Even a cursory glance at Fig-2 in my paper will

> convince any unbiased onlooker that annual rainfall waveform replicate

> the waveform of 61-years away for 50% of the time, even if we change

61

> to 60 or to 62, this replication will cease. Why Sunilji deliberately

> falsifies an important discovery is not difficult to guess. He has a

> prejuduce for 60-year Jovian cycle, and cannot accept any new fact

> against his prejudice. The Jovian cycle is quite different from the

> solar cycle of 61 years. Due to his prejudices, Sunilji is

deliberately

> falsifying data and facts. He says about me " He does not even know how

> to write a scientific paper properly and to report authentically. "

> Unfortunately, it is Sunilji whio does not even know how to read a

> scientific paper properly and to report honestly.

>

> As for the date of Kalidasa, I do not know his arguments for his

dating

> of Kalidasa in 8th century BC. I have no access to his full paper, I

got

> a passage quoted in another person's work. Hence, I neither accept nor

> refute his dating. But my knowledge of Sunilji's " scientific " temper

> leads me to suspect his dating has no substantiation. He had said that

> Suryasiddhanta had one hundred thousand verses. He makes wild

statements

> and does not cite sources. I am repeating my earlier statement that

the

> true date of Kalidasa can be judged only by procuring some old prints

of

> Ritusamhara which contained a verse at the end stating the date and

> tithi, but era was not stated ; later publishers omitted this verse

> because they thought a text of literature should not contain a

> mathematical verse about dating written in archaic astrological

> language. I have a photocopy of that page, the worn out book is in the

> possession of an elderly person. Unfortunately, Sunilji pokes fun at

all

> my statements without any reason. It is asign of his bizarre

> " scientific " attitude !

>

> He is misguided by his ignorance in saying " Vinayji is wrong when he

> says that INSA (India National Science Academy) papers are not

> peer-reviewed. " I never said Chandrahariji' s papers were not published

> in peer-reviewed journals, I said that Chandrahariji published his

wrong

> interprewtations of Suryasiddhanta in journals whose panel included

> peers of other disciplines, not a singlr expert of Suryasiddhanta was

> there. I can prove this statement in a court of law, as I have already

> done. There is no other cure for liars who pose as experts of texts

> which they do not understand. Neelamji is a light minded person who

> thinks the fundamental texts of Indian astrology should not be

discussed

> and monsoon-cycles have nothiong to do with astrology. If she has no

> interest in serious issues, she can keep away from these topics and

> forget me. But no, the friends of Chandrahariji have a mission : they

> want to modify the meaning of Suryasiddhanta which is not possible as

> long as I am here. Hence, I must be hanged or fired.

>

> Friends, wait for some time. I am going to dispel all this fog created

> by a small team (from AIA), for which I need some time, for

translating

> my works into English. Ancient Indian mundane astrology was a great

> science, which I want to bring to fore ; it will help in individual

> horoscopy as well. I have discovered nothing new. What Neelamji wants

to

> ban is not " my " method, my only crime is that I made a free software

out

> of this ancient method, which forms the bedrock of Jyotishaachaarya

> curriculum in all Sanskrit universities. Some supposedly " scientific "

> persons think all ancient things must be discarded, hence this hue and

> cry against me without even testing my free software !! Let them

forget

> me and my software, why waste so much of time over me ?

>

> -VJ

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

> , neelam gupta neelamgupta07@

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all,

> >

> > Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by

> > volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request

> you all

> > to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it

ever

> had

> > any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various

venues

> (read

> > fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined

> > initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter

> away

> > their precious time and energy.

> >

> > Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and

> > agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few

> months now, I

> > do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay

> Jha ji's

> > knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination

> to go

> > through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a

> > diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth.

> >

> > We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay

> > profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what

I

> (and

> > some others like me) can handle with some level of justification.

> Moreover,

> > this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our

> core

> > subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms

of

> > history and astronomy.

> >

> > Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core

> > interest.

> >

> > Regards

> > Neelam

> >

> >

> >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...