Guest guest Posted April 16, 2009 Report Share Posted April 16, 2009 Dear All, May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them. I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts - * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed. The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.Love and regards,Sreenadh , kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 wrote:>> *Varahamihira> *> Aryabhatta is said to have discovered the diurnal motion of the earth' which> he thought to be spherical. I leave the explanation of these scientific> matters to those who are making scientific investigations of Hindu> Astronomy. But one thing is certain that it was about this time that the old> Krttika series of asterisms was discarded and the new series commencing from> the 1st point of Asvini was adopted. The first point of ASvini recedes one> degree or by one day in 73 years and it has receded twenty days now giving a> total of twenty into seventy-three (20 X 73) that is, 1460 years. The point> was on the equinoctial circle on the first day of Vaisakha and now it is on> the 10th of Ohaitra. So the point was seen there 1460 years ago, that is,> 1921-1460 that is 461 A.D. This is only an approximate calculation. If> accurate calculation is made it will fall within the active period of> Aryabhata's life.> > Aryabhatta had many students and his next successor Lalla was one of his> pupils and some say *Varahamihira*, too, was his pupil.> > > Aryabhatta had another celebrated astronomer as his contemporary. This> was Varahamihira. In his Vrhajja- taka in the 26th chapter, he says that he> was son of Adityadasa, that he was an Avantaka, that he received his> knowledge from his father and that he obtained a book from the Sun-God at> Kampillaka or Kapitthaka. Bhattotpala tells us that he was a Migadha dvija.> Some say that he was a Magadvija, i.e., one of the Magii long settled in> India. From all this the late Pandit Sudhakara Dvivedi in his> Ganakatarangiui infers that it is not impossible that Varaha was a Magadha> Brahmin. He might have gone to Ujjain for livelihood He studied with his> father at his own house in Magadha and also studied the works of Aryabhatta> there, he travelled to make himself known, he worshipped Sun-God at> Kampillaka (Kalpi) and obtained a book from him. I acquired a manuscript of> his son's work Prthuyasah-Sastra at Samkhu the northernmost part of the> Nepal valley, the opening verse of which says that the son Varahamihira> asked his father some questions while he was residing at the beautiful city> of Kanyakubja on the Ganges.> > Varaha might have retired to Kanyakubja in his old age to be on the Ganges> and there imparted his knowledge to his son Prthuyasah. Amaraja, the> commentator of Khandanakhandakhadya says that Varahamihira died in the Saka> year 509 that is 587 A.D. Some people think that Varaha wrote his> Panca-Siddhantika in 505 A.D. that is Saka 4:27. But this is impossible if> we are to believe Amaraja. Varaha would then be only 18. Therefore Dr> Thibaut after carefully considering all the facts of the case thinks that> 427 Saka was the date when Lalla revised the Romaka-Siddhanta and that the> Panca-SiddhSnta was composed about 550 A.D. So Varahamihira was a later> contemporary and perhaps a student of Aryabhata.> > The Ganakatarangiui has given a list of Varaha's works and thinks that the> Vrhat-Saipbita is his last work. It is an Eucyclopoedic work. It treats not> only of Astronomy and Astrology but of such subjects as gardening,> agriculture, sculpture, strilak^ana, purusalakgana and so on. This great> work is the Pafica-Sidhantta in which he gives a summary of all the> Sidhantas current in his time. They are five in number Paulisa, Romaka.> VaSi^tha, Paitamaha and Sur.yyasiddhaata. Varaha says that of these five> PmiliSa and Roraaka have been explained by Latadeva.> > The Siddhanta made by PauliSa is accurate. Near to it stands the Siddhanta> proclaimed by Romaka, more accurate is the Savitra (Saura) and the two> remaining are far from the truth.> > Kern says that the third Skandha of Jyotisa "'namely, its Jataka section has> been borrowed from the Yavanas or Greeks. This is a fact. The Yavana-Jataka> of Yavan & caryya is still regarded as an authoritative work on the subject> and there are other works like Miuaraja Jataka also taken from the Yavanas.> I found in Nepal a manuscript of a Yavana-Jataka written in the character of> the tenth century oa palm-leaf which contains the following statement at the> end.> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Dear Sreenadhji, In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is just a logical guess.thank you. Regards, Hari Malla ----- Forwarded Message ----Sreenadh <sreesog Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM Re: Krittikadi Dear All, May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them. I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts - * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed. The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.Love and regards,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@ ...> wrote:>> *Varahamihira> *> Aryabhatta is said to have discovered the diurnal motion of the earth' which> he thought to be spherical. I leave the explanation of these scientific> matters to those who are making scientific investigations of Hindu> Astronomy. But one thing is certain that it was about this time that the old> Krttika series of asterisms was discarded and the new series commencing from> the 1st point of Asvini was adopted. The first point of ASvini recedes one> degree or by one day in 73 years and it has receded twenty days now giving a> total of twenty into seventy-three (20 X 73) that is, 1460 years. The point> was on the equinoctial circle on the first day of Vaisakha and now it is on> the 10th of Ohaitra. So the point was seen there 1460 years ago, that is,> 1921-1460 that is 461 A.D. This is only an approximate calculation. If> accurate calculation is made it will fall within the active period of> Aryabhata's life.> > Aryabhatta had many students and his next successor Lalla was one of his> pupils and some say *Varahamihira* , too, was his pupil.> > > Aryabhatta had another celebrated astronomer as his contemporary. This> was Varahamihira. In his Vrhajja- taka in the 26th chapter, he says that he> was son of Adityadasa, that he was an Avantaka, that he received his> knowledge from his father and that he obtained a book from the Sun-God at> Kampillaka or Kapitthaka. Bhattotpala tells us that he was a Migadha dvija.> Some say that he was a Magadvija, i.e., one of the Magii long settled in> India. From all this the late Pandit Sudhakara Dvivedi in his> Ganakatarangiui infers that it is not impossible that Varaha was a Magadha> Brahmin. He might have gone to Ujjain for livelihood He studied with his> father at his own house in Magadha and also studied the works of Aryabhatta> there, he travelled to make himself known, he worshipped Sun-God at> Kampillaka (Kalpi) and obtained a book from him. I acquired a manuscript of> his son's work Prthuyasah-Sastra at Samkhu the northernmost part of the> Nepal valley, the opening verse of which says that the son Varahamihira> asked his father some questions while he was residing at the beautiful city> of Kanyakubja on the Ganges.> > Varaha might have retired to Kanyakubja in his old age to be on the Ganges> and there imparted his knowledge to his son Prthuyasah. Amaraja, the> commentator of Khandanakhandakhady a says that Varahamihira died in the Saka> year 509 that is 587 A.D. Some people think that Varaha wrote his> Panca-Siddhantika in 505 A.D. that is Saka 4:27. But this is impossible if> we are to believe Amaraja. Varaha would then be only 18. Therefore Dr> Thibaut after carefully considering all the facts of the case thinks that> 427 Saka was the date when Lalla revised the Romaka-Siddhanta and that the> Panca-SiddhSnta was composed about 550 A.D. So Varahamihira was a later> contemporary and perhaps a student of Aryabhata.> > The Ganakatarangiui has given a list of Varaha's works and thinks that the> Vrhat-Saipbita is his last work. It is an Eucyclopoedic work. It treats not> only of Astronomy and Astrology but of such subjects as gardening,> agriculture, sculpture, strilak^ana, purusalakgana and so on. This great> work is the Pafica-Sidhantta in which he gives a summary of all the> Sidhantas current in his time. They are five in number Paulisa, Romaka.> VaSi^tha, Paitamaha and Sur.yyasiddhaata. Varaha says that of these five> PmiliSa and Roraaka have been explained by Latadeva.> > The Siddhanta made by PauliSa is accurate. Near to it stands the Siddhanta> proclaimed by Romaka, more accurate is the Savitra (Saura) and the two> remaining are far from the truth.> > Kern says that the third Skandha of Jyotisa "'namely, its Jataka section has> been borrowed from the Yavanas or Greeks. This is a fact. The Yavana-Jataka> of Yavan & caryya is still regarded as an authoritative work on the subject> and there are other works like Miuaraja Jataka also taken from the Yavanas.> I found in Nepal a manuscript of a Yavana-Jataka written in the character of> the tenth century oa palm-leaf which contains the following statement at the> end.> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Dear Sreenadhji, I believe in both vedic jyotish and also calender reform or celebration of festivals at correct times.I have been wondering if it is possible to make AK Kaul compromise with us.DO you think there is some chance of doing this.Perhaps after a conciliatory settlement he will stop bashing us all.What is your opinion? Let us see how much he can come to our terms and how much we can give him so he is satisfied.Thanking you, Sincerely yours, Hari Malla ----- Forwarded Message ----Hari Malla <harimallasreenadh <sreesogCc: Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 1:02:04 PMFw: Re: Krittikadi Dear Sreenadhji, In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is just a logical guess.thank you. Regards, Hari Malla ----- Forwarded Message ----Sreenadh <sreesog >ancient_indian_ astrologyThursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM[ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Krittikadi Dear All, May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them. I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts - * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed. The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.Love and regards,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@ ...> wrote:>> *Varahamihira> *> Aryabhatta is said to have discovered the diurnal motion of the earth' which> he thought to be spherical. I leave the explanation of these scientific> matters to those who are making scientific investigations of Hindu> Astronomy. But one thing is certain that it was about this time that the old> Krttika series of asterisms was discarded and the new series commencing from> the 1st point of Asvini was adopted. The first point of ASvini recedes one> degree or by one day in 73 years and it has receded twenty days now giving a> total of twenty into seventy-three (20 X 73) that is, 1460 years. The point> was on the equinoctial circle on the first day of Vaisakha and now it is on> the 10th of Ohaitra. So the point was seen there 1460 years ago, that is,> 1921-1460 that is 461 A.D. This is only an approximate calculation. If> accurate calculation is made it will fall within the active period of> Aryabhata's life.> > Aryabhatta had many students and his next successor Lalla was one of his> pupils and some say *Varahamihira* , too, was his pupil.> > > Aryabhatta had another celebrated astronomer as his contemporary. This> was Varahamihira. In his Vrhajja- taka in the 26th chapter, he says that he> was son of Adityadasa, that he was an Avantaka, that he received his> knowledge from his father and that he obtained a book from the Sun-God at> Kampillaka or Kapitthaka. Bhattotpala tells us that he was a Migadha dvija.> Some say that he was a Magadvija, i.e., one of the Magii long settled in> India. From all this the late Pandit Sudhakara Dvivedi in his> Ganakatarangiui infers that it is not impossible that Varaha was a Magadha> Brahmin. He might have gone to Ujjain for livelihood He studied with his> father at his own house in Magadha and also studied the works of Aryabhatta> there, he travelled to make himself known, he worshipped Sun-God at> Kampillaka (Kalpi) and obtained a book from him. I acquired a manuscript of> his son's work Prthuyasah-Sastra at Samkhu the northernmost part of the> Nepal valley, the opening verse of which says that the son Varahamihira> asked his father some questions while he was residing at the beautiful city> of Kanyakubja on the Ganges.> > Varaha might have retired to Kanyakubja in his old age to be on the Ganges> and there imparted his knowledge to his son Prthuyasah. Amaraja, the> commentator of Khandanakhandakhady a says that Varahamihira died in the Saka> year 509 that is 587 A.D. Some people think that Varaha wrote his> Panca-Siddhantika in 505 A.D. that is Saka 4:27. But this is impossible if> we are to believe Amaraja. Varaha would then be only 18. Therefore Dr> Thibaut after carefully considering all the facts of the case thinks that> 427 Saka was the date when Lalla revised the Romaka-Siddhanta and that the> Panca-SiddhSnta was composed about 550 A.D. So Varahamihira was a later> contemporary and perhaps a student of Aryabhata.> > The Ganakatarangiui has given a list of Varaha's works and thinks that the> Vrhat-Saipbita is his last work. It is an Eucyclopoedic work. It treats not> only of Astronomy and Astrology but of such subjects as gardening,> agriculture, sculpture, strilak^ana, purusalakgana and so on. This great> work is the Pafica-Sidhantta in which he gives a summary of all the> Sidhantas current in his time. They are five in number Paulisa, Romaka.> VaSi^tha, Paitamaha and Sur.yyasiddhaata. Varaha says that of these five> PmiliSa and Roraaka have been explained by Latadeva.> > The Siddhanta made by PauliSa is accurate. Near to it stands the Siddhanta> proclaimed by Romaka, more accurate is the Savitra (Saura) and the two> remaining are far from the truth.> > Kern says that the third Skandha of Jyotisa "'namely, its Jataka section has> been borrowed from the Yavanas or Greeks. This is a fact. The Yavana-Jataka> of Yavan & caryya is still regarded as an authoritative work on the subject> and there are other works like Miuaraja Jataka also taken from the Yavanas.> I found in Nepal a manuscript of a Yavana-Jataka written in the character of> the tenth century oa palm-leaf which contains the following statement at the> end.> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Dear Hari Mall ji, //> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.// I am yet to see any such reference. Can you provide us with the same?//You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.// It is understandable when you state that 'Purush' is God or universe. But is that Purush the same as KalaPurush (used in astrology)? Do you have any proof in support of or against? It would be logical to state that Year starts from the head of Kalapurush, since 'Kala' means 'Time' (which also includes Year). But where did you found the statement that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox'? Do you have any poof to supply? Now if we accept that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox', then how are you going to proove that 'Head of Purusha mentioned in Veda (NOT Kala purusha)' and indicates Vernal Equinox?! Do you have any vedic quote to proove this argument? To have some bit of fun as well (take it in light spirits) - "Sahasra Seersha Purusha (Purusha has 1000 heads)" - which head is Vernal equinox you wanted to say? :)Love and regards,Sreenadh , Hari Malla <harimalla wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is just a logical guess.thank you.> Regards,> Hari Malla> > > > ----- Forwarded Message ----> Sreenadh sreesog > Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM> Re: Krittikadi> Dear All,> May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them.> I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts -> * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. > * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! > * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if> some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed.> The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. > Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.> Love and regards,> Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Dear Hari Malla ji, //> I believe in both vedic jyotish and also calendar reform or celebration of festivals at correct times.// Good to know that you are a believer of Vedic Jyotish (Sayana Astrology). This also means that equinoxes and solstices are very important to you. Can you tell me how these 4 points can be used to predict the future of others? Now coming to festivals, how many of the festivals are totally depended on equinoxes and solstices alone and are mentioned in Vedas?! Do you want to advice us all that Rama Navami, Krishnashtami, Deepavali, Siva ratri etc?! All of them are neither mentioned in Vedas nor in anyway related to equinoxes and solstices as well. Along with Kaul do you want to advice us that - "Only 4 festivals (2 for equinoxes and 2 for solstices) should be celebrated and none else"?!!! //. I have been wondering if it is possible to make AK Kaul compromise with us. DO you think there is some chance of doing this.// Good to know that you want to change Kaul. But there is a saying - "There is no use trying to give childhood education to one in old age". AKK want to compromise or not is all his choice. He is no competitor to us, since the basic intentions differ; we can safly ignore especially in face of the fact that he runs away from any place where he see Sunil ji or me. Except his journalistic pedestrian attitude, what he got at all? He has nothing original to contribute and is a real bad mouth with his name calling against many knowledgeable souls of the bygone past. Slave to the western missionaries - he does not deserve the respect, not even as an individual with a backbone; he is just a persona, a mask! So just forget of compromising him or doing something together, since he does not seem to have the capability for the same at all and since his intentions differ. (Most possibly the poor old man is doing it for a living as guided by his missionary bosses). //> Let us see how much he can come to our terms and how much we can give him so he is satisfied.// Ha...Ha...you are putting it in an interesting manner. Getting him satisfied? As if by throwing a piece of born in front of the chained beast at home?! Ha ha ... That sounds good... But I don't like wild pets.... May be someone else in the group might be interested in 'satisfying' him.... (There are 2 possibilities) Either like the house owner throwing the piece of bone in front of his pet... or like the women surrendering to a business man just for the sake of money (you can replace the word money with respect, non-blaming, good words, money or what ever). Any way I am not interested in both the above paths and only have compassion towards the path lost poor old man Kaul ji. Let him be as he is.... he would be lost if he try to change at this very late age. If we want to do anything for "Sayana Vedic astrology" (since it too is a branch of ancient indian astrology), then we ourselves can do it. So is the case with "Revising the Vedic Calendar" - we ourselves can do it instead of taking help from a poor old fool who is making noise for the past 20+ or so years and had not prepared even the basic skeleton idea for reconstructing the ancient Vedic Calendar. Love and regards, Sreenadh , Hari Malla <harimalla wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> I believe in both vedic jyotish and also calender reform or celebration of festivals at correct times. I have been wondering if it is possible to make AK Kaul compromise with us.DO you think there is some chance of doing this.> Perhaps after a conciliatory settlement he will stop bashing us all.What is your opinion?> Let us see how much he can come to our terms and how much we can give him so he is satisfied.Thanking you,> Sincerely yours,> Hari Malla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Dear Sreenadhji, I have read that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox frorm the quotes of Shankar Balakrishna dixit's Bharatiya jyotish.At pesent the book is not with me.I will send the quotes aftter I get hold of the book.If you have the book, please refer to the chapter on vedic period in the said book. In my view, Kalpurush and the Sahasrar purush are both experienced at the vernal equinox.Thus the importance of the vernal equinox.But this much I can tell you that our experience of the char dham of the hindus at teh foour corners of India, is symbolised when the earth is placed at the vernal equinox.You do know that all heavenly bodies in the sky are measured by the sientitist placing the earth at the vernal equinox.There is a good reason for it.The earth's cardinal directions and the universal cardinal directions match only when the earth is placed at the vernal equinox and at no other position.thank you, sincerely yours, Hari Malla aSreenadh <sreesog Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 4:35:29 PM Re: Krittikadi Dear Hari Mall ji, //> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.// I am yet to see any such reference. Can you provide us with the same?//You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.// It is understandable when you state that 'Purush' is God or universe. But is that Purush the same as KalaPurush (used in astrology)? Do you have any proof in support of or against? It would be logical to state that Year starts from the head of Kalapurush, since 'Kala' means 'Time' (which also includes Year). But where did you found the statement that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox'? Do you have any poof to supply? Now if we accept that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox', then how are you going to proove that 'Head of Purusha mentioned in Veda (NOT Kala purusha)' and indicates Vernal Equinox?! Do you have any vedic quote to proove this argument? To have some bit of fun as well (take it in light spirits) - "Sahasra Seersha Purusha (Purusha has 1000 heads)" - which head is Vernal equinox you wanted to say? :)Love and regards,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, Hari Malla <harimalla@.. .> wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is just a logical guess.thank you.> Regards,> Hari Malla> > > > ----- Forwarded Message ----> Sreenadh sreesog ancient_indian_ astrology@ . com> Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Krittikadi> Dear All,> May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them.> I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts -> * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. > * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! > * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if> some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed.> The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. > Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.> Love and regards,> Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Dear Sreenadhji, Thank you for the frank reply.He does seem to have one thing which most of us lack..This is devotion to his purpose of calender reform.After all we must divide our work.If he comes to term with somethng which is commonly acceptable why not go along with him? I feel we can work something which harmonises all, which keeps up our nirayan tradition and also correct the times of festivals.The rashis must continue, as much of our religious literature and the present jyotish system is based and has been written using them. I have requested him not try to get rid of the rashis and also tolerate the nirayan system in a coordinated fashion with the sayan system.Hopefully he may agree.I have not been in contact with him for some time.Shree Sunil Bahatacharyaji, thinks he may not agree overnight.But I think it may be worthwhile to talk and negotiate.thank you. Sincerely yours, Hari Malla Sreenadh <sreesog Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 5:08:13 PM Re: Krittikadi Dear Hari Malla ji, //> I believe in both vedic jyotish and also calendar reform or celebration of festivals at correct times.// Good to know that you are a believer of Vedic Jyotish (Sayana Astrology). This also means that equinoxes and solstices are very important to you. Can you tell me how these 4 points can be used to predict the future of others? Now coming to festivals, how many of the festivals are totally depended on equinoxes and solstices alone and are mentioned in Vedas?! Do you want to advice us all that Rama Navami, Krishnashtami, Deepavali, Siva ratri etc?! All of them are neither mentioned in Vedas nor in anyway related to equinoxes and solstices as well. Along with Kaul do you want to advice us that - "Only 4 festivals (2 for equinoxes and 2 for solstices) should be celebrated and none else"?!!!//. I have been wondering if it is possible to make AK Kaul compromise with us. DO you think there is some chance of doing this.// Good to know that you want to change Kaul. But there is a saying - "There is no use trying to give childhood education to one in old age". AKK want to compromise or not is all his choice. He is no competitor to us, since the basic intentions differ; we can safly ignore especially in face of the fact that he runs away from any place where he see Sunil ji or me. Except his journalistic pedestrian attitude, what he got at all? He has nothing original to contribute and is a real bad mouth with his name calling against many knowledgeable souls of the bygone past. Slave to the western missionaries - he does not deserve the respect, not even as an individual with a backbone; he is just a persona, a mask! So just forget of compromising him or doing something together, since he does not seem to have the capability for the same at all and since his intentions differ. (Most possibly the poor old man is doing it for a living as guided by his missionary bosses). //> Let us see how much he can come to our terms and how much we can give him so he is satisfied.// Ha....Ha...you are putting it in an interesting manner. Getting him satisfied? As if by throwing a piece of born in front of the chained beast at home?! Ha ha ... That sounds good... But I don't like wild pets.... May be someone else in the group might be interested in 'satisfying' him.... (There are 2 possibilities) Either like the house owner throwing the piece of bone in front of his pet... or like the women surrendering to a business man just for the sake of money (you can replace the word money with respect, non-blaming, good words, money or what ever). Any way I am not interested in both the above paths and only have compassion towards the path lost poor old man Kaul ji. Let him be as he is.... he would be lost if he try to change at this very late age. If we want to do anything for "Sayana Vedic astrology" (since it too is a branch of ancient indian astrology), then we ourselves can do it. So is the case with "Revising the Vedic Calendar" - we ourselves can do it instead of taking help from a poor old fool who is making noise for the past 20+ or so years and had not prepared even the basic skeleton idea for reconstructing the ancient Vedic Calendar. Love and regards,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, Hari Malla <harimalla@.. .> wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> I believe in both vedic jyotish and also calender reform or celebration of festivals at correct times. I have been wondering if it is possible to make AK Kaul compromise with us.DO you think there is some chance of doing this.> Perhaps after a conciliatory settlement he will stop bashing us all.What is your opinion?> Let us see how much he can come to our terms and how much we can give him so he is satisfied.Thanking you,> Sincerely yours,> Hari Malla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Dear Hari Malla ji, //> In my view, Kalpurush and the Sahasrar purush are both experienced at the vernal equinox.// I was not asking about your view or my view or about the opinion of someone else. I requesting the specific Vedic quote that states/says so; or at least the Vedic quote that clearly indicates so. Even the direct mention of Vernal Equinox (Vishu) is not required. Year and Purusha was known to vedic people. Just any statement that says that the begining of the year is represented by head of Purusha would be enough. But I am yet to see any such reference. We need the the clear vedic reference and NOT the opinions or views of someone. Hope you see the point. Love and regards,Sreenadh , Hari Malla <harimalla wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> I have read that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox frorm the quotes of Shankar Balakrishna dixit's Bharatiya jyotish.At pesent the book is not with me.I will send the quotes aftter I get hold of the book.If you have the book, please refer to the chapter on vedic period in the said book.> In my view, Kalpurush and the Sahasrar purush are both experienced at the vernal equinox.Thus the importance of the vernal equinox.But this much I can tell you that our experience of the char dham of the hindus at teh foour corners of India, is symbolised when the earth is placed at the vernal equinox.You do know that all heavenly bodies in the sky are measured by the sientitist placing the earth at the vernal equinox.There is a good reason for it.The earth's cardinal directions and the universal cardinal directions match only when the earth is placed at the vernal equinox and at no other position.thank you,> sincerely yours, > Hari Malla> > > > ________________________________> aSreenadh sreesog > Friday, April 17, 2009 4:35:29 PM> Re: Krittikadi> > > > > > Dear Hari Mall ji, > //> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.//> I am yet to see any such reference. Can you provide us with the same?> //You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.//> It is understandable when you state that 'Purush' is God or universe. But is that Purush the same as KalaPurush (used in astrology)? Do you have any proof in support of or against? It would be logical to state that Year starts from the head of Kalapurush, since 'Kala' means 'Time' (which also includes Year). But where did you found the statement that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox'? Do you have any poof to supply? > Now if we accept that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox', then how are you going to proove that 'Head of Purusha mentioned in Veda (NOT Kala purusha)' and indicates Vernal Equinox?! Do you have any vedic quote to proove this argument? > To have some bit of fun as well (take it in light spirits) - > "Sahasra Seersha Purusha (Purusha has 1000 heads)" - which head is Vernal equinox you wanted to say? > Love and regards,> Sreenadh> > ancient_indian_ astrology, Hari Malla harimalla@ .> wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadhji,> > In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is just a logical guess.thank you.> > Regards,> > Hari Malla> > > > > > > > ----- Forwarded Message ----> > Sreenadh sreesog@> > ancient_indian_ astrology> > Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM> > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Krittikadi> > > Dear All,> > May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them.> > I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts -> > * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. > > * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! > > * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if> > some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed.> > The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. > > Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Dear Hari Malla ji, //> Thank you for the frank reply.He does seem to have one thing which most of us lack.This is devotion to his purpose of calender reform.// Sorry.. I think this itself is the very thing he lacks! He is NOT devoted to the purpose of calendar reform, but just to the his roadside rowdy bad mouth attitude against astrologers and astrology alone. If ever he been dedicated to the subject of Vedic calender reform even for at least 3 months or so he would have prepared the the skeleton frame work of the same, and also might have written good descriptive article about its components, organization, co-relation, purpose etc. He is yet to implement even these tasks, which a knowledeable individual who may dedicate 3 months to this subject may do. This not only prove that he is incapable, but also that he got NO DEVOTION to the purpose of vedic calender reform. Mark it.// I have requested him .... Hopefully he may agree....... I think it may be worthwhile to talk and negotiate.// Hopes are always good. Whether it be Sunil Nair ji, Sunil Bhattacharjya ji or Me, we all once had a respect for this man, which we all lost in due course during our repeated interactions with that foul mouth, without constructive attitude and respect for the contributions of our ancistors. You can have your turn, and wish you all the best in your sincere efforts. //If he comes to term with somethng which is commonly acceptable why not go along with him?// Yes, certainly if he wish he can join us and come along with. Or if you wish you can join him and go along with. But the point is the purpose of evey stream, school of knowledge and individuals differ and the group is just a meeting place. The true contributions are always done by individuals and is individualistic. This being so - neither I need the help of Kaul nor Kaul need the help of me. The same could be true about the contibution of anyone with in this group or outside. //After all we must divide our work.// Have your ever tried it (especially related astrological research)? And what was the result? What are the lessons you learned from that experience? We all would be eager to know. If you have ever tried the same, you would sure be able to answer those questions. But if you haven't ever tried the same - then your advice does not hold any water. Any way I am in support of that statement, but at times when it comes to astrological research, I don't find anyone to divide my work with! May be I may change this opinion as I see more sincere at the same time knowledgeable individuals.Love and regards,Sreenadh , Hari Malla <harimalla wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> Thank you for the frank reply.He does seem to have one thing which most of us lack.This is devotion to his purpose of calender reform. After all we must divide our work.If he comes to term with somethng which is commonly acceptable why not go along with him?> I feel we can work something which harmonises all, which keeps up our nirayan tradition and also correct the times of festivals.The rashis must continue, as much of our religious literature and the present jyotish system is based and has been written using them. I have requested him not try to get rid of the rashis and also tolerate the nirayan system in a coordinated fashion with the sayan system.> Hopefully he may agree.I have not been in contact with him for some time.Shree Sunil Bahatacharyaji, thinks he may not agree overnight.But I think it may be worthwhile to talk and negotiate.thank you..> Sincerely yours,> Hari Malla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 dear hari malla ji and sreenadh ji malla ji says shri kaul ji is ready to change his attitude or may b malla ji can make it happen ,kaul jis confessions and conversion are always welcome But the problem wont end there First of all he shud decide/agree what is Hindu astrological -astronomical concept and he shud discard his support for sayana western zodiacs and praising of their contributions .His calendrical concepts are based on a moving vishuva bindu ,so the rasi belt ( the path ) moves with the changes in vishuva bindu which is western concept not indian jyothishchakra ( hindu /baudha /jaina /charvaka etc ) .indian concept is based on nakshtra and fixed point of meshadi and aswinadi aramba chart ,if malla ji thinks it is varahamihira strted it i think he is wrong ,pls refer parasara hora ,chapter 3 shloka numbrs 3 to 7 ,nakshtrani grhanam ----- to meshadi namaka rasaya syu part . so for us rasi chakra is the path for grahas and nakshtras and other points required for a jyothichakra .And it has to b fixed one .And for us rasi and bhava is imp .lagna and Houses decide every thing and ownerships /shodasa vargas and all other mathematical points like ucha ,neecha and even gulika/mrityu sputa etc all r based on a fixed rasi chart .where as if we can use kaul's version then path is moving and grahas moving and nakshtras moving tho mathematicaly graha position ( i mean stithi ) point is same in both concepts which has diffrnt parameters ,so logicaly mathematicaly both may b correct apparently but cannot compromise because acccording his concept or supporting arguemnts will take us to think that the road and vehicles both r moving ( zodiac is moving back and grahas are moving forward ) .So when some one is travelling we hav to say delhi has come to him than he reached to delhi by road ,still the question of timing such purticular event in advance how it is possible when both r moving ??why we need to complicate every thing ?? so i hope malla ji may revise his views . also according to vedic concept the vishnu nabhi is important in thinking abt creation of universe and here the moola nakshtra ( as it is base or root ) and jyeshta ( eldest one ) is also has to b considered as based on it all nakshtra concept is based than some one interpret some vedic mantras as kritikati naksktras in some time of vedic periods is the strting point ,it has diffrnt meaning may b ,and vishuva bindu cannot b a strting point when thinking abt creation of universe as it is the basis of rai chakra ( rahu -sikhi chakra ) so many things accepted as vedic will b diffrnt frm kaulian argumnts and i dont think ther is any chance of reconciling both arguemnts . so he has only 2 choice .either discard his arguemnts or go ahed without any use except name calling and a chance to call astrologers as frauds in the name of a impractical calender ,like wat he was doing for almost quarter century . let us forget abt he abused ancient rishies / acharyas and dharma gurus and sankaracharyas .Also haunting any one who is interested in astrology by gate crashing technics and guerrilla technics . rgrds sunil nair . Om shreem mahalaxmai namah . , "Sreenadh" <sreesog wrote:>> Dear Hari Malla ji,> //> Thank you for the frank reply.He does seem to have one thing which> most of us lack.This is devotion to his purpose of calender reform.//> Sorry.. I think this itself is the very thing he lacks! He is NOT> devoted to the purpose of calendar reform, but just to the his roadside> rowdy bad mouth attitude against astrologers and astrology alone. If> ever he been dedicated to the subject of Vedic calender reform even for> at least 3 months or so he would have prepared the the skeleton frame> work of the same, and also might have written good descriptive article> about its components, organization, co-relation, purpose etc. He is yet> to implement even these tasks, which a knowledeable individual who may> dedicate 3 months to this subject may do. This not only prove that he is> incapable, but also that he got NO DEVOTION to the purpose of vedic> calender reform. Mark it.> // I have requested him .... Hopefully he may agree....... I think it> may be worthwhile to talk and negotiate.//> Hopes are always good. Whether it be Sunil Nair ji, Sunil> Bhattacharjya ji or Me, we all once had a respect for this man, which we> all lost in due course during our repeated interactions with that foul> mouth, without constructive attitude and respect for the contributions> of our ancistors. You can have your turn, and wish you all the best in> your sincere efforts. > //If he comes to term with somethng which is commonly acceptable why not> go along with him?//> Yes, certainly if he wish he can join us and come along with. Or if> you wish you can join him and go along with. But the point is the> purpose of evey stream, school of knowledge and individuals differ and> the group is just a meeting place. The true contributions are always> done by individuals and is individualistic. This being so - neither I> need the help of Kaul nor Kaul need the help of me. The same could be> true about the contibution of anyone with in this group or outside.> //After all we must divide our work.//> Have your ever tried it (especially related astrological research)?> And what was the result? What are the lessons you learned from that> experience? We all would be eager to know. If you have ever tried> the same, you would sure be able to answer those questions. But if you> haven't ever tried the same - then your advice does not hold any water.> Any way I am in support of that statement, but at times when it comes> to astrological research, I don't find anyone to divide my work with! > May be I may change this opinion as I see more sincere at the same time> knowledgeable individuals.> Love and regards,> Sreenadh> > , Hari Malla> harimalla@ wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadhji,> > Thank you for the frank reply.He does seem to have one thing which> most of us lack.This is devotion to his purpose of calender reform.> After all we must divide our work.If he comes to term with somethng> which is commonly acceptable why not go along with him?> > I feel we can work something which harmonises all, which keeps up our> nirayan tradition and also correct the times of festivals.The rashis> must continue, as much of our religious literature and the present> jyotish system is based and has been written using them. I have> requested him not try to get rid of the rashis and also tolerate the> nirayan system in a coordinated fashion with the sayan system.> > Hopefully he may agree.I have not been in contact with him for some> time.Shree Sunil Bahatacharyaji, thinks he may not agree overnight.But I> think it may be worthwhile to talk and negotiate.thank you..> > Sincerely yours,> > Hari Malla> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Sunil Nairji, I agree with you and Shreenadhji. AKK's main interest is to break the backbone of the Hindu jyotish by deriding the Nirayana system. Initially I too thought that he was interested in having a true Hindu calendar. It was later that I realised his game plan. It will be better not to associate with this incorrigible person called AKK. The Rashis are fundamental to the Nirayana system. The Sayana Rashis are not true rashis as they are just borrowals from the Nirayana as the Sayana system did not have any other better names for the twelve divisions of the moving Sayana Zodiac. The Vedas talk about the 12 divisions of the ecliptic and the Suryasiddhanta says that the 12 parts of the year are Meshaadi, ie Mesha and other Rasis are the 12 parts of the year. In the ancient times when the Sun moved to the Rashis the Solar months were accordingly named after the Rashi or a Nakshatra within that Rashi. Heavens will not fall if we do not celebrate the Equinoxes and the Solstices. Let AKK show where in the Vedas the ancient people observed the Equinoxes and the Solstices. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Fri, 4/17/09, sunil nair <astro_tellerkerala wrote: sunil nair <astro_tellerkerala Re: Krittikadi Date: Friday, April 17, 2009, 3:26 PM dear hari malla ji and sreenadh ji malla ji says shri kaul ji is ready to change his attitude or may b malla ji can make it happen ,kaul jis confessions and conversion are always welcome But the problem wont end there First of all he shud decide/agree what is Hindu astrological -astronomical concept and he shud discard his support for sayana western zodiacs and praising of their contributions .His calendrical concepts are based on a moving vishuva bindu ,so the rasi belt ( the path ) moves with the changes in vishuva bindu which is western concept not indian jyothishchakra ( hindu /baudha /jaina /charvaka etc ) .indian concept is based on nakshtra and fixed point of meshadi and aswinadi aramba chart ,if malla ji thinks it is varahamihira strted it i think he is wrong ,pls refer parasara hora ,chapter 3 shloka numbrs 3 to 7 ,nakshtrani grhanam ----- to meshadi namaka rasaya syu part . so for us rasi chakra is the path for grahas and nakshtras and other points required for a jyothichakra .And it has to b fixed one .And for us rasi and bhava is imp .lagna and Houses decide every thing and ownerships /shodasa vargas and all other mathematical points like ucha ,neecha and even gulika/mrityu sputa etc all r based on a fixed rasi chart .where as if we can use kaul's version then path is moving and grahas moving and nakshtras moving tho mathematicaly graha position ( i mean stithi ) point is same in both concepts which has diffrnt parameters ,so logicaly mathematicaly both may b correct apparently but cannot compromise because acccording his concept or supporting arguemnts will take us to think that the road and vehicles both r moving ( zodiac is moving back and grahas are moving forward ) .So when some one is travelling we hav to say delhi has come to him than he reached to delhi by road ,still the question of timing such purticular event in advance how it is possible when both r moving ??why we need to complicate every thing ?? so i hope malla ji may revise his views . also according to vedic concept the vishnu nabhi is important in thinking abt creation of universe and here the moola nakshtra ( as it is base or root ) and jyeshta ( eldest one ) is also has to b considered as based on it all nakshtra concept is based than some one interpret some vedic mantras as kritikati naksktras in some time of vedic periods is the strting point ,it has diffrnt meaning may b ,and vishuva bindu cannot b a strting point when thinking abt creation of universe as it is the basis of rai chakra ( rahu -sikhi chakra ) so many things accepted as vedic will b diffrnt frm kaulian argumnts and i dont think ther is any chance of reconciling both arguemnts . so he has only 2 choice .either discard his arguemnts or go ahed without any use except name calling and a chance to call astrologers as frauds in the name of a impractical calender ,like wat he was doing for almost quarter century . let us forget abt he abused ancient rishies / acharyas and dharma gurus and sankaracharyas .Also haunting any one who is interested in astrology by gate crashing technics and guerrilla technics . rgrds sunil nair . Om shreem mahalaxmai namah . ancient_indian_ astrology, "Sreenadh" <sreesog wrote:>> Dear Hari Malla ji,> //> Thank you for the frank reply.He does seem to have one thing which> most of us lack.This is devotion to his purpose of calender reform.//> Sorry.. I think this itself is the very thing he lacks! He is NOT> devoted to the purpose of calendar reform, but just to the his roadside> rowdy bad mouth attitude against astrologers and astrology alone. If> ever he been dedicated to the subject of Vedic calender reform even for> at least 3 months or so he would have prepared the the skeleton frame> work of the same, and also might have written good descriptive article> about its components, organization, co-relation, purpose etc. He is yet> to implement even these tasks, which a knowledeable individual who may> dedicate 3 months to this subject may do. This not only prove that he is> incapable, but also that he got NO DEVOTION to the purpose of vedic> calender reform. Mark it.> // I have requested him .... Hopefully he may agree....... I think it> may be worthwhile to talk and negotiate.//> Hopes are always good. Whether it be Sunil Nair ji, Sunil> Bhattacharjya ji or Me, we all once had a respect for this man, which we> all lost in due course during our repeated interactions with that foul> mouth, without constructive attitude and respect for the contributions> of our ancistors. You can have your turn, and wish you all the best in> your sincere efforts. > //If he comes to term with somethng which is commonly acceptable why not> go along with him?//> Yes, certainly if he wish he can join us and come along with. Or if> you wish you can join him and go along with. But the point is the> purpose of evey stream, school of knowledge and individuals differ and> the group is just a meeting place. The true contributions are always> done by individuals and is individualistic. This being so - neither I> need the help of Kaul nor Kaul need the help of me. The same could be> true about the contibution of anyone with in this group or outside.> //After all we must divide our work.//> Have your ever tried it (especially related astrological research)?> And what was the result? What are the lessons you learned from that> experience? We all would be eager to know. If you have ever tried> the same, you would sure be able to answer those questions. But if you> haven't ever tried the same - then your advice does not hold any water.> Any way I am in support of that statement, but at times when it comes> to astrological research, I don't find anyone to divide my work with! > May be I may change this opinion as I see more sincere at the same time> knowledgeable individuals.> Love and regards,> Sreenadh> > ancient_indian_ astrology, Hari Malla> harimalla@ wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadhji,> > Thank you for the frank reply.He does seem to have one thing which> most of us lack.This is devotion to his purpose of calender reform.> After all we must divide our work.If he comes to term with somethng> which is commonly acceptable why not go along with him?> > I feel we can work something which harmonises all, which keeps up our> nirayan tradition and also correct the times of festivals.The rashis> must continue, as much of our religious literature and the present> jyotish system is based and has been written using them. I have> requested him not try to get rid of the rashis and also tolerate the> nirayan system in a coordinated fashion with the sayan system.> > Hopefully he may agree.I have not been in contact with him for some> time.Shree Sunil Bahatacharyaji, thinks he may not agree overnight.But I> think it may be worthwhile to talk and negotiate.thank you..> > Sincerely yours,> > Hari Malla> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear All, Let us get our year numbers clearly from the perspective of the equinox madness before proceeding further, to understand the total absurdity involved in it.Uttara Bhadrapadadi = AD 1240 to till dateRevatyadi = AD 280 to AD 1240Aswinyadi = BC 680 to AD 280Bharanyadi = BC 1640 to BC 680 Krittikadi = BC 2600 to BC 1640Rohinyadi = BC 3560 to BC 2600Mrigasiradi = BC 4520 to BC 3560 Please note the following points - Vedas in most of the situations use Krittikadi series only. This will mean that as per them the period of vedas is between BC 2600 to BC 1640. But then again since in texts like Atharvaveda Aswinyadi series is given, as per them the period of such texts range between BC 680 to AD 280! Further this will also mean a total revision of Vedic texts and system during this period (i.e between BC 680 to AD 280), since there is NO PROOF for the use of a Bharanyadi system which they should have been used from BC 1640 to BC 680. It will mean that, as per them, there never existed people with understanding of vedic calander system except during BC 2600 to BC 1640 and BC 680 to AD 280; The who lived before (BC 4520 to BC 3560; BC 3560 to BC 2600), in between (BC 1640 to BC 680) and after (AD 280 to AD 1240; AD 1240 to till date) had no idea about this vedic calendar system based on equinoxes. See the absurdity involved - they are just trying to ignore the 19 centuries BC 2600, and the 10 centuries after BC 1640 (till BC 680), and the 17 centuries after BC 680! In total they are tyring to conveniently IGNORE more than 17+10+19 = 46 centuries fo the past and is still they argue that they are 'historians'(!) following a 'scientific' approach!! Bull shit! They neither have respect for history nor science - they are just slaves to western missonary propagonda with out any systematic approach towords vedic knowledge. Do you agree that - the Vedas dates back only upto BC 2600 to the max? (This is the christian proposed date!) Do you agree that - Vedas got written after BC 680 to AD 280 as they puts it (due to the presence of Aswinyadi Series in Vedas)? Do you agree that - For the long 10 centuries from BC 1640 to BC 680 (Bharanyadi) people knew nothing about the Vedic calendar but re-wrote the Vedas during BC 680 to AD 280? If you cannot agree to the above points, how you still accept this stupid approach of connecting movement of equinox with the Krittikadi and Aswiniyadi Nakshatra series present in Vedas? Please note that except the above two, no other series as mentioned above (Missing: Mrigasiradi, Rohinyadi, Bharanyadi, Revatyadi, Uttara Bhadrapadadi) is used in Vedas. With the 2 series present in Vedas they are adding 4 from their imagination and trying to bring down the calculation of Vedic period to AD 280! If not christian missionary agenda, and western ego what can one see in it?! Alas for the slaves without original thought who succumb to their strategy and propoganda! Love and regards,Sreenadh , "Sreenadh" <sreesog wrote:Dear All, [i made a date errors in the previous mail, and so correcting it and posting it below.] May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonym 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them. I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts - * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidence for the use or existence of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centuries (960 years; BC 1640 to BC 680) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonym of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed. The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western Charlestons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their argument such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.Love and regards,Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, // Let AKK show where in the Vedas the ancient people observed the Equinoxes and the Solstices.// If there is no clear mention of equinoxes in Vedas, how to show that festivals related to the same existed in Vedas? Just think of Vishu (vernal equinox) - what is the vedic quote that suggest that this Vishu should be celebrated? It is good to ask such a question, since may be the first time in life AKK may start doing some real research to find answer to this basic question. I am sure that he don't know even this as of now. Love and regards,Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Sreenadhji,Bhattachayaji, I am happy our discussiion is taking a interesting turn.I am glad I have come in a critical juncture.Through our mutual cooperation, we may solve the century long problem of calender reform.I find Bhatacharyaji is senior person with a balanced view.Sreenadhji is also quite a careful person with critical power of analaysis.Sunil Nairji seems to be philanthropist respecting the global nature of the vedic culture which was clear from his last writing on vedic culture. Let us be without prejudices so we all arrive at the truth.As I have already written in my last mail,let me remind my friends that there is mention of the vernal equinox where we have the head of the in the vedas. With the litle reading I have done, I have come to know that in the ancient time the months were mainly lunar months.The seasons were also lunar as we see that during the vedanga jyotish period the months started from magh sukla pratipada as the winter solstice.In Atharva samhita ,we read of 'Ayanam maghaa'.From this, it is clear that firstly there was Uttrayan at Magh purnima, then it was shifted to magh sukla pratipada when mid aslesha and dhanistha has been mentioned by Braha mihir. Then during the early centuries of the christian era, we find Makar sakranti and poush purnima as the new solstice even as mentioned by Barahmihir in Brihad samhita. This last we are still celebrating.The change in equinox or solstice seems togo by the validity of the lunar tithi.this could be the reason why we do not have Bhariniadi series and a jump from Kritikadi to Aswiniadi. so let us please analyse it carefully, the facts we have come to know from the ancient texts.Thank you Sreenadh <sreesog Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 8:32:16 AM Re: Krittikadi Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, // Let AKK show where in the Vedas the ancient people observed the Equinoxes and the Solstices.// If there is no clear mention of equinoxes in Vedas, how to show that festivals related to the same existed in Vedas? Just think of Vishu (vernal equinox) - what is the vedic quote that suggest that this Vishu should be celebrated? It is good to ask such a question, since may be the first time in life AKK may start doing some real research to find answer to this basic question. I am sure that he don't know even this as of now. Love and regards,Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dee Sreenadhji, I have found the reference of vernal equinox is in Aitteriya Brahman 18/22.This is quoted by Shankar Blakrishna Dixit.He says similar mention of equinox is made in Taiteriya Brahman too. " Like Purush so is vishuvan.....Vishuvan is like the head of the Purush. " (Ait.Brahmana.18/22) " Like the two aspects of the house so is the year.Vishuvan is the middle " (Taiteriya Brahmana 1/2/3) thank you, Sincerely yours Hari Malla ________________________________ Sreenadh <sreesog Friday, April 17, 2009 4:35:29 PM Re: Krittikadi Dear Hari Mall ji, //> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.// I am yet to see any such reference. Can you provide us with the same? //You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.// It is understandable when you state that 'Purush' is God or universe. But is that Purush the same as KalaPurush (used in astrology)? Do you have any proof in support of or against? It would be logical to state that Year starts from the head of Kalapurush, since 'Kala' means 'Time' (which also includes Year). But where did you found the statement that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox'? Do you have any poof to supply? Now if we accept that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox', then how are you going to proove that 'Head of Purusha mentioned in Veda (NOT Kala purusha)' and indicates Vernal Equinox?! Do you have any vedic quote to proove this argument? To have some bit of fun as well (take it in light spirits) - " Sahasra Seersha Purusha (Purusha has 1000 heads) " - which head is Vernal equinox you wanted to say? Love and regards, Sreenadh ancient_indian_ astrology, Hari Malla <harimalla@.. .> wrote: > > Dear Sreenadhji, > In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is just a logical guess.thank you. > Regards, > Hari Malla > > > > ----- Forwarded Message ---- > Sreenadh sreesog > ancient_indian_ astrology > Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Krittikadi > Dear All, > May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them. > I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts - > * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. > * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! > * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if > some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed. > The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. > Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion. > Love and regards, > Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dera Sreenadhji, In fact sometime ago I asked AKK and Dr. iyengar to show when was the Makar Sankranti celebrated in the Vedas? Dr, Iyengar weas blindly supporting AKK on the Makar sankranti issue that it should celebrated on the winter solstice day. There is no Vedaachaara on the Sankrantis. It is only Lokaachaara. So it need create any problem with the Calendar. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Fri, 4/17/09, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote: Sreenadh <sreesog Re: Krittikadi Friday, April 17, 2009, 7:47 PM Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, // Let AKK show where in the Vedas the ancient people observed the Equinoxes and the Solstices.// If there is no clear mention of equinoxes in Vedas, how to show that festivals related to the same existed in Vedas? Just think of Vishu (vernal equinox) - what is the vedic quote that suggest that this Vishu should be celebrated? It is good to ask such a question, since may be the first time in life AKK may start doing some real research to find answer to this basic question. I am sure that he don't know even this as of now. Love and regards, Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Sreenadhji, Good analysis. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Fri, 4/17/09, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote: Sreenadh <sreesog Re: Krittikadi Friday, April 17, 2009, 7:41 PM Dear All, Let us get our year numbers clearly from the perspective of the equinox madness before proceeding further, to understand the total absurdity involved in it. Uttara Bhadrapadadi = AD 1240 to till date Revatyadi = AD 280 to AD 1240 Aswinyadi = BC 680 to AD 280 Bharanyadi = BC 1640 to BC 680 Krittikadi = BC 2600 to BC 1640 Rohinyadi = BC 3560 to BC 2600 Mrigasiradi = BC 4520 to BC 3560 Please note the following points - Vedas in most of the situations use Krittikadi series only. This will mean that as per them the period of vedas is between BC 2600 to BC 1640. But then again since in texts like Atharvaveda Aswinyadi series is given, as per them the period of such texts range between BC 680 to AD 280! Further this will also mean a total revision of Vedic texts and system during this period (i.e between BC 680 to AD 280), since there is NO PROOF for the use of a Bharanyadi system which they should have been used from BC 1640 to BC 680. It will mean that, as per them, there never existed people with understanding of vedic calander system except during BC 2600 to BC 1640 and BC 680 to AD 280; The who lived before (BC 4520 to BC 3560; BC 3560 to BC 2600), in between (BC 1640 to BC 680) and after (AD 280 to AD 1240; AD 1240 to till date) had no idea about this vedic calendar system based on equinoxes. See the absurdity involved - they are just trying to ignore the 19 centuries BC 2600, and the 10 centuries after BC 1640 (till BC 680), and the 17 centuries after BC 680! In total they are tyring to conveniently IGNORE more than 17+10+19 = 46 centuries fo the past and is still they argue that they are 'historians' (!) following a 'scientific' approach!! Bull shit! They neither have respect for history nor science - they are just slaves to western missonary propagonda with out any systematic approach towords vedic knowledge. Do you agree that - the Vedas dates back only upto BC 2600 to the max? (This is the christian proposed date!) Do you agree that - Vedas got written after BC 680 to AD 280 as they puts it (due to the presence of Aswinyadi Series in Vedas)? Do you agree that - For the long 10 centuries from BC 1640 to BC 680 (Bharanyadi) people knew nothing about the Vedic calendar but re-wrote the Vedas during BC 680 to AD 280? If you cannot agree to the above points, how you still accept this stupid approach of connecting movement of equinox with the Krittikadi and Aswiniyadi Nakshatra series present in Vedas? Please note that except the above two, no other series as mentioned above (Missing: Mrigasiradi, Rohinyadi, Bharanyadi, Revatyadi, Uttara Bhadrapadadi) is used in Vedas. With the 2 series present in Vedas they are adding 4 from their imagination and trying to bring down the calculation of Vedic period to AD 280! If not christian missionary agenda, and western ego what can one see in it?! Alas for the slaves without original thought who succumb to their strategy and propoganda! Love and regards, Sreenadh ancient_indian_ astrology, " Sreenadh " <sreesog wrote: Dear All, [i made a date errors in the previous mail, and so correcting it and posting it below.] May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonym 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them. I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts - * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidence for the use or existence of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centuries (960 years; BC 1640 to BC 680) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonym of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed. The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western Charlestons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their argument such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion. Love and regards, Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Sreenadh-ji and other seniors, Let me clarify two things at beginning. 1) My knowledge in these area is very less. Whatever I know now is based on the discussions held here. 2) Based on the discussions held so far, I am more inclined with the views expressed by Sreenadh-ji, Sunil Nayar Ji, SKB ji etc. __ Regarding the festivals in India, I noticed few things..Festivals are originated from two or three strata of soceity. 1) Most of the festivals connected to Vedic Gods are related to Lunar Tithi. 2) Most of the Agrarian festivals are related to equinoxes like Vishu (Kerala) /Bihu (Assam)/Baishakhi (Punjab) / Bisagu (Bodo) Also, all the Samkranti related festivals (Makar samkranti and Ashwin Samkranti (Kati Bihu in Assam) 3) New year celebration is also related to Samkranti 4) Kumbha / Amrut Kumbha celebration is related to Jup 5) There are few sets of festivals which could be called as 'Laukik' or related to common folks. These will include 'Manasaa Puja' Vishwakarma Puja etc. These are related to some particular date (like 1st day of Ashadha, 1st day of Ashwin etc) Regarding the word 'Agrahayani', it reminds me of the month Agarhayana (Agra + Ayana). We were taught that Agrahayana used to be the 1st month of Bengali Calendar. Later Akbar changed it to Baishakh by a royal decree for ease of collection of taxes. Apparently, there were two famous Astrologers of 19th Century, one from Orissa (some Samanta...SKB-ji is aware about him) and other was from Bengal, author of 'Hora Rahasyam' do also mention something about change of calendar. I do have the book in possesion. I will try to write about that. regards Chakraborty Sreenadh [sreesog]Saturday, April 18, 2009 8:11 AM Subject: Re: Krittikadi Dear All, Let us get our year numbers clearly from the perspective of the equinox madness before proceeding further, to understand the total absurdity involved in it.Uttara Bhadrapadadi = AD 1240 to till dateRevatyadi = AD 280 to AD 1240Aswinyadi = BC 680 to AD 280Bharanyadi = BC 1640 to BC 680 Krittikadi = BC 2600 to BC 1640Rohinyadi = BC 3560 to BC 2600Mrigasiradi = BC 4520 to BC 3560 Please note the following points - Vedas in most of the situations use Krittikadi series only. This will mean that as per them the period of vedas is between BC 2600 to BC 1640. But then again since in texts like Atharvaveda Aswinyadi series is given, as per them the period of such texts range between BC 680 to AD 280! Further this will also mean a total revision of Vedic texts and system during this period (i.e between BC 680 to AD 280), since there is NO PROOF for the use of a Bharanyadi system which they should have been used from BC 1640 to BC 680. It will mean that, as per them, there never existed people with understanding of vedic calander system except during BC 2600 to BC 1640 and BC 680 to AD 280; The who lived before (BC 4520 to BC 3560; BC 3560 to BC 2600), in between (BC 1640 to BC 680) and after (AD 280 to AD 1240; AD 1240 to till date) had no idea about this vedic calendar system based on equinoxes. See the absurdity involved - they are just trying to ignore the 19 centuries BC 2600, and the 10 centuries after BC 1640 (till BC 680), and the 17 centuries after BC 680! In total they are tyring to conveniently IGNORE more than 17+10+19 = 46 centuries fo the past and is still they argue that they are 'historians'(!) following a 'scientific' approach!! Bull shit! They neither have respect for history nor science - they are just slaves to western missonary propagonda with out any systematic approach towords vedic knowledge. Do you agree that - the Vedas dates back only upto BC 2600 to the max? (This is the christian proposed date!) Do you agree that - Vedas got written after BC 680 to AD 280 as they puts it (due to the presence of Aswinyadi Series in Vedas)? Do you agree that - For the long 10 centuries from BC 1640 to BC 680 (Bharanyadi) people knew nothing about the Vedic calendar but re-wrote the Vedas during BC 680 to AD 280? If you cannot agree to the above points, how you still accept this stupid approach of connecting movement of equinox with the Krittikadi and Aswiniyadi Nakshatra series present in Vedas? Please note that except the above two, no other series as mentioned above (Missing: Mrigasiradi, Rohinyadi, Bharanyadi, Revatyadi, Uttara Bhadrapadadi) is used in Vedas. With the 2 series present in Vedas they are adding 4 from their imagination and trying to bring down the calculation of Vedic period to AD 280! If not christian missionary agenda, and western ego what can one see in it?! Alas for the slaves without original thought who succumb to their strategy and propoganda! Love and regards,Sreenadh , "Sreenadh" <sreesog wrote:Dear All, [i made a date errors in the previous mail, and so correcting it and posting it below.] May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonym 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them. I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts - * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidence for the use or existence of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centuries (960 years; BC 1640 to BC 680) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore! * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonym of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed. The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western Charlestons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their argument such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc. Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.Love and regards,SreenadhThis Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Hari Malla ji, //let me remind my friends that there is mention of the vernal equinox where we have the head of the (Purusha?) in the vedas.// Where? Please provide the quote - without which such 'opinions' are not valid. //With the litle reading I have done, I have come to know that in the ancient time the months were mainly lunar months.// Where are the quotes? And why you are being so sure on this without evidence? Do you want to argue that "Tapa, Tapasya, Madhu, Madhava etc" are Lunar months and not solar?! Do you want to argue that Chaitra, Vaisakaha etc months are Lunar in nature and there nevar existed solar and lunar months with the same name (Lunar Chaitra and Solar Chaitra!) as AKK argues? Do you want to argue that Nakshatra (Lunar) moths with 27 days each existed even though they didn't had a name for those Nakshatra masas (Siderial months)? //In Atharva samhita ,we read of 'Ayanam maghaa'.From this, it is clear that firstly there was Uttrayan at Magh purnima// What a confusion! Please not that you are mixing Lunar Months (with the words Makha Purnima), Nakshtra masa (Ayanams Magha) and Solar moths (Uttarayana). Why you want to club Nakshatra Chakra with Lunar months? Ayana is Solar or Lunar in nature?//> The change in equinox or solstice seems togo by the validity of the lunar tithi.this could be the reason why we do not have Bhariniadi series and a jump from Kritikadi to Aswiniadi.// What do you mean by those words? It doesn't make any sense to me as of now - can you please elaborate and explain what you wanted to say? Love and regards,Sreenadh , Hari Malla <harimalla wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,Bhattachayaji,> I am happy our discussiion is taking a interesting turn.I am glad I have come in a critical juncture.Through our mutual cooperation, we may solve the century long problem of calender reform.I find Bhatacharyaji is senior person with a balanced view.Sreenadhji is also quite a careful person with critical power of analaysis.Sunil Nairji seems to be philanthropist respecting the global nature of the vedic culture which was clear from his last writing on vedic culture.> Let us be without prejudices so we all arrive at the truth.As I have already written in my last mail,let me remind my friends that there is mention of the vernal equinox where we have the head of the in the vedas.> With the litle reading I have done, I have come to know that in the ancient time the months were mainly lunar months.The seasons were also lunar as we see that during the vedanga jyotish period the months started from magh sukla pratipada as the winter solstice. In Atharva samhita ,we read of 'Ayanam maghaa'.From this, it is clear that firstly there was Uttrayan at Magh purnima,then it was shifted to magh sukla pratipada when mid aslesha and dhanistha has been mentioned by Braha mihir. Then during the early centuries of the christian era, we find Makar sakranti and poush purnima as the new solstice even as mentioned by Barahmihir in Brihad samhita. This last we are still celebrating.> The change in equinox or solstice seems togo by the validity of the lunar tithi.this could be the reason why we do not have Bhariniadi series and a jump from Kritikadi to Aswiniadi.> so let us please analyse it carefully, the facts we have come to know from the ancient texts.Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Hari Malla ji, Please provide the full quote in SANSKRIT with the translation/interpretation of Shankar Blakrishna Dixit. (I don't have the copy of Aitteriya Brahman with me).Regards,Sreenadh , Hari Malla <harimalla wrote:>> Dee Sreenadhji,> I have found the reference of vernal equinox is in Aitteriya Brahman 18/22.This is quoted by Shankar Blakrishna Dixit.He says similar mention of equinox is made in Taiteriya Brahman too."Like Purush so is vishuvan.....Vishuvan is like the head of the Purush."(Ait.Brahmana.18/22)> "Like the two aspects of the house so is the year.Vishuvan is the middle" (Taiteriya Brahmana 1/2/3)> > thank you,> Sincerely yours> Hari Malla> > > ________________________________> Sreenadh sreesog > Friday, April 17, 2009 4:35:29 PM> Re: Krittikadi> > Dear Hari Mall ji,> //> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.//> I am yet to see any such reference. Can you provide us with the same?> //You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.//> It is understandable when you state that 'Purush' is God or universe. But is that Purush the same as KalaPurush (used in astrology)? Do you have any proof in support of or against? It would be logical to state that Year starts from the head of Kalapurush, since 'Kala' means 'Time' (which also includes Year). But where did you found the statement that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox'? Do you have any poof to supply?> Now if we accept that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox', then how are you going to proove that 'Head of Purusha mentioned in Veda (NOT Kala purusha)' and indicates Vernal Equinox?! Do you have any vedic quote to proove this argument?> To have some bit of fun as well (take it in light spirits) -> "Sahasra Seersha Purusha (Purusha has 1000 heads)" - which head is Vernal equinox you wanted to say? > Love and regards,> Sreenadh> > ancient_indian_ astrology, Hari Malla harimalla@ .> wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadhji,> > In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is just a logical guess.thank you.> > Regards,> > Hari Malla> >> >> >> > ----- Forwarded Message ----> > Sreenadh sreesog@> > ancient_indian_ astrology> > Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM> > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Krittikadi> > > Dear All,> > May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them.> > I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts -> > * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests.> > * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore!> > * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if> > some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed.> > The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc.> > Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Chakraborty ji, ==> Regarding the festivals in India, I noticed few things..Festivals are originated from two or three strata of society. 1) Most of the festivals connected to Vedic Gods are related to Lunar Tithi. 2) Most of the Agrarian festivals are related to equinoxes like Vishu (Kerala) /Bihu (Assam)/Baishakhi (Punjab) / Bisagu (Bodo) Also, all the Samkranti related festivals (Makar samkranti and Ashwin Samkranti (Kati Bihu in Assam) 3) New year celebration is also related to Samkranti 4) Kumbha / Amrut Kumbha celebration is related to Jup 5) There are few sets of festivals which could be called as 'Laukik' or related to common folks. These will include 'Manasaa Puja' Vishwakarma Puja etc. These are related to some particular date (like 1st day of Ashadha, 1st day of Ashwin etc) <== That was beautifully said - I agree with you. Let me go through it. //1) Most of the festivals connected to Vedic Gods are related to Lunar Tithi.// This also means that most of the festivals NOT connected to Vedic Gods are NOT related to Lunar Tithi! Many of them like Onam of Chinga masa (Month of Leo) of Kerala has strong relation with Nakshatra and Sign and has no connection with Tithi. //2) Most of the Agrarian festivals are related to equinoxes like Vishu (Kerala) /Bihu (Assam)/Baishakhi (Punjab) / Bisagu (Bodo) Also, all the Samkranti related festivals (Makar samkranti and Ashwin Samkranti (Kati Bihu in Assam)// Agree. This is absolutly right. Agrarian festivals are usually related to Tropical Zodiac, the seasons, and even the Nakshtra position of Sun (Njayar Nila - Placement of Sun in Nakshatra divisions) as kerala traidtion puts it. //3) New year celebration is also related to Samkranti// But what is Sankaranti? What do you mean by the word Sankranti? * Do you mean the transit of Sun between solar months such as Tapa, Tapasya, Madhu, Madhava etc? * Do you mean the transit of Sun between Lunar months (this itself sound absurd) such as Chaitra, Vaisakha etc? * Do you mean the transit of Sun between fixed Sign months such as Mesha, Vrishabha etc? If it mean the 3rd one (i.e. Samkranti means transit between signs such as Mesha, Vrishaba etc) then does it not point to the existance of Signs from the Vedic past itself (provided Sankranti is mentioned in Vedic literature). //5) There are few sets of festivals which could be called as 'Laukik' or related to common folks. These will include 'Manasaa Puja' Vishwakarma Puja etc. These are related to some particular date (like 1st day of Ashadha, 1st day of Ashwin etc)// May be this can be elaborated and categorised into two. 1st day of Ashadha, 1st day of Ashwin etc is some how connected to some seasons (Ritus) as well. There could be numerous local festiveals which are not in any way connected to seasons, lunar months, tithis, nakshatras etc. Simply put what I understand till date about festivals is that - They REPEAT on the SAME DAY, located using some or all of the panchanga parameters such as - * Year (Use the Jupitarian year name) * Month (This could be Solar or Lunar) * Fortnight (Paksha - this could be Suklapaksha or Krishna paksha) * Tithi * Nakshatra * Week day (its use seems to be limited in festivals) * Nitya yoga (its use seems to be very limited in fixing festivals) So in short a repeating festival day is simply - repeating day! Located mainly by considering either - * Year, Month, Fortnight, Tithi, Nakshatra * Year, Month, Fortnight, Tithi * Year, Month, Fortnight, Nakshatra * Year, Month, Nakshatra * Year, Month, Thithi * Year, Month, Day Usually the festival is in memory of somthing - whether it be a repeating season, or a past event. If the approach is this simple, then why are me making it a big issue? Ofcourse the only questions that would remain to be answered is - which year length to use, whch type of month, whether to give improtance to Tithi or nakshatra etc etc only. This also can be addressed simply by making the people see the point rather than be too orthadox. i.e. The approach should be to follow the same system using which they got defined knowing the seasonal connection, event or memory connected with. For example, if it is Vishu, it is well clear that Solar Year, Solar Month and Day should be considered and nothing else. If it is Onam of keala it is clear that Nirayana Year, Nirayana Month Simha (Sun in Leo) and Nakashatra (Sravana) should be considered. Why to make it all a big issue like Kaul does? Pleaple have freedom, they have logic, and festivals are not of much importance or worth, if the logic, purpose or memory behind them is not understood. This is my approach. Love and regards, Sreenadh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear shreenadh, if u can lay your hands on the sanskrit version of Brihad Arnyaka's first adhyaya it says something about the dawn being the head of the sacrificial horse (ashwin medha). the sun enters the ashwin nakshatra in the sankranti marking the vernal equinox...the dawn of the new year...the head of the horse, etc., etc.??? There could be layers and layers of meaning in sanskrit shlokas and only those well versed in the language can peel these layers to understand the underlying symbolism / meaning. As u can see there is mention of division of time...seasons, months, half-months, day and night, etc.in the opening verse... i am sending the english translation which may not be of that much use...but still it may generate some thoughts... BRIHADÂRANYAKA-UPANISHAD. FIRST ADHYÂYA 1. FIRST BRÂHMANA. 1. Verily 2 the dawn is the head of the horse which is fit for sacrifice, the sun its eye, the wind its breath, the mouth the Vaisvânara 3 fire, the year the body of the sacrificial horse. Heaven is the back, the sky the belly, the earth the chest 4, the quarters the two sides, the intermediate quarters the ribs, the members the seasons, the joints the months and half-months, the feet days and nights, the bones the stars, the p. 74 flesh the clouds. The half-digested food is the sand, the rivers the bowels 1, the liver and the lungs 2 the mountains, the hairs the herbs and trees. As the sun rises, it is the forepart, as it sets, the hindpart of the horse. When the horse shakes itself 3, then it lightens; when it kicks, it thunders; when it makes water, it rains; voice 4 is its voice. 2. Verily Day arose after the horse as the (golden) vessel 5, called Mahiman (greatness), which (at the sacrifice) is placed before the horse. Its place is in the Eastern sea. The Night arose after the horse as the (silver) vessel, called Mahiman, which (at the sacrifice) is placed behind the horse. Its place is in the Western sea. Verily, these two vessels (or greatnesses) arose to be on each side of the horse. As a racer he carried the Devas, as a stallion the Gandharvas, as a runner the Asuras, as a horse men. The sea is its kin, the sea is its birthplace. , " Sreenadh " <sreesog wrote: > > Dear Hari Mall ji, > //> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at > the vernal equinox.// > I am yet to see any such reference. Can you provide us with the same? > //You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the > reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.// > It is understandable when you state that 'Purush' is God or universe. > But is that Purush the same as KalaPurush (used in astrology)? Do you > have any proof in support of or against? It would be logical to state > that Year starts from the head of Kalapurush, since 'Kala' means 'Time' > (which also includes Year). But where did you found the statement that > 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox'? Do you have any poof to supply? > Now if we accept that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox', then how are > you going to proove that 'Head of Purusha mentioned in Veda (NOT Kala > purusha)' and indicates Vernal Equinox?! Do you have any vedic quote to > proove this argument? > To have some bit of fun as well (take it in light spirits) - > " Sahasra Seersha Purusha (Purusha has 1000 heads) " - which head is > Vernal equinox you wanted to say? > Love and regards, > Sreenadh > > , Hari Malla > <harimalla@> wrote: > > > > Dear Sreenadhji, > > In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at > the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus > could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is > just a logical guess.thank you. > > Regards, > > Hari Malla > > > > > > > > ----- Forwarded Message ---- > > Sreenadh sreesog@ > > > > Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM > > Re: Krittikadi > > > Dear All, > > May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in > Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi > Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal > Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series > originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is > available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and > Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this > information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of > time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this > must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them. > > I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and > arguments due to the following facts - > > * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence > of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal > Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use > or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian > astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a > small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll > in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT > sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests. > > * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox > is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th > century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra > series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also > something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to > conveniantly ignore! > > * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi > series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of > Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is > ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that > 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra > in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based > year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even > the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as > year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one > (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting > Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and > d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just > based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first > Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if > > some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might > become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership > quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It > is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed. > > The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series > could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding > about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the > baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not > become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us > all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning > Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through > Nakshatras' etc. > > Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion. > > Love and regards, > > Sreenadh > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Sreenadhji, Please read my Roman script version of sanskrit and traslation of the hindi version of SB Dixit's translation.That which is in brackets is his interpetation of the sanskrit text. <yatha wam purusha evam vishuvatasya yethha dakshinordha ebam purvaardho vishubato ethottarordhon ebamuttrordho vishuvatstasmaduttara ityabakshyate prabaahuksat shira ebam vishubaan//(Ai. Bra./18/22) Like purusu same is vishuban.like the right half of the(purush)same is its first half.like the left half so its latter half.Thus (six months after vishuva the aspect is known) as latter (half).(left -right)equally thus equipoised (sitting) (purush's) head is such the vishuvan.> Sorry if there is any mistake..try o get theoriginal book of SB Dixit. thank you. Sincerely yours, Hari Malla Sreenadh <sreesog Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 1:01:49 PM Re: Krittikadi Dear Hari Malla ji, Please provide the full quote in SANSKRIT with the translation/ interpretation of Shankar Blakrishna Dixit. (I don't have the copy of Aitteriya Brahman with me).Regards,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, Hari Malla <harimalla@.. .> wrote:>> Dee Sreenadhji,> I have found the reference of vernal equinox is in Aitteriya Brahman 18/22.This is quoted by Shankar Blakrishna Dixit.He says similar mention of equinox is made in Taiteriya Brahman too."Like Purush so is vishuvan.... .Vishuvan is like the head of the Purush."(Ait. Brahmana. 18/22)> "Like the two aspects of the house so is the year.Vishuvan is the middle" (Taiteriya Brahmana 1/2/3)> > thank you,> Sincerely yours> Hari Malla> > > ____________ _________ _________ __> Sreenadh sreesog ancient_indian_ astrology> Friday, April 17, 2009 4:35:29 PM> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Krittikadi> > Dear Hari Mall ji,> //> In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.//> I am yet to see any such reference. Can you provide us with the same?> //You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.//> It is understandable when you state that 'Purush' is God or universe. But is that Purush the same as KalaPurush (used in astrology)? Do you have any proof in support of or against? It would be logical to state that Year starts from the head of Kalapurush, since 'Kala' means 'Time' (which also includes Year). But where did you found the statement that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox'? Do you have any poof to supply?> Now if we accept that 'Year starts from Vernal Equinox', then how are you going to proove that 'Head of Purusha mentioned in Veda (NOT Kala purusha)' and indicates Vernal Equinox?! Do you have any vedic quote to proove this argument?> To have some bit of fun as well (take it in light spirits) -> "Sahasra Seersha Purusha (Purusha has 1000 heads)" - which head is Vernal equinox you wanted to say? > Love and regards,> Sreenadh> > ancient_indian_ astrology, Hari Malla harimalla@ .> wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadhji,> > In the vedas there are references that the head of the Purush is at the vernal equinox.You would be knowing that by Purush is meant God.Thus could be the reason why, the year starts from the vernal equinox.This is just a logical guess.thank you.> > Regards,> > Hari Malla> >> >> >> > ----- Forwarded Message ----> > Sreenadh sreesog@> > ancient_indian_ astrology> > Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:52:07 PM> > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Krittikadi> > > Dear All,> > May people argue that in Vedic period the Vernal equinox was in Krittika Nakshatra and that is why during that period Krittikadi Nakshatra series was in use. They also argue that later the vernal Equinox moved to Aswini Nakshatra and that is how Aswinyadi series originated. Even though no Rohinyadi, or Mrigasiradi series is available, since Rohini is considered the birth star of Brahma and Mrigasira has a synonymn 'Agrahayani' (the first one?) they treat this information as one in favor of them and argue that at some period of time Rohinyadi and Mrigasiradi series might have existed, and also this must be due to the presence of vernal equinox in them.> > I am having a total uneasy attitude towads this whole approach and arguments due to the following facts -> > * If Krittikadi and Aswinyadi series originated due to the presence of vernal equinox in then, at least for around 960 years the vernal Equinox was in Bharani Nakshatra. But there is no evidance for the use or existance of a Bharanyadi Nakahstra series in the history of Indian astrology. 10 centruries (960 years; BC 680 to AD 280) is NOT such a small period to ignore, and any argument that tries to ignore this poll in the eye, just to drive home their own favorite argument is NOT sincere at all and might be even dirven by versted interests.> > * For the past 768 years (AD 1240 to till date) the Vernal Equinox is in Uttara Bhadrapada, but still we never heared not even any 12th century ancient scholar speaking about any Uttara Bhadrapadadi Nakshtra series. I don't think this long history of more than 7 centuries is also something that we can allow the fake and non-sincere historians to conveniantly ignore!> > * There is no proof for the existance of Rohinyadi or Mrigasiradi series except for the weak arguments that Rohini is the birth star of Brahma, and that Mrigasira has got a name 'Agrahayani' (the one who is ahead). Is it that Brahma means 'Year'?! If not how they argue that 'Rohini is the Birth star of Brahma' means 'Rohini is the first Nakshtra in the Nakshatra series'? Did we ever considered the Nakshatra based year system as the most important one, than the Solar Year and the even the Lunar Thithi based years? If not why should Rohini be considered as year beginning? Considering Nakshatra Year as the most imporant one (more important than Solar and Lunar years) and without enough accepting Rohinyadi as Nakshatra series that existed - are both unscientific and d illogical. Same is the case with Mrigasira. How can we argue just based on the a single synonymn of Mrigasira that it was the first Nakshatra of the Nakshatra series once?! Even if> > some ancient astrologer thought that the one born in Mrigasira might become the eldest in the family, or that he will have leadership quolities or so - then to a name like 'Agrahayani' is quite possible. It is NOT necessory that some thing like a Mrigasiradi series existed.> > The base cause for the existance of a Krittikadi or Aswinyadi series could be totally different. Our ignorance and lack of understanding about this should not become an easy chance to accept and crown even the baseless arguments as the most authentic ones. Our ignorance should not become a helping tool for the western charletons like Kaul to bash us all. See the absurdity of their arguemnt such as - 'Year beginning Nakshatra changes as per the movement of Vernal equinox through Nakshatras' etc.> > Hope I have made a point clear, initiating a fruitful discussion.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Vinita ji, Good to see you active. Now coming to this discussion - it is not that I am not aware of such quotes, but understand the context of discussion first. Hari Mulla ji was speaking about considering Head of Purusha as Vernal Equinox (even though no such clear reference is available); now let us replace the Purusha with the Aswa from Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad you are providing with. So the question is, do you want to say that the head of Aswa signify Vernal equinox placed in Aswini Nakshatra? Before saying yes, please think twice. You can ask yourself the follwing questions - * Does the quote say anything about Head of Aswa being Vernal equinox? * Does it say or indicate in any way that "Aswa" (The expanding univese represented symbolically) is Aswini Nakshatra - the head of both indicating the same point (i.e. vernal equinox) ? I hope that you have already gone though the mail: /message/19659 So the question would be - * Do you want to say that Brihad Araynaka Upanishad was written between BC 680 to AD 280? (since that is the Aswinyadi period if Aswa of Brihad aranyaka and Aswati nakshatra has some connection - Aswinyadi = BC 680 to AD 280) Even though not an expert but only a simple individual with minimum capablities, I can easly see the following - Certainly Brihad Aryanyaka Uplanishad was NOT written AFTER the period of Vishnu Gupta (author of Artha Sastra) and Mourya Empair. If the text deals with the history, and dialogues of people who lived in ancient Mithila (King Janaka, Yajnavalkya, Gargi etc) then the text must have been of much earlier origin what ever the perspective be - whether Lingustic, historical, or astronomical. So I don't belive that Aswa of Briahd Arayanaka Upanishad maps with Aswini Nakshatra or Vernal Equinox; I don't belive that Brihad Aryanaka Upanishad is a text of very recent origin near AD 280. Hope you see my stand point, and the point I want to make. Love and regards, Sreenadh , "vinita kumar" <shankar_mamta wrote:>> Dear shreenadh,> > if u can lay your hands on the sanskrit version of Brihad Arnyaka's first adhyaya it says something about the dawn being the head of the sacrificial horse (ashwin medha). the sun enters the ashwin nakshatra in the sankranti marking the vernal equinox...the dawn of the new year...the head of the horse, etc., etc.???> > There could be layers and layers of meaning in sanskrit shlokas and only those well versed in the language can peel these layers to understand the underlying symbolism / meaning.> > As u can see there is mention of division of time...seasons, months, half-months, day and night, etc.in the opening verse...> > i am sending the english translation which may not be of that much use...but still it may generate some thoughts...> > BRIHADÂRANYAKA-UPANISHAD.> FIRST ADHYÂYA 1.> FIRST BRÂHMANA.> 1. Verily 2 the dawn is the head of the horse which is fit for sacrifice, the sun its eye, the wind its breath, the mouth the Vaisvânara 3 fire, the year the body of the sacrificial horse. Heaven is the back, the sky the belly, the earth the chest 4, the quarters the two sides, the intermediate quarters the ribs, the members the seasons, the joints the months and half-months, the feet days and nights, the bones the stars, the> > > > > > p. 74> > flesh the clouds. The half-digested food is the sand, the rivers the bowels 1, the liver and the lungs 2 the mountains, the hairs the herbs and trees. As the sun rises, it is the forepart, as it sets, the hindpart of the horse. When the horse shakes itself 3, then it lightens; when it kicks, it thunders; when it makes water, it rains; voice 4 is its voice.> > 2. Verily Day arose after the horse as the (golden) vessel 5, called Mahiman (greatness), which (at the sacrifice) is placed before the horse. Its place is in the Eastern sea. The Night arose after the horse as the (silver) vessel, called Mahiman, which (at the sacrifice) is placed behind the horse. Its place is in the Western sea. Verily, these two vessels (or greatnesses) arose to be on each side of the horse.> > As a racer he carried the Devas, as a stallion the Gandharvas, as a runner the Asuras, as a horse men. The sea is its kin, the sea is its birthplace.> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dear Sunil ji, //> vedic concepts were simple and strght and ppl like kaul is trying to> bring some fascism or total chaos in hindustan/hinduism// I agree with you. :)//) some are based on after this many> days like 28 ceremony after a child birth we do in kerala ( here no way> we can take nakshtra or any parameter than so many days passed after the> event )// This too simply gets integrated into the base categories I mentioned earlier. For example here only the Year, Month and Day (Better to say Nal or Nakshatra) is considered.Year: The 28th day festival should be conducted in the same year as the birth year of of child (i.e. within a solar year)Month: It should be conducted in the same month (Or better to say, in 1st day of next Siderial month!)Day: It should be done on the 28th day. i.e. The day on which the same Nakshatra repeats! Logic behind: On the 28th day, we are celebrating the 1st repeating Birth Day (Birth Nakshatra) of the child! For example if we got a child on Pushya Nakshatra, then when the next Pushya Nakshatra happens (usually on the 28th day) we happly celebrate the the event in blissful memory of the birth of the child in the same Nakshatra! That is all to it - I would say. Thus things become logical and meaningful. Similar logical arguments applies to any festival. Festivals are to Celebrate - therefore connected with every festival we can find the memory of some happy moment/occation, whether related to Agriculture, History, Puranic story or what ever that be. Celebrating the memory of that happy moment itslef is usually the purpose of any festival. Love and regards,Sreenadh , "sunil nair" <astro_tellerkerala wrote:>> > > > dear sreenadh ji> > i think u already put in correct words and we cannot force ppl to do> wat they shud do what ever may b the case ,other wise all this efforts> will go waist like wat happened in other civilisations> > so we shud find logic behind it and help them to fine tune it than> kaulian lunar vada calender which is primarily aimed at attacking> astrology than anything has to do with dharma karyas> > vedic concepts were simple and strght and ppl like kaul is trying to> bring some fascism or total chaos in hindustan/hinduism ,This morning> also we discussed and i think u can put in words how diffrnt events r> done by hindu s using diffrnt calanders> > some are only naskshatra based,some are thithi based ( like pitru karyas> followed in every yr during pitru paksha called mahalaya paksha --even> kerala tradition is diffrnt here ) some are based on after this many> days like 28 ceremony after a child birth we do in kerala ( here no way> we can take nakshtra or any parameter than so many days passed after the> event ) like this if we want we can write another 1 GB mail on it and> even every one knows abt it .> > > > thanks for ur post> > > > rgrds sunil nair> > > , "Sreenadh"> sreesog@ wrote:> >> >> > Dear Chakraborty ji,> > ==>> >> > Regarding the festivals in India, I noticed few things..Festivals are> >> > originated from two or three strata of society.> >> >> >> > 1) Most of the festivals connected to Vedic Gods are related to> >> > Lunar Tithi.> >> > 2) Most of the Agrarian festivals are related to equinoxes like> >> > Vishu (Kerala) /Bihu (Assam)/Baishakhi (Punjab) / Bisagu (Bodo)> >> > Also, all the Samkranti related festivals (Makar samkranti and> >> > Ashwin Samkranti (Kati Bihu in Assam)> >> >> >> > 3) New year celebration is also related to Samkranti> >> >> >> > 4) Kumbha / Amrut Kumbha celebration is related to Jup> >> >> >> > 5) There are few sets of festivals which could be called as 'Laukik'> >> > or related to common folks. These will include 'Manasaa Puja'> >> > Vishwakarma Puja etc. These are related to some particular date> >> > (like 1st day of Ashadha, 1st day of Ashwin etc)> >> > <==> > That was beautifully said - I agree with you. Let me go through it.> > //1) Most of the festivals connected to Vedic Gods are related to> >> > Lunar Tithi.//> > This also means that most of the festivals NOT connected to Vedic Gods> > are NOT related to Lunar Tithi! Many of them like Onam of Chinga masa> > (Month of Leo) of Kerala has strong relation with Nakshatra and Sign> and> > has no connection with Tithi.> > //2) Most of the Agrarian festivals are related to equinoxes like> >> > Vishu (Kerala) /Bihu (Assam)/Baishakhi (Punjab) / Bisagu (Bodo)> >> > Also, all the Samkranti related festivals (Makar samkranti and> >> > Ashwin Samkranti (Kati Bihu in Assam)//> > Agree. This is absolutly right. Agrarian festivals are usually related> > to Tropical Zodiac, the seasons, and even the Nakshtra position of Sun> > (Njayar Nila - Placement of Sun in Nakshatra divisions) as kerala> > traidtion puts it.> > //3) New year celebration is also related to Samkranti//> > But what is Sankaranti? What do you mean by the word Sankranti?> > * Do you mean the transit of Sun between solar months such as Tapa,> > Tapasya, Madhu, Madhava etc?> > * Do you mean the transit of Sun between Lunar months (this itself> > sound absurd) such as Chaitra, Vaisakha etc?> > * Do you mean the transit of Sun between fixed Sign months such as> > Mesha, Vrishabha etc?> >> > If it mean the 3rd one (i.e. Samkranti means transit between signs> > such as Mesha, Vrishaba etc) then does it not point to the existance> of> > Signs from the Vedic past itself (provided Sankranti is mentioned in> > Vedic literature).> > //5) There are few sets of festivals which could be called as> > 'Laukik'> >> > or related to common folks. These will include 'Manasaa Puja'> >> > Vishwakarma Puja etc. These are related to some particular date> >> > (like 1st day of Ashadha, 1st day of Ashwin etc)//> > May be this can be elaborated and categorised into two. 1st day of> > Ashadha, 1st day of Ashwin etc is some how connected to some seasons> > (Ritus) as well. There could be numerous local festiveals which are> not> > in any way connected to seasons, lunar months, tithis, nakshatras etc.> >> > Simply put what I understand till date about festivals is that - They> > REPEAT on the SAME DAY, located using some or all of the panchanga> > parameters such as -> > * Year (Use the Jupitarian year name)> > * Month (This could be Solar or Lunar)> > * Fortnight (Paksha - this could be Suklapaksha or Krishna paksha)> > * Tithi> > * Nakshatra> > * Week day (its use seems to be limited in festivals)> > * Nitya yoga (its use seems to be very limited in fixing festivals)> > So in short a repeating festival day is simply - repeating day!> > Located mainly by considering either -> > * Year, Month, Fortnight, Tithi, Nakshatra> > * Year, Month, Fortnight, Tithi> > * Year, Month, Fortnight, Nakshatra> > * Year, Month, Nakshatra> > * Year, Month, Thithi> > * Year, Month, Day> > Usually the festival is in memory of somthing - whether it be a> > repeating season, or a past event. If the approach is this simple,> then> > why are me making it a big issue?> > Ofcourse the only questions that would remain to be answered is -> > which year length to use, whch type of month, whether to give> improtance> > to Tithi or nakshatra etc etc only. This also can be addressed simply> by> > making the people see the point rather than be too orthadox. i.e. The> > approach should be to follow the same system using which they got> > defined knowing the seasonal connection, event or memory connected> with.> > For example, if it is Vishu, it is well clear that Solar Year, Solar> > Month and Day should be considered and nothing else. If it is Onam of> > keala it is clear that Nirayana Year, Nirayana Month Simha (Sun in> Leo)> > and Nakashatra (Sravana) should be considered. Why to make it all a> big> > issue like Kaul does? Pleaple have freedom, they have logic, and> > festivals are not of much importance or worth, if the logic, purpose> or> > memory behind them is not understood. This is my approach.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.