Fw: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

April 30, 2009

Dear Prafulla,

I am referring to the text available from the"Sacred texts" site. It does not mention about the division and span of the yugas. Markandeya spoke only about the qualities of the Kali yuga etc. Why don't you give all the five verses (3.188.22 to 3.188.26) in complete, which you are referring to. To my knowledge the Gita press has done wrong translation at times? I am away from my home and have no immediaate access to BORI crtitical edititon/ edition either.

SKB. --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendki wrote:

Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendkiRe: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta"Sunil Bhattacharjya" <sunil_bhattacharjyaWednesday, April 29, 2009, 10:17 PM

Dear Sunil

I am refering to Gitapress Khanda 2(Vanparva and Viratparva) in which

Markandeya Samasyaparva is present.188.22 is on page 1482.Are you refering to Gitapress or some other Edition?

Prafulla

--- On Thu, 30/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjyaRe: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta"Prafulla Mendki" <prafulla_mendkiThursday, 30 April, 2009, 7:46 AM

Dear Prafulla,

Mahabharata Book - 2 is Sabha-Parva and that does not have the Markandeya-Samasya Parva. Only the Book - 3 is Vana-Parva or Aranya-Parva and that has the Markandeya-Samasya Parva. In the Markandeya-Samasya Parva there is no verse like you have quoted.

S.K.Bhattacharjya --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendki wrote:

Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendkiRe: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhantasunil_bhattacharjyaDate: Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 1:58 AM

Dear Sunil

I am refering to MBH2( not 3) 188.22 to 188.26( Gitapress) pages 1482 & 1483

Chatvaryahu: sahastrani varshanam tat krutam yugam

tasya tavat shati sandhya sandhyansha: ch tathavidha: ....

Prafulla

--- On Wed, 29/4/09, sunil_bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

sunil_bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjyaRe: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta"prafulla Vaman Mendki" <prafulla_mendkiWednesday, 29 April, 2009, 5:05 AM

Dear friend,

The verse (MBH 3.188.22) is as follows:

This verse does not say what you mentioned. Can you please quote the Sanskrit verse you arer referring to?

Best wishes,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Tue, 4/28/09, prafulla Vaman Mendki <prafulla_mendki wrote:

prafulla Vaman Mendki <prafulla_mendkiFw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta"Sunil Bhattacharjya" <sunil_bhattacharjyaTuesday, April 28, 2009, 6:26 AM

prafulla_mendki writes:Suryasiddhanta was written after start of Kaliyug.As per 188.22 in MarkandeyaSamasya parva in Mahabharata,Krut,Treta,Dwapar and Kaliyug were 4800,3600,2400 and 1200years only.The idea of Dev varsha and Manav varsha came after Mahabharatai.e. after start of Kaliyug .PrafullaWAVES-Vedic , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:>>>> --- On Sat, 4/25/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:>>> Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya> Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> To:

> Cc: > Saturday, April 25, 2009, 3:42 AM>>>>>>>>> Namaste,> > Vinayji does not know himself as to how many verses were really there in the Suryasiddhanta and tries to find fault with me even though I said that I read the figure of 100,000 in a book long ago though I do not recollect all the details. If Vinayji thinks I am wrong let him give the number of verses in the original Suryasiddhanta straightway without wasting any time.> > Secondly he says as follows:> > Quote> >

The date 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta is mentioned in the text of Suryasiddhanta itself, which says it was given by Lord Surya at the end of Satayuga. This text says one divya day is of one normal year (verse 13 in Ch-1) and next verse says 360 divya days make one divya year. In succeeding verses, one Mahayuga is said to be of 12000 divya years, which is equal to 4320000 normal years. If we accept Sunil ji's absurd notion of divya year being same as solar year, all siddhantas of ancient India will have planetary motions being speeded up by 360 times, and it will be impossible to make any panchanga at all from any traditional Indian method, because Indians used to give number of planetary revolutions in terms of revolutions per mahayuga. "Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati" may be a great discovery for Sunil ji, but it is taught to every student of Jyotisha at primary level by those experts of Sanskrit universities who are called "pseudo-scholars" by Sunil ji

just> because Sunil ji has not read original texts and thinks all pandits are fools.> > Unquote> > Vinayji's yuga calculation will show that Lord Rama was born al least a million years ago. Any takers of that? Vinayji has not read that the Saptarshi cycle of 2700 Divya varsha is equal to 3030 Manush varsha. Hence he is making unnecessary noise here. Let him say what the Bhagavata purana and Vishnu purana say about the yugas. He has not read these as his views indicate.> > Regards,> > Sunil Kumar Bhattacharjya>> --- On Wed, 4/22/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:>> vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >> Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> > Wednesday, April 22, 2009, 12:44 AM>> Namaste,>> Sunil ji

claimed original Suryasiddhanta had 100000 verses. Why he does not cite the source of this wonderful information instead of ridiculing me on fictious grounds ?? Sunil ji makes wild claims and then forgets to substantiate them. Bhatta Utpala quoted many verses of Suryasiddhanta which are not present in extant version. Bhaskar-II quoted a formula from Suryasiddhanta in Siddhaanta Shiromani which differs from the same formula in extant version of Suryasiddhanta, which Burgess misinterpreted, although Bhaskar had clearly mentioned in his own commentary on Siddhaanta Shiromani (Vaasanaa-bhaashya, not translated as yet) that he quoted this formula of Suryasiddhanta from Shruti (ie, from oral Vedic tradition, and not from any manuscript of Suryasiddhanta) . If Varaha Mihira had seen manuscript of Suryasiddhanta, Bhaskara-II must have seen the same, more so because Bhatta Utpala who preceded Bhaskara by just a century quoted verses from Suryasiddhanta.>

Yet Bhaskar-II clearly says Suryasiddhanta has some items which are part of Shruti and not being committed to writing !!! Thus, there were two versions of Suryasiddhanta : written and oral. Written version has not survived in full, as is clear from Utpala's verses, but the written verse contains almopst everything required for panchanga making for astrological purposes, while the items cited from Shruti have serious differences with extant Suryasiddhanta and tally with modern physical astronomy with a high degree of precision (wrt precession). Thus, there were two versions of Suryasiddhanta, which the greatest mediaeval exponent of Suryasiddhanta Kamlakara Bhatta termed as Drikpaksha and Saurapaksha . Ketakar ji, proponent of famous of Ketaki system of panchanga making, follolwed this bifurcation , although Ketakar ji supported Drikpaksha (like Pandit Samanta Chandrasekha) while Kamlakara supported Saurapaksha for astrological purposes.>>

Sunil ji makes a wrong statement : "Makaranda developed the tables the way Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar had done." The latter followed Drikpaksha while the former followed Saurapaksha. The only difference of Makaranda Tables from socalled "modern" Suryasiddhanta is the incorporation of beeja samskaara in Makaranda Tables, whose magnitudes were explained in siddhantic terms in Makaranda-vivarana by Diwakar Bhatta but Western commentators could not understant these differences which were inflated in tantra method to huge proportions, because the accumulated beeja of ~2 billion years in siddhanta method is distributed over ~5000 years in tantra method beginning from Kaliyuga and over few centuries beginning from some recent zero date. Varah Mihira followed karana method but the verse mentioning his zero date is missing is Panchsiddhantika, hence it is not possible to compute anything on the basis of Panchsiddhantika due to missing verses.>>

Sunil Ji is merely repeating Western propaganda by stating : "Varahamihira was probably the last person to have seen the original Suryasiddhanta as well as the Aryasiddhanta of the very first Aryabhatta." Varahamihira' s Suryasiddhanta has been called as "old" and extant version as "new" by Western commentators, in spite of the fact that he is following karana method and not siddhanta method while describing Suryasiddhanta. Makarandaachaarya also followed tantra method (different from Tantras of philosophy) instead of siddhanta method. Extant version of Suryasiddhanta is the siddhanta method. That is why those who do not know how to make panchangas from three methods imagine Varahamihira' s version to be different from that of siddhanta method.>> I am sorry to disclose these facts to a person who is trying to gain facts from me by paying me handsome dakshinaa in the form of sarcastic remarks and non-obscene abuses. Even when he is

incapable of refuting me, he uses words which give an impression that my statements are unreliable. For instance, he says : "Vinayji claims to have supplied data for 382 - 1082 CE ." Why he does not falsify my supposed claims ?? I provided DATA, which are facts and not views. It is unfortunate Sunil ji is unable to differentiate facts from views. He may oppose my views, but he should not oppose facts. I devoted months over the period 3200 BC, as well as over other period. That is why I said Suryadiddhantic planets do not tally with physical planets for ANY period. Sunil ji has no time for making computations, and falsifies my years of research with his unsubstantiated remarks about my integrity and truthfulness. As for his own respect for truth, it is clear from> following remark.>> Sunil ji is again taking a recourse to deliberate distortions of my statements with a view to poke fun at me. I said : "Pragjyotishpur was the

easternmost city of ancient India where first Sunrise (Prak - jyotish) occurred." To this, Sunil ji replied : "Regarding the naming of Pragjyotishpur Vinayji thinks that the ancient Indians thought the Kamrup district in Assam to be the end of the earth on the eastern side." By replacing "India" with "earth" in my statement, whom he intends to befool ??>> The date 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta is mentioned in the text of Suryasiddhanta itself, which says it was given by Lord Surya at the end of Satayuga. This text says one divya day is of one normal year (verse 13 in Ch-1) and next verse says 360 divya days make one divya year. In succeeding verses, one Mahayuga is said to be of 12000 divya years, which is equal to 4320000 normal years. If we accept Sunil ji's absurd notion of divya year being same as solar year, all siddhantas of ancient India will have planetary motions being speeded up by 360 times, and it will be impossible to make

any panchanga at all from any traditional Indian method, because Indians used to give number of planetary revolutions in terms of revolutions per mahayuga. "Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati" may be a great discovery for Sunil ji, but it is taught to every student of Jyotisha at primary level by those experts of Sanskrit universities who are called "pseudo-scholars" by Sunil ji just> because Sunil ji has not read original texts and thinks all pandits are fools.>> While mentioning that Lord Surya gave present version of Suryasiddhanta to Maya at the end of present Satyuga, the text also says that it was given to maharshis in every yuga (ie, in every satyuga). Hence, according to Suryasiddhanta it was present at the beginning of Creation ! Whether Suryasiddhanta makes a false or true claim is another matter, but Sunil ji has no right to call me names ("pseudo-scholar" ) just because I quote the texts accurately, instead of making wild and

unsubstantiated claims like him. I do not use foul words for him, as he does for me, but I must counter his wrong statements. He should read a lot before posting his statements here. Internet fora are not for misinformation by ignorants. He should study Makarandaprakaasha (published by Chowkhamba) wrt Suryasiddhanta, which will take months, before commenting wildly.>> -VJ> ============ = ============ ========= ==> , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:> >> > Namaste,> > > > Will Vinayji tell us his opinion about the Makaranda-Tables, which are based on the Suryasiddhanta, in the light of what he said here. Makaranda develop[ed the tables the way Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar had done. While Makaranda corrected the data for all the grahas probably he did not succeed in correcting the

data for Mars. Mihira (Varahamihira) was probably the last person to have seen the original Suryasiddhanta as well as the Aryasiddhanta of the very first Aryabhatta.> > > > Vinayji claims to have supplied data for 382 - 1082 CE . Why did he not try the dates around 3200 BCE, the time around which one Mayasura helped the Pandavas establish their new capital? There could be a chance that this Mayasura was the author of the Suryasiddhanta, though one cannot be sure. At least Vinayji should have tried that date around 3200 BCE instead of saying that he can supply data for other dates too if Sunilji wants.> > > > Some people who do not have proper knowledge of the Hindu Yuga system claim that Mayasura was there more than two million years ago. What can be more ridiculous than that. Kaulji and his likes ridicule the Hindu Yugas just because some ignorant Hindu scholars stick

to some fantastic lengths for the yugas such as 1,296,000 years for the Dwapara yuga. One who has read the Puranas know that the length of the Dwapara yuga is 3600 years and not 1,296,000 years. It is because those pseudo-scholars do not know the importance of the need to use the rule "Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati" in the interpretation of the yuga data and they also do not know that Divya varsha is nothing but the Solar year, ie. the period the Sun takes to come back to the same nakshatra or the Nirayana year. I read somewhere that one author had given the date of 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta. What can be more damaging to the Hindu Astronomy than this?> > > > Nobody knows exactly as to how many verses the original Suryasiddhanta contained. I too do not have any first-hand information on that as I only read about it somewhere long time ago. Will Vinayji care

to tell the group the exact number of verses in the Suryasiddhanta as composed by Mayasura if he knows that instead of ridiculing the figure of 100,000 verses? I hope he will also tell us as to how he is sanguine about the number he may give if at all he can give the correct number of verses.> > > > Regarding the naming of Pragjyotishpur Vinayji thinks that the ancient Indians thought the Kamrup district in Assam to be the end of the earth on the eastern side. Interesting?> > > > Regards,> > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> > > >> > --- On Tue, 4/21/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:> >> >> > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>> > Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> > >

> Tuesday, April 21, 2009, 3:44 AM> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Namaste,> >> > I support Sunil ji's view that Maya Asura was not a mlechchha. But I hope my differences with him on following points will be answered in good spirit.> >> > Eclipses are based upon relative motion of Moon with respect to Sun, and is therefore a function of synodical month. Suryasiddhantic synodical month (29.530587946071718 224742696207476 days = 53433336 synodic revolutions in a Mahayuga of 1577917828 days) is only 0.01204949 seconds longer than long term average value of modern astronomical value of 29.53058780661 days, which implies a difference of merely 19 seconds in 1600 years. Hence, Hartley found no major difference between Suryasiddhantic and pgysical eclipses.> >> > But it is utterly wrong to say on this basis

that Suryasiddhantic planets tallied with physical planets in the past. It is a false myth created by modern Western critics posing as experts of Suryasiddhanta. I have supplied past data about physical and Suryasiddhantic planetary positions in detail , yet Sunil ji is sticking to false claims that Suryasiddhantic planets conformed to "real" (ie, physical) positions in the past. Why he does not back up his false claims with calculations ? There is no period in past , present or future when Suryasiddhantic planets show less than ~10 degrees of difference from physical planets. I have supplied data from 382 - 1082 AD, and I can supply data for other periods too if Sunil ji wants. But he has no respect for facts and is propagating fictious ideas. I request him not to give vent to unfounded assertions based on Western critics.> >> > His statement is wrong : "The data as corrected by Samantaji holds good for most of the astronomical

calculations" . What is the proof ? Siddhantic method can never be corrected for giving results acceptable with refrence to physical planets, whatever corrections we make in terms used. Sunil ji does not know the siddhantic formulae, that is why makes such wrong guesses. I had explained four samskaaras made in siddhantic mean planets, but modern astronomy does not recognize such samskaaras. Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar used siddhantic method and made changes merely in the magnitudes of terms. Hence, he got some approximations to planetary positions of modern astronomy for his year of observation, but these approximations soon grew upto intolerable differences. That is why no one accepted Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar' s method, excepting Sunil ji who may be celebrating festivals secretly according to Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar' s calculations, perhaps> !!> > Only an atheist can say "Only a school-child will ask if Lord Surya came in

person before Mayasura and taught him Astronomy " and that "skeptics say that there were several Mayasuras" (please take my words in a friendly manner). Pragjyotishpur was the easternmost city of ancient India where first Sunrise (Prak - jyotish) occurred. Pragjyotishpur has no special contribution to astrology. It is useless to counter such baseless statements. Sunil ji falsely claims that Suryasiddhanta had 100000 verses originally (only 502 are left)!! He feels no need of giving proof in favour of his invented myths... He feels anything can be posted on internet.> >> > -VJ> >> > ____________ _________ _________ __> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>> > indiaarchaeology> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology; ; vedic_research_ institute> > Tuesday, April

21, 2009 11:43:22 AM> > Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> >> > Dear all.> >> > Namaskar,> >> > The Suryasiddhanta, the ancient jewel of Indian Astronomy, has been spoken of disparagingly by a lot of people, which include both Western scholars and some Indians. You can see the following facts for yourself.> >> > Suryasiddhanta is an ancient text and it is obvious that the data given therein will not exactly hold for today. It is only imperative that the data of the Suryasiddhanta should be upgraded from time to time as the motions as well as the mutual distances of the grahas and the upagrahas do change with time. Bhaskaracharya and others corrected the data for their own time. Towards the end of the 19th century CE Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar revised the data based on his own naked eye obsevation of the heavenly bodies. Only after his bok

was published that Samanta Chandrasekhar was given a telescope by a person and he exclaimed that if only he had it earlier. Samantaji never borrowed any data from the western scholars though Vinayji guesses that Samantaji got data from the western scholars. The data as corrected by Samantaji holds good for most of the astronomical calculations. The calculations of the eclipse timings may now be somewhat off and one> > may need to update that data. In ancient times the astronomers were not like the arm-chair astronomers of today and therefore such updation was not a problem at all. Hartley got good results by using the data from the Suryasiddhanta and he says that the data were more accurate for past observations. This is in line with the requirement of updation of the data of Suryasiddhjanta from time to time. Thus Suryasiddhanta is an astronomical book for all time to come, if viewed positively. Only an ignorant person will condemn

Suryasiddhanta. Mayasura was the composer of the Suryasiddhanta. Manu smriti tells us about people using two bhashas ie. Arya-bhasha (refined language such as sanskrit)) and Mlechha-bhasha (unrefined language). It is known that Mayasura was definitely not one of the mlecchas as Mayasura wrote the Suryasiddhanta in the Sanskrit language. Ironically some modern mlecchas ( who use foul words such as charlatan to describe others)> > call Mayasura as mleccha. An Asura is not necessarily a bad peerson either as even Lord Krishna had been called an "Asura" as he fought with Indra, the king of the suras.> >> > Mayasura was the author of Suryasiddhanta and he is said to have got the knowledge of astronomy directly from Lord Surya. This obviously means that he meditated on Lord Surya and observed the movement of the heavenly bodies and thus he acquired the knowledge of astronomy. Even in the 19th century Samanta Chabndrasekhar got

his knowledge by direct observation of the heavenly bodies. Only a school-child will ask if Lord Surya came in person before Mayasura and taught him Astronomy.> >> > As regards the date of Mayasura some skeptics say that there were several Mayasuras. Suffice it to say that the last of the Mayasuras lived in the days of the Mahabharata war ie towards the end of the Dwapara yuga. So Suryasiddhanta was composed at least about three millennia before the Greeks came to know astronomy. It is also known that the Asura king Bhagadatta brought to Hastinapur, a group of Yavanas from Pragjyitishpur, which as its name indicates, was the earliest seat of Jyotisha in the ancient times.> >> > Hope you will find this information useful.> >> > regards,> >> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> >> >> >> > --- On Sun, 4/19/09, Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT)

com> wrote:> >> > Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com>> > [ind-Arch] Fwd: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> > indiaarchaeology> > Sunday, April 19, 2009, 11:49 PM> >> > Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com, "Avtar Krishen Kaul" <jyotirved@ ..> wrote:> >> > Shri Vinay Jha-ji,> > Namaskar!> > Since you have alreadey downloaded a copy of Mahesh/Ganesh program and maybe even Vasishta program from Hindu calendar forum, I am sure that by now you are aware that the Surya Sidhanta fundamental arguments are anything but correct! They are the most monstrous, beyond even the imagination of a really good astronomer!> >> > Maya the mlechha is actually a liar of the worst kind since he claims to have obtained those planetary details direct from Surya

Bhagwan himself at the fag end of the last Satya Yuga, i.e. at least several million years ago, as per the duration of yugas of the same Surya Sidhanta which is being eulogized by some "Vedic astrologers" .> > Or do you mean to say that it was Surya Bhagwan Himelf who gave Maya the mlechha wrong arguments, and that also millions of years back?> > If we do not have any books even on palm leaves of an era of even 6000 BCE available by now, how come it is only works like Brighu Samhitas and Surya Sidhanta etc that have survied for millions of years?> > If Maya the mlechha of the Surya Sidhanta is the Maya of Satya/Trea-yuga, he is supposed to be the father-in-law of Rakishasa king Ravana! How can it be the same so called Maya of the Mahabharata era? Or do you meant to say that like Brighu Samhita, he also survived right from the end of Satya-yuga to the fag end of Dwapara-yuga to guide Arjuna through forest fire?> >

Thus you have first to see tha janma-patri of Maya himself through your Kundalee softwaree to acertain his earlier and successive janmas to decide as to which Maya, if at all it is the real Maya, it is that you are talking about and defending!> > Regards,> > A K Kaul> > Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com, "vinayjhaa16" <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:> > >> > >> > > To All :> > >> > > One proof of archaicness and originality of Suryasiddhanta, which some> > > misguided persons assume to be an adaptation from Greek work.> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Mahabharata (MBh) has a story that when Jaraasandha threw his (tantric)> > > gadaa at Mathura, it fell just adjacent to Mathura at a distance of 99> > > yojanas from Girivraja, the ancient

capital of Magadha.> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Suryasiddhanta says Earth's equatorial diameter is of 1600 yojanas,> > > whose modern value is 12756.4 Kms (or 12756.3) . Hence, one> > > Suryasiddhantic yojana measures 7.97274625 Kms.> > >> > > Computed the distance of Girivraja to Mathura and convert it into> > > Suryasiddhantic yojana, it comes to be 98.54 yojanas, which Vyaasa ji> > > rounded off to 99 in his verse.> > >> > > The value of yojana in Aryabhatiya and Panchsiddhantika was 1.5 times> > > greater than that of Suryasiddhantic one. In later ages, it fluctuated> > > towards upper side of Aryabhatta's value, and never came to lower side> > > near to Suryasiddhantic value. Since Panchsiddhantika mentions> > > Suryasiddhanta, the

latter must be an earliker work than> > > Panchsiddhantika. Moreover, before Ajatshatru shifted the capital of> > > Magadha to Pataliputra around ~490 BCE (I forget the exact year), the> > > capital was at Rajgir. Girivraja was the capital in so-called> > > prehistoric period (before ~600 BCE), and never in historic period.> > > Therefore, can we not say that this story of MBh and magnitude of> > > Suryasiddhantic yojana belong to a prehistoric period ??? This story> > > cannot be brushed aside as an interpolation, because it forms part of> > > the main story and its mathematical value is also accurate.> > >> > > Narada Purana is also accredited to Vyaasa Ji, although white and brown> > > sahibs can think otherwise. It gives details which fit well with> > > Suryasiddhanta. Moreover, the philosophical

and cosmological framework> > > of Suryasiddhanta is perfectly in harmony with Vedic-Puranic- Epic> > > tradition. Therefore, the kernel of all those references to astrology or> > > astronomy in Vedic, Puranic and epic texts must be prehistoric which fit> > > with Suryasiddhantic framework. It is only a summarized view, one proof> > > in favour of which I have cited above.> > >> > > There are interpolations in epic-Puranic texts which conform to> > > Vedic-Puranic- Epic tradition of Suryasiddhantic astrology / astronomy or> > > cosmology, but have a far smaller value of yojana. Such a small value> > > has never been attested in historical period. Hence, I guess these> > > interpolations belong to Harappan period perhaps. Hence, during the> > > entire span of Treta and Dvapar ages, Suryasiddhantic

yojana must have> > > in vogue, unless proven otherwise, on account of aforementioned evidence> > > from MBh, and similarity in other writings ascribed to Vyaasa ji with> > > Suryasiddhantic framework.> > >> > > Now, I come to a difficult point. Almagest (Syntaxis) is a hotch-potch> > > written by a clever plagiarist Ptolemy. Ptolemy is a proven plagiarist,> > > who stole the idea of Hipparchus about precession and ascribed the> > > discovery to his own experiments and observations. But modern researches> > > have shown that those observational values belonged to the epoch of> > > Hipparchus and not of Ptolemy (read the book 'The Crime of Ptolemy' by a> > > modern professor Newton). Another hitherto undiscovered plagiary of> > > Ptolemy is the fact that Suryasiddhanta has an organic unity and>

> > beautiful systemic coherence which Almagest lacks. It is next to> > > impossible to prove this point, because Indians do not study either> > > Almagest or Suryasiddhanta, and Westerners will never listen to> > > Suryasiddhantic point of view. One instance of the great mathematical> > > coherence amounting to almost magic can be viewed by Clicking Here> > > <http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Suryasiddanta+ %3A+Proof+ of+Brahma% \> > > 27s+Age> . There are many such hidden magics in Suryasiddhanta, the> > > greatest of which is the accuracy of predictive astrology based on it,> > > which was true in the era of Varaha Mihira and is true even today. I am> > > translating my Hindi works and uploading them one by one on the> > > internet.>

> >> > > One should test the accuracy of Suryasiddhanta astrologically, by means> > > of Kundalee software. I have nothing to gain from it, because I never> > > earned a paisa out of astrology. Kundalee software will turn even a> > > novice into good astrologer in short time, provided intent is sincere.> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > -VJ> > >> > > ============ ==== ============ ====> > >> >> > --- End forwarded message ---> >> >

May 5, 2009

Dear Prafulla,

I am referring to the textavailable from the"Sacred texts" site. Why don't you give the five verses that you are referring to?

SunilK. Bhattacharjya--- On Wed, 4/29/09, Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendki wrote: