Fw: Originality of Suryasiddhanta : Proof

[Guest guest]

Vinayji,

 

1)

You have not yet given us the corresponding calculations for the Moon and the Jupiter

 

2)

Secondly yoy are yet to tell us your date of Lord Rama in conformity with your idea of the span of the yugas.?

 

3)

As regards Prafulla's yuga calculations I told him that there are no such verses in the Markandeya Samasya Parva. Prafulla is yet to respond.

 

-SKB

 

 

--- On Wed, 5/6/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta : Proof Date: Wednesday, May 6, 2009, 10:37 AM

 

 

Sunil ji,Mr Prafulla Mendki is misleading you, he has written a wrong book andrefused to discuss it openly. In Mahabharata, there are many refencesto Suryasiddhantic system, as well as to divya varsha. For instance,read Shantiparva - chapter 231, which deals in detail the divisions oftime, and in verse 17 Vyaasa Ji says "One year (of men, cf, verse 15) isequal to one ahoraatra (day and night) of gods ; division of their daysand night is thus : Uttaraayana is their day and Dakshinaayana is theirnight."рджреИрд╡реЗ рд░рд╛рддреÐрд░реÐрдпрд╣рдиреÐрд╡рд░реÐрд╖рдВ рдкреÐрд░рд╡рдâ”рднрд╛рдЧрд╕реÐрддрдпреЛрдГрдкреБрдирдГ редрдЕрд╣рд╕реÐрддрддреÐрд░реЛрджрдЧрдпрдирдВрд░рд╛рддреÐрд░рдâ”рдГ

рд╕реÐрдпрд╛рджреÐрджрдХреÐрд╖рдâ”рдгрд╛рдпрдирдВредред17редредI am really sorry for you. Instead of accepting the truth, you aresearching for such verses which will not specify whether they are divyaor Maanava years due to requirements of prosody. It is not honesty.Please do not degrade yourself. If Truth is different from yourmisconceptions, do not try to invent new theories against Truth.-Vinay Jha============ == ============ =, sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:>>> Dear Prafulla,> ┬> I am referring to the textavailable from the"Sacred texts" site. Whydon't you give the five verses that you are referring

to?> ┬> SunilK. Bhattacharjya>> --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Prafulla Mendki prafulla_mendki@ ... wrote:>>> Prafulla Mendki prafulla_mendki@ ...> Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> "Sunil Bhattacharjya" sunil_bhattacharjya Wednesday, 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 yourefering to Gitapress or some other Edition?> Prafulla> ┬>>> --- On Thu, 30/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:>>> Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> "Prafulla

Mendki" prafulla_mendki@ ...> Thursday, 30 April, 2009, 7:46 AM>>>>>>>> Dear Prafulla,> ┬> Mahabharata Book - 2 is Sabha-Parva and that does not have theMarkandeya-Samasya Parva. Only the Book - 3 is Vana-Parva orAranya-Parva and that has the Markandeya-Samasya Parva. In theMarkandeya-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_mendki@ ...> Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> sunil_bhattacharjya 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_bhattacharjya Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> "prafulla Vaman Mendki" prafulla_mendki@ ...> Wednesday, 29 April, 2009, 5:05 AM>>>>>>>>> Dear friend,> ┬> The verse (MBH 3.188.22) is as follows:> ┬> ┬ ┬ ┬ ┬ рдЕрдиреÐрдпреКрдиреÐрдпрдВрдкрд░рдâ”рдореБрд╖реÐрдгрдиреÐрддреКрд╣рдâ”рдВрд╕рдпрдиреÐрддрд╢ рдЪ рдорд╛рдирд╡рд╛рдГ> ┬ ┬ ┬ ┬

рдЕрдЬрдкрд╛рдирд╛рд╕реÐрддрдâ”рдХрд╛рдГ рд╕рддреЗрдирд╛рднрд╡рдâ”рд╖реÐрдпрдиреÐрддрд┠рдпреБрдЧрдХреÐрд╖рдпреЗ> ┬> This verse does not say what you mentioned. Can you please quote theSanskrit 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_mendki@ ...> Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> "Sunil Bhattacharjya" sunil_bhattacharjya Tuesday, 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 1200> years only.> The idea of Dev varsha and Manav varsha came after Mahabharata> i.e. after start of Kaliyug .> Prafulla>> WAVES-Vedic, Sunil Bhattacharjyasunil_bhattacharjya @ wrote:> >> >> >> > --- On Sat, 4/25/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya @ wrote:> >> >> > Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya @> > Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta> > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology> > Saturday, April 25, 2009, 3:42 AM> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Namaste,> > ┬> > Vinayji does not know himself as to how many verses were reallythere in the Suryasiddhanta and tries to find fault with me even thoughI said that┬ ┬ I read the figure of 100,000 in a book long agothough I do not recollect all the details. If Vinayji thinks I am wronglet him┬ give the number of verses in the original Suryasiddhantastraightway without wasting any time.> > ┬> >

Secondly he says as follows:> > ┬> > Quote> > ┬> > The date 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta is mentioned in the text ofSuryasiddhanta itself, which says it was given by Lord Surya at the endof Satayuga. This text says one divya day is of one normal year (verse13 in Ch-1) and next verse says 360 divya days make one divya year. Insucceeding verses, one Mahayuga is said to be of 12000 divya years,which is equal to 4320000 normal years. If we accept Sunil ji's absurdnotion of divya year being same as solar year, all siddhantas of ancientIndia will have planetary motions being speeded up by 360 times, and itwill be impossible to make any panchanga at all from any traditionalIndian method, because Indians used to give number of planetaryrevolutions in terms of revolutions per mahayuga. "Ankaanaam VaamatoGati" may be a great discovery for Sunil ji, but it is taught to

everystudent of Jyotisha at primary level by those experts of Sanskrituniversities who are called "pseudo-scholars" by Sunil ji> just> > because Sunil ji has not read original texts and thinks all panditsare fools.> > ┬> > Unquote> > ┬> > Vinayji's yuga calculation will show that Lord Rama was born alleast a million years ago. Any takers of that? Vinayji has not read thatthe Saptarshi cycle of 2700 Divya varsha is equal to 3030 Manush varsha.Hence he is making unnecessary noise here. Let him say what theBhagavata purana and Vishnu purana say about the yugas. He has not readthese 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 hedoes not cite the source of this wonderful information instead ofridiculing me on fictious grounds ?? Sunil ji makes wild claims and thenforgets to substantiate them. Bhatta Utpala quoted many verses ofSuryasiddhanta which are not present in extant version. Bhaskar-IIquoted a formula from Suryasiddhanta in Siddhaanta Shiromani whichdiffers from the same formula in extant version of Suryasiddhanta, whichBurgess misinterpreted, although Bhaskar had clearly mentioned in hisown commentary on Siddhaanta Shiromani (Vaasanaa-bhaashya, nottranslated as yet) that he quoted this formula of Suryasiddhanta fromShruti

(ie, from oral Vedic tradition, and not from any manuscript ofSuryasiddhanta) . If Varaha Mihira had seen manuscript ofSuryasiddhanta, Bhaskara-II must have seen the same, more so becauseBhatta Utpala who preceded Bhaskara by just a century quoted verses from> Suryasiddhanta.> > Yet Bhaskar-II clearly says Suryasiddhanta has some items which arepart of Shruti and not being committed to writing !!! Thus, there weretwo versions of Suryasiddhanta : written and oral. Written version hasnot survived in full, as is clear from Utpala's verses, but the writtenverse contains almopst everything required for panchanga making forastrological purposes, while the items cited from Shruti have seriousdifferences with extant Suryasiddhanta and tally with modern physicalastronomy with a high degree of precision (wrt precession). Thus, therewere two versions of Suryasiddhanta, which the greatest

mediaevalexponent of Suryasiddhanta Kamlakara Bhatta termed as Drikpaksha andSaurapaksha . Ketakar ji, proponent of famous of Ketaki system ofpanchanga making, follolwed this bifurcation , although Ketakar jisupported Drikpaksha (like Pandit Samanta Chandrasekha) while Kamlakarasupported Saurapaksha for astrological purposes.> >> > Sunil ji makes a wrong statement : "Makaranda developed the tablesthe way Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar had done." The latter followedDrikpaksha while the former followed Saurapaksha. The only difference ofMakaranda Tables from socalled "modern" Suryasiddhanta is theincorporation of beeja samskaara in Makaranda Tables, whose magnitudeswere explained in siddhantic terms in Makaranda-vivarana by DiwakarBhatta but Western commentators could not understant these differenceswhich were inflated in tantra method to huge proportions, because theaccumulated beeja

of ~2 billion years in siddhanta method is distributedover ~5000 years in tantra method beginning from Kaliyuga and over fewcenturies beginning from some recent zero date. Varah Mihira followedkarana method but the verse mentioning his zero date is missing isPanchsiddhantika, hence it is not possible to compute anything on thebasis 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 originalSuryasiddhanta as well as the Aryasiddhanta of the very firstAryabhatta." Varahamihira' s Suryasiddhanta has been called as "old" andextant version as "new" by Western commentators, in spite of the factthat he is following karana method and not siddhanta method whiledescribing 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 whythose who do not know how to make panchangas from three methods imagineVarahamihira' s version to be different from that of siddhanta method.> >> > I am sorry to disclose these facts to a person who is trying to gainfacts from me by paying me handsome dakshinaa in the form of sarcasticremarks and non-obscene abuses. Even when he is incapable of refutingme, he uses words which give an impression that my statements areunreliable. For instance, he says : "Vinayji claims to have supplieddata for 382 - 1082 CE ." Why he does not falsify my supposed claims ??I provided DATA, which are facts and not views. It is unfortunate Sunilji is unable to differentiate facts from views. He may oppose my views,but he should not oppose facts. I devoted months over the period 3200BC, as well as over other period. That is

why I said Suryadiddhanticplanets do not tally with physical planets for ANY period. Sunil ji hasno time for making computations, and falsifies my years of research withhis unsubstantiated remarks about my integrity and truthfulness. As forhis own respect for truth, it is clear from> > following remark.> >> > Sunil ji is again taking a recourse to deliberate distortions of mystatements with a view to poke fun at me. I said : "Pragjyotishpur wasthe easternmost city of ancient India where first Sunrise (Prak -jyotish) occurred." To this, Sunil ji replied : "Regarding the naming ofPragjyotishpur Vinayji thinks that the ancient Indians thought theKamrup district in Assam to be the end of the earth on the easternside." By replacing "India" with "earth" in my statement, whom heintends to befool ??> >> > The date 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta is mentioned in the text

ofSuryasiddhanta itself, which says it was given by Lord Surya at the endof Satayuga. This text says one divya day is of one normal year (verse13 in Ch-1) and next verse says 360 divya days make one divya year. Insucceeding verses, one Mahayuga is said to be of 12000 divya years,which is equal to 4320000 normal years. If we accept Sunil ji's absurdnotion of divya year being same as solar year, all siddhantas of ancientIndia will have planetary motions being speeded up by 360 times, and itwill be impossible to make any panchanga at all from any traditionalIndian method, because Indians used to give number of planetaryrevolutions in terms of revolutions per mahayuga. "Ankaanaam VaamatoGati" may be a great discovery for Sunil ji, but it is taught to everystudent of Jyotisha at primary level by those experts of Sanskrituniversities who are called "pseudo-scholars" by Sunil ji> just> >

because Sunil ji has not read original texts and thinks all panditsare fools.> >> > While mentioning that Lord Surya gave present version ofSuryasiddhanta to Maya at the end of present Satyuga, the text also saysthat it was given to maharshis in every yuga (ie, in every satyuga).Hence, according to Suryasiddhanta it was present at the beginning ofCreation ! Whether Suryasiddhanta makes a false or true claim is anothermatter, but Sunil ji has no right to call me names ("pseudo-scholar" )just because I quote the texts accurately, instead of making wild andunsubstantiated claims like him. I do not use foul words for him, as hedoes for me, but I must counter his wrong statements. He should read alot before posting his statements here. Internet fora are not formisinformation 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 theMakaranda-Tables, which are based on ┬ the Suryasiddhanta, in thelight of what he said here. Makaranda develop[ed the tables the wayPandit┬ Samanta Chandrasekhar had done.┬ While Makaranda correctedthe data for all the grahas┬ probably he did not┬ succeed incorrecting the data for Mars. Mihira (Varahamihira)┬ was probablythe last person to have seen the original Suryasiddhanta as well asthe┬ Aryasiddhanta of the very first Aryabhatta.> > > ┬> > > Vinayji claims to have supplied data for 382 - 1082 CE . Why didhe not

try the dates around 3200 BCE, the time around which┬ oneMayasura helped the Pandavas establish their new capital? There could bea chance that this Mayasura was the author of the Suryasiddhanta, thoughone cannot be sure. At least Vinayji should have tried that date around3200 BCE┬ instead of saying that he can supply data for other datestoo if Sunilji wants.> > > ┬> > > Some people who do not have proper knowledge of the Hindu Yugasystem claim that Mayasura was there more than two million years ago.What can be more ridiculous than that. Kaulji and his likes ridicule theHindu Yugas just because some ignorant Hindu scholars┬ stick to┬some fantastic lengths for the yugas such as 1,296,000 years for theDwapara yuga.┬ One who has read the Puranas know that the length ofthe Dwapara yuga is┬ 3600 years and not 1,296,000 years. It isbecause those pseudo-scholars┬ do not

know the importance of theneed to use the rule "Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati" in the interpretation ofthe yuga data and┬ they also do not know that Divya varsha is┬nothing but the Solar┬ year, ie. the period the Sun takes to comeback to the same nakshatra or the Nirayana year. I read somewhere thatone author had given the date of 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta. Whatcan be more damaging to the Hindu Astronomy than this?> > > ┬> > > Nobody knows exactly as to how many verses the originalSuryasiddhanta contained. I too do not have┬ any first-handinformation on that┬ as┬ I only read about it somewhere long timeago.┬ Will┬ Vinayji care to┬ tell the group┬ the exactnumber of verses in the Suryasiddhanta as composed by Mayasura┬ if heknows that instead of ridiculing the figure of 100,000 verses? I hope hewill also tell us as to how he is sanguine about the number he┬

maygive┬ if at all he can give the correct number of verses.> > > ┬> > > Regarding the naming of Pragjyotishpur┬ Vinayji thinks thatthe ancient┬ Indians┬ thought the Kamrup district in Assam to bethe 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. ButI hope my differences with him on following points will be answered ingood spirit.> > >> > > Eclipses are based upon relative motion of Moon with respect toSun, and is therefore a function of synodical month. Suryasiddhanticsynodical month (29.530587946071718 224742696207476 days = 53433336synodic revolutions in a Mahayuga of 1577917828 days) is only 0.01204949seconds longer than long term average value of modern astronomical valueof 29.53058780661 days, which implies a difference of merely 19 secondsin 1600 years. Hence, Hartley found no major difference betweenSuryasiddhantic and pgysical eclipses.> > >> > > But it is utterly wrong to say on this basis that Suryasiddhanticplanets tallied with physical planets in the past. It is a

false mythcreated by modern Western critics posing as experts of Suryasiddhanta. Ihave supplied past data about physical and Suryasiddhantic planetarypositions in detail , yet Sunil ji is sticking to false claims thatSuryasiddhantic planets conformed to "real" (ie, physical) positions inthe past. Why he does not back up his false claims with calculations ?There is no period in past , present or future when Suryasiddhanticplanets show less than ~10 degrees of difference from physical planets.I have supplied data from 382 - 1082 AD, and I can supply data for otherperiods too if Sunil ji wants. But he has no respect for facts and ispropagating fictious ideas. I request him not to give vent to unfoundedassertions based on Western critics.> > >> > > His statement is wrong : "The data as corrected by Samantaji holdsgood for most of the astronomical calculations" . What is the proof

?Siddhantic method can never be corrected for giving results acceptablewith refrence to physical planets, whatever corrections we make in termsused. Sunil ji does not know the siddhantic formulae, that is why makessuch wrong guesses. I had explained four samskaaras made in siddhanticmean planets, but modern astronomy does not recognize such samskaaras.Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar used siddhantic method and made changesmerely in the magnitudes of terms. Hence, he got some approximations toplanetary positions of modern astronomy for his year of observation, butthese approximations soon grew upto intolerable differences. That is whyno one accepted Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar' s method, excepting Sunilji who may be celebrating festivals secretly according to Pandit SamantaChandrasekhar' s calculations,> perhaps> > !!> > > Only an atheist can say "Only a school-child will ask if

LordSurya came in person before Mayasura and taught him Astronomy " and that"skeptics say that there were several Mayasuras" (please take my wordsin a friendly manner). Pragjyotishpur was the easternmost city ofancient India where first Sunrise (Prak - jyotish) occurred.Pragjyotishpur has no special contribution to astrology. It is uselessto counter such baseless statements. Sunil ji falsely claims thatSuryasiddhanta had 100000 verses originally (only 502 are left)!! Hefeels no need of giving proof in favour of his invented myths... Hefeels 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, hasbeen spoken of disparagingly by a lot of people, which include bothWestern scholars and some Indians. You can see the following facts foryourself.> > >> > > Suryasiddhanta is an ancient text and it is obvious that the datagiven therein will not exactly hold for today. It is only imperativethat the data of the Suryasiddhanta should be upgraded from time to timeas the motions as well as the mutual distances of the grahas and theupagrahas do change with time. Bhaskaracharya and others corrected thedata

for their own time. Towards the end of the 19th century CE PanditSamanta Chandrasekhar revised the data based on his own naked eyeobsevation of the heavenly bodies. Only after his bok was published thatSamanta Chandrasekhar was given a telescope by a person and he exclaimedthat if only he had it earlier. Samantaji never borrowed any data fromthe western scholars though Vinayji guesses that Samantaji got data fromthe western scholars. The data as corrected by Samantaji holds good formost of the astronomical calculations. The calculations of the eclipsetimings may now be somewhat off and one> > > may need to update that data. In ancient times the astronomerswere not like the arm-chair astronomers of today and therefore suchupdation was not a problem at all. Hartley got good results by using thedata from the Suryasiddhanta and he says that the data were moreaccurate for past observations. This is

in line with the requirement ofupdation of the data of Suryasiddhjanta from time to time. ThusSuryasiddhanta is an astronomical book for all time to come, if viewedpositively. Only an ignorant person will condemn Suryasiddhanta.Mayasura was the composer of the Suryasiddhanta. Manu smriti tells usabout people using two bhashas ie. Arya-bhasha (refined language such assanskrit)) and Mlechha-bhasha (unrefined language). It is known thatMayasura was definitely not one of the mlecchas as Mayasura wrote theSuryasiddhanta 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 badpeerson either as even Lord Krishna had been called an "Asura" as hefought with Indra, the king of the suras.> > >> > > Mayasura was the author of Suryasiddhanta and he is said to

havegot the knowledge of astronomy directly from Lord Surya. This obviouslymeans that he meditated on Lord Surya and observed the movement of theheavenly bodies and thus he acquired the knowledge of astronomy. Even inthe 19th century Samanta Chabndrasekhar got his knowledge by directobservation of the heavenly bodies. Only a school-child will ask if LordSurya came in person before Mayasura and taught him Astronomy.> > >> > > As regards the date of Mayasura some skeptics say that there wereseveral Mayasuras. Suffice it to say that the last of the Mayasuraslived in the days of the Mahabharata war ie towards the end of theDwapara yuga. So Suryasiddhanta was composed at least about threemillennia before the Greeks came to know astronomy. It is also knownthat the Asura king Bhagadatta brought to Hastinapur, a group of Yavanasfrom Pragjyitishpur, which as its name indicates, was the

earliest seatof 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 programand maybe even Vasishta program from Hindu calendar forum, I am surethat by now you are aware that the Surya Sidhanta fundamental argumentsare anything but correct! They are the most monstrous, beyond even theimagination of a really good astronomer!> > >> > > Maya the mlechha is actually a liar of the worst kind since heclaims to have obtained those planetary details direct from SuryaBhagwan himself at the fag end of the last Satya Yuga, i.e. at leastseveral million years ago, as per the duration of yugas of the sameSurya Sidhanta which is being eulogized by some "Vedic astrologers" .> > > Or do you mean to say that it was Surya Bhagwan Himelf who gaveMaya 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 even6000 BCE available by now, how come it is only works

like BrighuSamhitas and Surya Sidhanta etc that have survied for millions of years?> > > If Maya the mlechha of the Surya Sidhanta is the Maya ofSatya/Trea-yuga, he is supposed to be the father-in-law of Rakishasaking Ravana! How can it be the same so called Maya of the Mahabharataera? Or do you meant to say that like Brighu Samhita, he also survivedright from the end of Satya-yuga to the fag end of Dwapara-yuga to guideArjuna through forest fire?> > > Thus you have first to see tha janma-patri of Maya himself throughyour Kundalee softwaree to acertain his earlier and successive janmas todecide as to which Maya, if at all it is the real Maya, it is that youare 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 distanceof 99> > > > yojanas from Girivraja, the ancient capital of Magadha.> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Suryasiddhanta says Earth's equatorial diameter is of 1600yojanas,> > > > 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 itinto> > > > Suryasiddhantic yojana, it comes to be 98.54 yojanas, whichVyaasa ji> > > > rounded off to 99 in his verse.> > > >> > > > The value of yojana in Aryabhatiya and Panchsiddhantika was 1.5times> > > > greater than that of Suryasiddhantic one. In later ages, itfluctuated> > > > towards upper side of Aryabhatta's value, and never came tolower side> > > > near to Suryasiddhantic value. Since Panchsiddhantika mentions> > > > Suryasiddhanta, the latter must be an earliker work than> > > > Panchsiddhantika. Moreover, before Ajatshatru shifted thecapital of> > > > Magadha to Pataliputra around ~490 BCE (I forget the exactyear), the> > > >

capital was at Rajgir. Girivraja was the capital in so-called> > > > prehistoric period (before ~600 BCE), and never in historicperiod.> > > > Therefore, can we not say that this story of MBh and magnitudeof> > > > Suryasiddhantic yojana belong to a prehistoric period ??? Thisstory> > > > cannot be brushed aside as an interpolation, because it formspart of> > > > the main story and its mathematical value is also accurate.> > > >> > > > Narada Purana is also accredited to Vyaasa Ji, although whiteand brown> > > > sahibs can think otherwise. It gives details which fit well with> > > > Suryasiddhanta. Moreover, the philosophical and cosmologicalframework> > > > of Suryasiddhanta is perfectly in harmony with Vedic-Puranic-Epic> > > > tradition. Therefore,

the kernel of all those references toastrology or> > > > astronomy in Vedic, Puranic and epic texts must be prehistoricwhich 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 smallvalue> > > > has never been attested in historical period. Hence, I guessthese> > > > interpolations belong to Harappan period perhaps. Hence, duringthe> > > > entire span of Treta and Dvapar ages, Suryasiddhantic yojanamust have> > > > in vogue, unless proven otherwise, on

account of aforementionedevidence> > > > from MBh, and similarity in other writings ascribed to Vyaasa jiwith> > > > Suryasiddhantic framework.> > > >> > > > Now, I come to a difficult point. Almagest (Syntaxis) is ahotch-potch> > > > written by a clever plagiarist Ptolemy. Ptolemy is a provenplagiarist,> > > > who stole the idea of Hipparchus about precession and ascribedthe> > > > discovery to his own experiments and observations. But modernresearches> > > > have shown that those observational values belonged to the epochof> > > > Hipparchus and not of Ptolemy (read the book 'The Crime ofPtolemy' by a> > > > modern professor Newton). Another hitherto undiscovered plagiaryof> > > > 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 studyeither> > > > Almagest or Suryasiddhanta, and Westerners will never listen to> > > > Suryasiddhantic point of view. One instance of the greatmathematical> > > > coherence amounting to almost magic can be viewed by ClickingHere> > > > <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 basedon it,> > > > which was true in the era of Varaha Mihira and is true eventoday. 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 Inever> > > > earned a paisa out of astrology. Kundalee software will turneven a> > > > novice into good astrologer in short time, provided intent issincere.> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > -VJ> > > >> > > > ============ ==== ============ ====> > > >> > >> > > --- End forwarded message ---> > >> > >