Ayanamsha

[Guest guest]

, " Francois Carriere "

<francois.carriere@l...> wrote:

> Hello everyone,

>

> I am new to this list and to Krishnamurti Paddhati. I would like to

> how does the ayanamsha is calculated in this system. Do we use a

> dynamic or a static rate of precession? Which one is it? Do the

> ayanamsha given by our (werstern) software are accurate? I suspect

> not, if a static rate of precession is used.

>

> I would like to when the ayanamsha was zero in the western calendar

> and what is the rate of the precession. If you could present an

> example of calculation, it would also be very appreciated.

>

> --

> Kind regards - François

> francois.carriere@l...

> http://cf.geocities.com/astl1/

> P.S. Please do not advertise any software, I do own few ones, and I

> will contact software designers when I am ready to buy.

 

Hello everyone,

 

It seems I may have found the answer to my question on Astroamerica

website (<http://www.astroamerica.com/v-krish2.html>):

 

" it is defined as tropical & sidereal zodiacs in agreement in 291 AD,

with 50.2388475 seconds of difference each year since " .

 

So the best way to calculate our static ayanamsha is to know the

Julian day of year 291 (1827345) which will be substracted from the

Julian day of an event (usually a birth) than multiplied by the

constant rate of precession (50.2388475) and divided by number of

days in a year (365.2422). Thus, for the 10 february 1963, we get:

 

(2438070-1827345) * 50.2388475 / 365.2422 = 23°20'4.86 "

 

--

Regards - François

[Guest guest]

, " Francois Carriere "

<francois.carriere@l...> wrote:

 

Hello everyone,

 

This question of the ayanamsha seems to be crucial in hindu

astrology. More important, is the question of knowing how to choose

and uses the right ayanamsha and precession rate. What are the

criteria needed for the good choice? What were those of K S

Krishnamurti? How did he ended choosing them?

 

--

Regards - François

[Guest guest]

Dear François ji,

 

 

Sri KSK was very experimental astrologer. As far as I know, he came up with this ayanamsa based on his experiments with astrology only. Nowadays there are some controversies going on with KP ayanamsa. The method he has suggested in his books and the ready-made ayanamsas given for different years do not match. So nowadays there are two different ayansmsas one is called KP Old and other is KP New. It is a question of great debate which one is correct.

 

KP and Lahiri ayanamsas are very close. So most of the times it does not make much difference which ayanamsa you choose.

 

Hope I'll be able to confuse you a little more J

 

Regards,

Punit Pandey

Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote:

, "Francois Carriere" <francois.carriere@l...> wrote:Hello everyone,This question of the ayanamsha seems to be crucial in hindu astrology. More important, is the question of knowing how to choose and uses the right ayanamsha and precession rate. What are the criteria needed for the good choice? What were those of K S Krishnamurti? How did he ended choosing them?-- Regards - François

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

[Guest guest]

Hello dear Punit,

 

I understand that ayanamsha is a controversy among astrologers: I rather use one with a method, proven it is working and another with another method; although I'd prefer to find the right one!... I met people who reject all the great work of our peers unrespectfully, sustaining that "it just don't work"! Sadly.

 

From what I read on KP, I finally find a method which integrates both Solar and Lunar zodiac and French tropicalists revere Alexandre Volguine who wrote an astonishing book on tropical lunar astrology. Discovering KP through Jean Dethier (although still waiting the older version ~the original one~ of his book by mail) was an enlightment!

 

For the ayanamsha purpose, I would like to know if the way I calculated mine (10 feb 1963) is correct and may I use the same method while studying KP through Dethier work? Also, I believe most software may not be using a "static" rate of precession. May this be a mistake or can I be confident with my software (Astrolog, for instance)?

 

--

Kind Regards - François

P.S. I often see the name of people followed with "ji". What is the meaning of this word?

 

 

-

Punit Pandey

Monday, May 03, 2004 4:30 AM

Re: Re: Ayanamsha

 

Dear François ji,

 

 

Sri KSK was very experimental astrologer. As far as I know, he came up with this ayanamsa based on his experiments with astrology only. Nowadays there are some controversies going on with KP ayanamsa. The method he has suggested in his books and the ready-made ayanamsas given for different years do not match. So nowadays there are two different ayansmsas one is called KP Old and other is KP New. It is a question of great debate which one is correct.

 

KP and Lahiri ayanamsas are very close. So most of the times it does not make much difference which ayanamsa you choose.

 

Hope I'll be able to confuse you a little more J

 

Regards,

Punit Pandey

Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote: , "Francois Carriere" <francois.carriere@l...> wrote:Hello everyone,This question of the ayanamsha seems to be crucial in hindu astrology. More important, is the question of knowing how to choose and uses the right ayanamsha and precession rate. What are the criteria needed for the good choice? What were those of K S Krishnamurti? How did he ended choosing them?-- Regards - François

 

 

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

[Guest guest]

'ji' suffix is used for respect in India. I didn't find 'Dear Mr.' conveying the same meaning.Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote:

 

Hello dear Punit,

 

I understand that ayanamsha is a controversy among astrologers: I rather use one with a method, proven it is working and another with another method; although I'd prefer to find the right one!... I met people who reject all the great work of our peers unrespectfully, sustaining that "it just don't work"! Sadly.

 

From what I read on KP, I finally find a method which integrates both Solar and Lunar zodiac and French tropicalists revere Alexandre Volguine who wrote an astonishing book on tropical lunar astrology. Discovering KP through Jean Dethier (although still waiting the older version ~the original one~ of his book by mail) was an enlightment!

 

For the ayanamsha purpose, I would like to know if the way I calculated mine (10 feb 1963) is correct and may I use the same method while studying KP through Dethier work? Also, I believe most software may not be using a "static" rate of precession. May this be a mistake or can I be confident with my software (Astrolog, for instance)?

 

--

Kind Regards - François

P.S. I often see the name of people followed with "ji". What is the meaning of this word?

 

 

-

Punit Pandey

Monday, May 03, 2004 4:30 AM

Re: Re: Ayanamsha

 

Dear François ji,

 

 

Sri KSK was very experimental astrologer. As far as I know, he came up with this ayanamsa based on his experiments with astrology only. Nowadays there are some controversies going on with KP ayanamsa. The method he has suggested in his books and the ready-made ayanamsas given for different years do not match. So nowadays there are two different ayansmsas one is called KP Old and other is KP New. It is a question of great debate which one is correct.

 

KP and Lahiri ayanamsas are very close. So most of the times it does not make much difference which ayanamsa you choose.

 

Hope I'll be able to confuse you a little more J

 

Regards,

Punit Pandey

Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote: , "Francois Carriere" <francois.carriere@l...> wrote:Hello everyone,This question of the ayanamsha seems to be crucial in hindu astrology. More important, is the question of knowing how to choose and uses the right ayanamsha and precession rate. What are the criteria needed for the good choice? What were those of K S Krishnamurti? How did he ended choosing them?-- Regards - François

 

 

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

[Guest guest]

What is the full name of Mr. Neelkanta? Becuase I have one very good book in photostat format, but nowhere I found the name of author.Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote:

 

Hello dear Punit,

 

I understand that ayanamsha is a controversy among astrologers: I rather use one with a method, proven it is working and another with another method; although I'd prefer to find the right one!... I met people who reject all the great work of our peers unrespectfully, sustaining that "it just don't work"! Sadly.

 

From what I read on KP, I finally find a method which integrates both Solar and Lunar zodiac and French tropicalists revere Alexandre Volguine who wrote an astonishing book on tropical lunar astrology. Discovering KP through Jean Dethier (although still waiting the older version ~the original one~ of his book by mail) was an enlightment!

 

For the ayanamsha purpose, I would like to know if the way I calculated mine (10 feb 1963) is correct and may I use the same method while studying KP through Dethier work? Also, I believe most software may not be using a "static" rate of precession. May this be a mistake or can I be confident with my software (Astrolog, for instance)?

 

--

Kind Regards - François

P.S. I often see the name of people followed with "ji". What is the meaning of this word?

 

 

-

Punit Pandey

Monday, May 03, 2004 4:30 AM

Re: Re: Ayanamsha

 

Dear François ji,

 

 

Sri KSK was very experimental astrologer. As far as I know, he came up with this ayanamsa based on his experiments with astrology only. Nowadays there are some controversies going on with KP ayanamsa. The method he has suggested in his books and the ready-made ayanamsas given for different years do not match. So nowadays there are two different ayansmsas one is called KP Old and other is KP New. It is a question of great debate which one is correct.

 

KP and Lahiri ayanamsas are very close. So most of the times it does not make much difference which ayanamsa you choose.

 

Hope I'll be able to confuse you a little more J

 

Regards,

Punit Pandey

Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote: , "Francois Carriere" <francois.carriere@l...> wrote:Hello everyone,This question of the ayanamsha seems to be crucial in hindu astrology. More important, is the question of knowing how to choose and uses the right ayanamsha and precession rate. What are the criteria needed for the good choice? What were those of K S Krishnamurti? How did he ended choosing them?-- Regards - François

 

 

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

[Guest guest]

Punit Ji,

 

I do not have his full name. The best I have found is that he was a disciple of Tiruvenkatacharya (my source, Christophe Bussien, believes that Krishnamurti was also a student of the latter, but I have a doubt).

 

Anyway -- I should gather my concentration on astrology, since I found a technique that fully integrates zodiacal and lunar constellations! ;-)

 

--

Kind regards - François

 

 

-

Punit Pandey

Tuesday, May 04, 2004 12:59 AM

Re: Re: Ayanamsha

 

What is the full name of Mr. Neelkanta? Becuase I have one very good book in photostat format, but nowhere I found the name of author.Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote:

Hello dear Punit,

 

I understand that ayanamsha is a controversy among astrologers: I rather use one with a method, proven it is working and another with another method; although I'd prefer to find the right one!... I met people who reject all the great work of our peers unrespectfully, sustaining that "it just don't work"! Sadly.

 

From what I read on KP, I finally find a method which integrates both Solar and Lunar zodiac and French tropicalists revere Alexandre Volguine who wrote an astonishing book on tropical lunar astrology. Discovering KP through Jean Dethier (although still waiting the older version ~the original one~ of his book by mail) was an enlightment!

 

For the ayanamsha purpose, I would like to know if the way I calculated mine (10 feb 1963) is correct and may I use the same method while studying KP through Dethier work? Also, I believe most software may not be using a "static" rate of precession. May this be a mistake or can I be confident with my software (Astrolog, for instance)?

 

--

Kind Regards - François

P.S. I often see the name of people followed with "ji". What is the meaning of this word?

 

 

-

Punit Pandey

Monday, May 03, 2004 4:30 AM

Re: Re: Ayanamsha

 

Dear François ji,

 

 

Sri KSK was very experimental astrologer. As far as I know, he came up with this ayanamsa based on his experiments with astrology only. Nowadays there are some controversies going on with KP ayanamsa. The method he has suggested in his books and the ready-made ayanamsas given for different years do not match. So nowadays there are two different ayansmsas one is called KP Old and other is KP New. It is a question of great debate which one is correct.

 

KP and Lahiri ayanamsas are very close. So most of the times it does not make much difference which ayanamsa you choose.

 

Hope I'll be able to confuse you a little more J

 

Regards,

Punit Pandey

Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote: , "Francois Carriere" <francois.carriere@l...> wrote:Hello everyone,This question of the ayanamsha seems to be crucial in hindu astrology. More important, is the question of knowing how to choose and uses the right ayanamsha and precession rate. What are the criteria needed for the good choice? What were those of K S Krishnamurti? How did he ended choosing them?-- Regards - François

 

 

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

 

 

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

[Guest guest]

François ji,

As I told you, I have a book in photostat format. The book is excellent but probably the name of the author was not given.The book is not with me right now, so I can not give any details. But as far as I remember the name of book was "Nakshatra Chitamani" (I guess) and the author was Mr. Bhat. Again I don't remember the first name. The book was in two parts.

Thanks & Regards,

Punit Pandey

Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote:

 

Punit Ji,

 

I do not have his full name. The best I have found is that he was a disciple of Tiruvenkatacharya (my source, Christophe Bussien, believes that Krishnamurti was also a student of the latter, but I have a doubt).

 

Anyway -- I should gather my concentration on astrology, since I found a technique that fully integrates zodiacal and lunar constellations! ;-)

 

--

Kind regards - François

 

 

-

Punit Pandey

Tuesday, May 04, 2004 12:59 AM

Re: Re: Ayanamsha

 

What is the full name of Mr. Neelkanta? Becuase I have one very good book in photostat format, but nowhere I found the name of author.Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote:

Hello dear Punit,

 

I understand that ayanamsha is a controversy among astrologers: I rather use one with a method, proven it is working and another with another method; although I'd prefer to find the right one!... I met people who reject all the great work of our peers unrespectfully, sustaining that "it just don't work"! Sadly.

 

From what I read on KP, I finally find a method which integrates both Solar and Lunar zodiac and French tropicalists revere Alexandre Volguine who wrote an astonishing book on tropical lunar astrology. Discovering KP through Jean Dethier (although still waiting the older version ~the original one~ of his book by mail) was an enlightment!

 

For the ayanamsha purpose, I would like to know if the way I calculated mine (10 feb 1963) is correct and may I use the same method while studying KP through Dethier work? Also, I believe most software may not be using a "static" rate of precession. May this be a mistake or can I be confident with my software (Astrolog, for instance)?

 

--

Kind Regards - François

P.S. I often see the name of people followed with "ji". What is the meaning of this word?

 

 

-

Punit Pandey

Monday, May 03, 2004 4:30 AM

Re: Re: Ayanamsha

 

Dear François ji,

 

 

Sri KSK was very experimental astrologer. As far as I know, he came up with this ayanamsa based on his experiments with astrology only. Nowadays there are some controversies going on with KP ayanamsa. The method he has suggested in his books and the ready-made ayanamsas given for different years do not match. So nowadays there are two different ayansmsas one is called KP Old and other is KP New. It is a question of great debate which one is correct.

 

KP and Lahiri ayanamsas are very close. So most of the times it does not make much difference which ayanamsa you choose.

 

Hope I'll be able to confuse you a little more J

 

Regards,

Punit Pandey

Francois Carriere <francois.carriere wrote: , "Francois Carriere" <francois.carriere@l...> wrote:Hello everyone,This question of the ayanamsha seems to be crucial in hindu astrology. More important, is the question of knowing how to choose and uses the right ayanamsha and precession rate. What are the criteria needed for the good choice? What were those of K S Krishnamurti? How did he ended choosing them?-- Regards - François

 

 

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

 

 

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at HotJobs

[Guest guest]

At 10:21 PM 5/6/04 -0000, Francois wrote:

>

>Hello Therese, and group ;-)

>

>If you use the Krishnamurti ayanamsha, then you use one that was 0°

>january 1, 291 and that has a fixed rate of precession of 50.2388475 "

>per year (today, may 6, 2004, it is 23°54'36.63 " ). However, other

>ayanamsha begin on other dates and have different precession rates. A

>beginner just goes nuts not knowing which one to use!...

 

The most popular ayanamsa in India today is the Lahiri ayanamsa, which has

a base date of 285, very close to Krishnamurti. When you work with the

varga charts, such as the navamsa, it's easier to see which ayanamsa gives

the best results. It's difficult to tell with only the natal chart because

Fagan-Allen, Lahiri and Krishnamaurti all fall within a degree of each

other. Some of us have changed from Lahiri to Krishnamurti because we've

found that Krsihnamurti gives more accurate timing. Yes, it is difficult

for a beginner!

 

If you like the writings of Cyril Fagan and Donald Bradley, try the Fagan

ayanamsa. If you plan to study the varga chart such as the navamsa, go with

the Lahiri or Krishnamurti ayanamsa.

 

>Actually I am tempted to use an ayanamsha that fixes Spica at 0°

>Libra for all charts, since a paper on Swiss Ephemeris website tells

>us that ancient chart worked better with Spica at 0°.

 

This is as good a choice as any. This is basically the Lahiri ayanamsa.

There might be a one minute difference for certain years.

 

>See: <http://www.astro.com/swisseph/swisseph.htm#_Toc6813684>

 

I'll check out that link.

 

>If you use Krishnamurti Paddhati and ayanamsha, do you find the

>system efficient with subs?

 

I don't use Krishanmurti Paddhati except that for transits and dasas, I

consider the nakshatra lord of the planet receiving the transit or whose

dasa or bhukti period is running. For example if Jupiter is transiting the

Moon and the Moon is in Rahu's nakshatra, then I look to Rahu for the

results of the transit.

 

>If it does not work properly, is there a way to find the " right "

>ayanamsha and precession rate, or do we have to accept to work with

>an approximate sidereal zodiac?

 

I've been working on finding the " right " ayanamsa in two ways:

(1) I've done a lot of work with the navamsa chart with groups of charts

such as gay charts and nurses and other professions. The relevant navamsa

planets will be in certain navamsa signs. Krishnamurti came out the best in

these studies. Lahiri is close also.

 

(2) Using ingress charts for events, especially earthquakes, as I see it,

the Krishnamurti ayanamsa again is coming out on top when the quake event

chart is compared to the monthly solar ingress chart. There are charts and

text files on these charts in he sidereal files section (in the " Earthquake

Charts " folder):

 

 

 

My own belief is that we're going to find only one ayanamsa that checks out

in a variety of different ways. I don't believe they are all going to work

equally well. I am working on research files for my web site, but they will

take a while. I have used all three ayanamsas: F-B, Lahiri and Krishnamurti

over many years. So far I find the K ayanamsa works the best.

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

, Therese Hamilton

<eastwest@s...> wrote:

 

[...]

 

Therese,

 

Have you worked with the sassanian ayanamsha (Revati at 29°49Pisces

on march 18, 564, according to swiss ephemeris paper)?

 

On the other hand, did anyone tried this ayanamsha?

 

--

François

[Guest guest]

At 01:38 AM 5/11/04 -0000, Francois wrote:

>

>Therese,

>

>Have you worked with the sassanian ayanamsha (Revati at 29°49Pisces

>on march 18, 564, according to swiss ephemeris paper)?

 

I've researched that ayanamsa. It seems to be an accident which happened at

a time when there was confusion about the zodiacs, and the sidereal zodiac

got 'stuck' at that time in history. I don't believe it has any validity.

That ayanamsa pops up in some of the early Arabic texts.

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

, Therese Hamilton

<eastwest@s...> wrote:

 

[...On Sassanian reform...]

 

> I've researched that ayanamsa. It seems to be an accident which

happened at

> a time when there was confusion about the zodiacs, and the sidereal

zodiac

> got 'stuck' at that time in history. I don't believe it has any

validity.

> That ayanamsa pops up in some of the early Arabic texts.

 

However, the Indian astrologers seem to have use a definition of the

zodiac with Revati. Furthermore, it appears that Greeks, Arabs and

Indian people aggreed on this definition. Where they all wrong?

 

--

Kind regards - François

[Guest guest]

At 10:40 AM 5/11/04 -0000, Francois wrote:

 

>However, the Indian astrologers seem to have use a definition of the

>zodiac with Revati. Furthermore, it appears that Greeks, Arabs and

>Indian people aggreed on this definition. Where they all wrong?

 

Quite possibly. What time period are we talking about?

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

Francois Carriere wrote:

 

>

> However, the Indian astrologers seem to have use a definition of the

> zodiac with Revati. Furthermore, it appears that Greeks, Arabs and

> Indian people aggreed on this definition. Where they all wrong?

 

Hi Francois and Therese,

 

Like you, I've had questions over the years regarding the early use of

the star Zeta Piscium or Revati as a primary fiducial.

 

There is a very good book on the question of the ayanamsa, including

information regarding the use of Revati by Robert Powell and Peter

Treadgold called " The Sidereal Zodiac " . This booklet is still available

through Amazon.com and is published by the AFA.

 

The authors state on page 17: " A central figure in the reformation that

occurred in Indian astronomy is Aryabata, who was born in AD 476, and is

based on the computation of large numbers of planetary revolutions of

the zodiac over long periods of time (the yuga system). The reform in

Indian astronomy that occurred at this time

, in the sixth century AD, resulted in the definition of the Indian

zodiac as a division of the zodiacal belt into twelve 30 degree signs,

with the starting point of the sign of Aries taken to be the fixed star

that was at that time (the reformation) coinciding with the location of

the vernal point. The fixed star nearest to the vernal point, at the

time the reform was finalized, was Zeta Piscium (know in India as

Revati). Hence the Indian zodiac defined in the sixth century AD is

defined so that it's zero point (0 Aries) is located 10 minutes to the

east of the star Revati (or according to some authorities, 0 Aries

coincides with Revati). "

 

The authors continue on page 18: " Raymond Mercier's study of the

medieval conception of precession leads to the conclusion that 0 Aries

of the Indian zodiac was fixed in the years AD 562/3, when the vernal

point lay 10 minutes east of Zeta Piscium. He shows moreover, that this

location of the zero point defined by Indian astronomers was also

adopted by the Islamic astronomer al-Khwarizmi (first half of the ninth

century) in the Khwarizmian tables, and by the Jewish astronomers who

prepared the Toledan tables (eleventh century). Thus the reform in

Indian astronomy, which led to the definition zodiac with zero point 0

Aries, coinciding with the vernal of AD 562/3 , also influenced Islamic

and Jewish astronomers. "

 

Continuing on page 19: " Although the Indian zodiac was originally

defined so that its zero point (0 Aries) more or less coincided with the

star Revati, this definition has generally not been adhered to over the

succeeding centuries. Thus , the authors of the panchangas--modern

Indian popular calendars--almost invariably use Spica, and not Revati,

as prime fiducial star. ......Taking Spica to be at 30 Virgo (0 Libra),

the modern Indian zodiac is considerably closer to the Babylonian zodiac

than it's forerunner--the original Indian zodiac, defined in the sixth

century AD, with Revati as prime fiducial. "

 

 

I believe BV Raman used Revati, rather than Chitra, for the measurement

of his ayanamsa, but I would have to some research on this to be

certain.

 

 

Best,

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

At 11:43 AM 5/11/04 -0700, Steve wrote:

 

Steve, thanks so much for this reference and the quotes. I have the book on

my Amazon.com list, as soon as I add up enough books for $25 in free

shipping. Yes, I believe that Raman used the Revati ayanamsa or something

close to it. The Yukteswar ayanamsa is the same. Your quotes are what I

meant when I said the Reveti zodiac got stuck at a certain time in history.

 

Therese

 

>Hi Francois and Therese,

>

>Like you, I've had questions over the years regarding the early use of

>the star Zeta Piscium or Revati as a primary fiducial.

>

>There is a very good book on the question of the ayanamsa, including

>information regarding the use of Revati by Robert Powell and Peter

>Treadgold called " The Sidereal Zodiac " . This booklet is still available

>through Amazon.com and is published by the AFA...

>

[Guest guest]

Hello Therese,

 

> At 10:40 AM 5/11/04 -0000, Francois wrote:

>

> >However, the Indian astrologers seem to have use a definition of the

> >zodiac with Revati. Furthermore, it appears that Greeks, Arabs and

> >Indian people aggreed on this definition. Where they all wrong?

>

> Quite possibly. What time period are we talking about?

 

I don't have any date in mind. I am rather refering to the swiss ephemeris

paper link. What I do understand it's that there has been at least two

definition of the zodiac in India: one with Revati, one with Chitra. I see

however that author differs on the date both tropical and sidereal zodiacs

were identical.

 

I wonder if the historical texts of jyotish tells us something about this

matter, and what could it be!?

 

--

François

[Guest guest]

, Steven Stuckey

<shastrakara@s...> wrote:

 

Hello Steve,

 

Thank you for your quotes: I feel comforted in some way. However, did

you make a typo or the authors states 562 as the fiducial year:

Astrolog or Mercier come to 564 for Zeta Piscium at 29°49'Pisces...

 

Do the authors tell why Revati was not used later to the reform?

 

Also does the book tells which precession rates was used? The modern

rarte is around 50 " which I believe to be correct but people like

Yukteswar used 54 " or so.

 

--

Kind regards - François

 

 

>

>

> Francois Carriere wrote:

>

> >

> > However, the Indian astrologers seem to have use a definition of

the

> > zodiac with Revati. Furthermore, it appears that Greeks, Arabs and

> > Indian people aggreed on this definition. Where they all wrong?

>

> Hi Francois and Therese,

>

> Like you, I've had questions over the years regarding the early use

of

> the star Zeta Piscium or Revati as a primary fiducial.

>

> There is a very good book on the question of the ayanamsa, including

> information regarding the use of Revati by Robert Powell and Peter

> Treadgold called " The Sidereal Zodiac " . This booklet is still

available

> through Amazon.com and is published by the AFA.

>

> The authors state on page 17: " A central figure in the reformation

that

> occurred in Indian astronomy is Aryabata, who was born in AD 476,

and is

> based on the computation of large numbers of planetary revolutions

of

> the zodiac over long periods of time (the yuga system). The reform

in

> Indian astronomy that occurred at this time

> , in the sixth century AD, resulted in the definition of the Indian

> zodiac as a division of the zodiacal belt into twelve 30 degree

signs,

> with the starting point of the sign of Aries taken to be the fixed

star

> that was at that time (the reformation) coinciding with the

location of

> the vernal point. The fixed star nearest to the vernal point, at

the

> time the reform was finalized, was Zeta Piscium (know in India as

> Revati). Hence the Indian zodiac defined in the sixth century AD is

> defined so that it's zero point (0 Aries) is located 10 minutes to

the

> east of the star Revati (or according to some authorities, 0 Aries

> coincides with Revati). "

>

> The authors continue on page 18: " Raymond Mercier's study of the

> medieval conception of precession leads to the conclusion that 0

Aries

> of the Indian zodiac was fixed in the years AD 562/3, when the

vernal

> point lay 10 minutes east of Zeta Piscium. He shows moreover, that

this

> location of the zero point defined by Indian astronomers was also

> adopted by the Islamic astronomer al-Khwarizmi (first half of the

ninth

> century) in the Khwarizmian tables, and by the Jewish astronomers

who

> prepared the Toledan tables (eleventh century). Thus the reform in

> Indian astronomy, which led to the definition zodiac with zero

point 0

> Aries, coinciding with the vernal of AD 562/3 , also influenced

Islamic

> and Jewish astronomers. "

>

> Continuing on page 19: " Although the Indian zodiac was originally

> defined so that its zero point (0 Aries) more or less coincided

with the

> star Revati, this definition has generally not been adhered to over

the

> succeeding centuries. Thus , the authors of the panchangas--modern

> Indian popular calendars--almost invariably use Spica, and not

Revati,

> as prime fiducial star. ......Taking Spica to be at 30 Virgo (0

Libra),

> the modern Indian zodiac is considerably closer to the Babylonian

zodiac

> than it's forerunner--the original Indian zodiac, defined in the

sixth

> century AD, with Revati as prime fiducial. "

>

>

> I believe BV Raman used Revati, rather than Chitra, for the

measurement

> of his ayanamsa, but I would have to some research on this to be

> certain.

>

>

> Best,

>

> Steve

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Francois Carriere wrote:

 

>

> Thank you for your quotes: I feel comforted in some way. However, did

> you make a typo or the authors states 562 as the fiducial year:

> Astrolog or Mercier come to 564 for Zeta Piscium at 29°49'Pisces...

 

Hi Francois,

 

Yes it is 562/563, which basically works out to the same thing, since

the author is quoting 29* 50' for this year, allowing for approx 51'' of

arc per year, it would be 29* 49' a year later i.e 564

 

>

>

> Do the authors tell why Revati was not used later to the reform?

 

No explanation on this......

 

 

>

>

> Also does the book tells which precession rates was used? The modern

> rarte is around 50 " which I believe to be correct but people like

> Yukteswar used 54 " or so.

 

The book, which is more of a phamphlet, does not address the questions

of precessional rate. I think the modern rate is closer to 51.25 if

memory serves me well.

 

Fagan mentions that the Greeks around 300 AD used a precessional rate of

about 45'' per year or about 1* in 80 years.

 

Aryabhata developed a theory that the vernal equinox was at 0 Aries on

March 21, 499 AD and moved at 54'' of arc per year. However he also

thought that the vernal point swung 27 degrees either side of this 0

point, or something like a pendulum.

If the 0 point was 499 AD, and moving at 54'' of arc per year, it would

take 1800 years to travel 27 degrees to the date 1302 BC. Moving back

from 27 degrees another 1800 years would bring you to 3102 BC or the

pervious 0 date.

Fagan mentions this in his " Astrological Origins " as a possible reason

why the Hindu's have fixed this date (3102 BC) as the commencement of

the Kali Yuga.

 

 

Best,

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Steve,

 

there are three ayanamsha I believe to be good, all to be found on

Swiss Ephemeris webiste.

 

(1) Fagan-Bradley

 

(2) Lahiri

 

(3) Sanssanian

 

Personally, I am studying the sassanian with the precessional rate

Astrolog give us (around 50 " a year).

 

Which Ayanamsha do you use and how do you manage to " proof " it is the

right one? I understand it is a no end issue, but experienced

astrologers should help younger ones ;-)

 

--

François

[Guest guest]

>

>

>>

>>

>> Francois wrote:

>>

>> Which Ayanamsha do you use and how do you manage to " proof " it is

>> the

>> right one? I understand it is a no end issue, but experienced

>> astrologers should help younger ones ;-)

>

>

> Hi Francois,

>

> Assuming " experienced " astrologers are older and have something of

> value to 'help' younger ones with....:>))

>

> I use the Fagan ayanamsa....but have dabbled also with Lahiri,

> Yukteswar, Krishnamurthi, Raman etc etc.etc etc

>

> It may be a " no end " issue as you say, since even if someone comes up

> with substantial 'proof' for a particular ayanamsa, it is doubtful

> that persons having good results with other ayanamsa's would be

> willing to adopt it.

>

> I had heard a rumor some years ago that BV Raman later adopted the

> Lahiri ayanamsa. I personally asked Gayatri Devi (Raman's daughter) if

> this was true.

> Her absolute denial of this, in conjunction with the fact that she

> uses her father's ayanamsa, was more than enough to convince me that

> this was of course an absurd question for me to even ask. In

> retrospect, think about all the books and correct predictions that

> would have to be re-written--yeh, right!

> It turns out that Mr Lahiri spoke personally to Mr Raman and admitted

> that Raman's ayanamsa was in fact the correct one.

>

> Myself and other astrologers I know have decided it's not a good idea

> to try to prove the ayanamsa with the dasa system.

> The varga charts and ingress charts, as Therese has already suggested,

> offer better possibilities--but I have been able to 'prove' things

> with various ayanamsa's here also.

>

> One of the important things I've noticed, after 30 years of looking at

> charts, and interacting with many of the 'owners' of those charts, is

> that planets close to the cusps of different signs may offer a clue,

> although admittedly a subjective one, as to the direction of the

> ayanamsa.

> My experience has almost always led me to the 'earlier' sign--for

> instance, choosing Lahiri over Raman, Yukteswar or others that are

> later---and Fagan over Lahiri.

> This is especially noticeable (at least by me) and is based on

> experience of what qualities are exibited by planets in various signs.

>

> There are some big differences in certain signs, especially the

> junction of water/fire and air/water signs.

>

> I mainly have used the personal planets here: Sun, Moon, Mercury,

> Venus and Mars.

> Moon can't always qualify because of the parallax factor however.

>

> I think it's important to adopt one ayanamsa, after taking your best

> shot, and stick with that. It's then that you may begin to notice

> things at variance with your choice and may eventually move you

> gradually in one direction or the other.

>

> Best,

>

> Steve

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, Steven Stuckey

<shastrakara@s...> wrote:

 

> My experience has almost always led me to the 'earlier' sign--for

instance, choosing Lahiri over Raman, Yukteswar or others that are

later---and Fagan over Lahiri. This is especially noticeable (at

least by me) and is based on experience of what qualities are

exibited by planets in various signs.

 

Hello Steve,

 

This is really the best way to evaluate the ayanamsha, since the

varga are rather used to evaluate the strength of a planet (a planet

which is in its fall being weakened - anyway from what I understand

of jyotish).

 

However, there is always the question of the rate of precession: did

you used the rate each author (Raman, Lahiri, Fagan, etc.) promote

for their ayanamsha? Or can we be confident with the rate of

precession our softwares give us? I mainly use a revised version of

Astrolog and another french sotware and I get almost the same results.

 

--

Best regards - François

[Guest guest]

Francois Carriere wrote:

 

>

> This is really the best way to evaluate the ayanamsha, since the

> varga are rather used to evaluate the strength of a planet (a planet

> which is in its fall being weakened - anyway from what I understand

> of jyotish).

 

 

Hi Francois,

 

My opinion is that Varga can be used to help verify ayanamsa. There is

more than just planetary strength involved.

Because planets can easily change signs and therefore houses,depending

upon ayanamsa, in the various harmonics, this could become a valuable

tool for ayanamsa rectification.

There are some people out there (you might find one at

www.modernVedic Astrology.com :>))) also considering the harmonic degrees

for transit timing.

 

>

>

> However, there is always the question of the rate of precession: did

> you used the rate each author (Raman, Lahiri, Fagan, etc.) promote

> for their ayanamsha? Or can we be confident with the rate of

> precession our softwares give us? I mainly use a revised version of

> Astrolog and another french sotware and I get almost the same results.

 

 

This is something I've always wanted to check out and never have...I

think Solar Fire takes one standard precessional rate for all

ayanamsa's, but I could be wrong. I'll have to check this on Jyotish

software--I've made an assumption (perhaps erroneously) that each

ayanamsa is in keeping with the individual precession rate.

 

 

Best,

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Steven...

 

You raise a very good point... Software Programs are not without issues. I find

errors utilizing Solar Fire which show up as incorrect calculated data. For

example, aspects between planets on the wheel could be exact to the minute but

the graph housing all of the aspects will show minutes and sometimes degrees of

seperation.

 

I would have confidence utilizing NOVA for judging the veracity of ayanasmas

within any software program you might use...

 

Reliable software is critical for the serious researcher.

 

Please share the results of your investigation.

 

Juan

 

 

Steven Stuckey <shastrakara wrote:

 

This is something I've always wanted to check out and never have...I

think Solar Fire takes one standard precessional rate for all

ayanamsa's, but I could be wrong. I'll have to check this on Jyotish

software--I've made an assumption (perhaps erroneously) that each

ayanamsa is in keeping with the individual precession rate.

 

 

Best,

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Juan Oliver wrote:

 

>

> You raise a very good point... Software Programs are not without

> issues. I find errors utilizing Solar Fire which show up as incorrect

> calculated data.

 

Hi Juan,

 

Thanks for the input, I've never bothered to check the table printout vs

the chart--I'll have to watch that from now on.

 

I decided to check the ayanamsa question a bit.

Solar Fire assumes a fixed rate of precession, regardless of ayanamsa.

This does not appear to be stated anywhere (I have checked both the

manuel and software " Help " .

 

This is apparent by looking at the " User Defined " ayanamsa value in the

options section. An epoch date of Jan 1, 1900 is assumed but there is

no allowance made to set your own precessional rate.

If the value of various ayanamsa's is correct to the epoch date (Jan 1,

1900) using the stated precessional rate set down for each ayanamsa by

their respective authors, then their would be very minimal error for

most of the charts one would calculate.

 

By calculating the vernal equinox's at 1000 years apart, the average

rate per year appears to be about 50.3 " of arc per year for Solar Fire.

 

Das Goravani and Sri Jyoti Star software both allow not only a setting

of an epoch date, but one can also set the precessional rate for a user

defined ayanamsa.

In addition, both programs have already pre-set the correct precession

value for each individual ayanamsa (with very slight variations between

the two).

 

These are: Lahiri @ 50.27 " , Raman @ 50.34 " , Fagan @ 50.25 " ,

Krishnamurthi @ 50.2388475 " , Yukteswar @ 54 " , and JN Basin @

50.3388775 "

 

 

Best,

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

At 11:09 AM 5/15/04 -0700, Steve wrote:

>

>Thanks for the input, I've never bothered to check the table printout vs

>the chart--I'll have to watch that from now on.

>

>I decided to check the ayanamsa question a bit.

>Solar Fire assumes a fixed rate of precession, regardless of ayanamsa.

>This does not appear to be stated anywhere (I have checked both the

>manuel and software " Help " (...)

 

Steve, thanks for the information in your post. Very helpful! Do you know

anything about the ayanamsa and Pararshara's Light?

 

Therese