Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Shri Kaulji, You said Fine, but Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya says that the janma-kundali of Bhagwan Ram also was not given by Valmiki himself, since, according to him, both the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda in the VR are a much later addition by somebody else! He is more comfortabole with the janma-kundali of Bhgwan Ram in the Adyatma Ramayana, which is supposed to have been given by Krishna Dwaipayana Vedavyasa. Did I say anywhere that the contents of the Balakanda are not authentic? Did I say that they are wrong? I said that Lord Rama has been presented in the Balakanda as God and don't you think that is correct. Anybody with common sense will wonder why is it that in the Balakanda and Uttara kanda Lord Rama had been shown as God and in the middle five kandas He has been shown as man, after reading the whole of the Ramayana. I wonder why you did not notice that or did you not read the entire Ramayana yourself?. Any intelligent person will notice that and Sunil Bhattacharya is not required to tell that. Do you understand that Shri Kaul? It could even be that the sage Valmiki wrote the middle five kandas first and then he thought it fit to add the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda later and there he presented him as God as he realised what a divine person Lord Rama was. Treating Lord Rama as God the Divya-varsha has been interpreted in the Siddhantic way by multiplying it by 360. The year was not taken as the Solar year as it should have been. I explained that in earlier mails. I am sure except you every intelligent person could understand that whoever read my mail.I hope it will be understood by you now once for all and for Lord Rama's sake you will not repeat your false statement as is your habit. Secondly why are you telling an untruth by saying that I am more comfortable with the janma kundali of Lord Ram in Adhyaqtma Ramayana. Where did I say that? My stand has always been that Adhyatma Ramayana, which presents Lord Rama as God corroborates what is said in the Valmiki Ramayana, more so in the Balakanda, where also Lord Rama is presented as God. I have already shown that Lord Rama was born in the Shukla Navami of the Chaitra month and the statement of the Balakanda on that is correct. For the Navami to occur in Punarvasu the Sun will have to be around 27 degree in the Mina Rashi and this means that the next Purnima had occurred when the Sun came to around 3 degrees of the Mesha. For the Purnima to occur the Moon will have to 180 degrees away from the Sun ie the Moon would have been at the longitude of around 183 degrees in the Chitra nakshatra. Thus the purnimanta Month was Chaitra and it ended with this purnima. This definitely shows that Lord Rama was born in the Chaitra month and the Hindus are observing the Ram Navami correctly. If you are not aware let me tell you that the seasonal months go on changing. Even if it was the seasonal Madhu month at that time it will always not coincide with the Chaitra month so your bringing up the issue of the seasonal month has no sense at all. I explained it in detail so that your misconception is removed and you should accept it unless you have some ulterior reasons. You have addressed the mail to Shri Goyelji but I do not know if Goyelji is a member of this forum. If he is he can still express his views.  Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya S.K.Bhattacjharjya --- On Sun, 10/18/09, Krishen <jyotirved wrote: Krishen <jyotirved [ind-Arch] Re: Dating of Ramayana Period indiaarchaeology Sunday, October 18, 2009, 10:24 PM  --- AKKaul@@ wrote: Shri Gopal Krishna Geolji, Gopal Krishna ki jai! < 1.Valmiki Ramayan Does not say Rama was born in Madhu Masa.> Fine, but Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya says that the janma-kundali of Bhagwan Ram also was not given by Valmiki himself, since, according to him, both the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda in the VR are a much later addition by somebody else! He is more comfortabole with the janma-kundali of Bhgwan Ram in the Adyatma Ramayana, which is supposed to have been given by Krishna Dwaipayana Vedavyasa. And the Adyatma Ramayana 1/3/14 has said categorically that Bhagwan Ram was born in Madhu-masa! In any case, even if we forget Madhumasa for the moment, VR 1/13/1 says, " The vernal season (i.e. Vasanta Ritu) having appeared again and the powerful monarch Dasharatha called on Vasishtha with a view to commencing the horse sacrifice for the sake of a progeny " . Then in 1/14/1 the same VR says, " The aforementioned horse having returned on the completion of a twelve-month after its release, the horse sacrifice commenced on the northern bank of the Sarayu " Thus the " yajnya " was completed in Vasanta Ritu itelf! In 1/18/8, the same VR has said, " In the meantime six seasons (each consisting of two months) rolled away after the scrifice was over, then on the ninth lunar day of Chaitra, the twelfth month after the conclusion of the sacrifice, when the asterism Punarvasu (presided over by Aditi) was in the ascendant... .Shri Ram was born " . It thus leaves no doubut in anybody's mind that Bhagwan Ram had incarnated in the first month of Vasanta Ritu, that was known as Chaitra as per the VR and Madhu as per the Adyatma Ramayana and Goswami Tulsidas and the Vedanga Jyotisha and the Puranas etc.! The Vedanga Jyotisha, Rik-Jyotisha fifth and Yajur-jyotisha sixth mantra---say that when the Sun and the Moon come together in Danishtha, it is the month of Magha as well as Tapah.... If Magha = Tapah, Phalguna is equal to Tapasya and Chaitra is equal to Madhu in that order! So Bhagwan Ram was born in Madhu-cum-Chaitra, which is a so called sayana phenomenon! It also appears you have not gone through BVB6.doc at all, though it has been posted several times in several forums, the latest one being a few days back under " no subject " heading! Kindly do peruse it and you will see that the Puranas also talk of Madhava = Vaishakha = sun in Mesha which means Madhu is equal to Chaitra = sun in Mina! I have already quoted Vedic mantras as saying " madhuschai madhavashchai vasantikav ritoo " i.e. Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu! If you take Lahiri Ephemeris (the bible of nirayanawalas! ) you will see that also talking of Madhu and Vedic Chaitra in the same breath! Thus whicdhever way you look at it, the sun could neither be in so called Sayana Mesha nor in so called nirayana (or even Sayana) Mina at the time of birth of Bhagwan Ram, since that is an asronomically impossible combination! Gopal Krishna Ki Jai! A K Kaul Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com, GKGoel@@ wrote: > > Dear Kaul Sahib apki jai. > 1.Valmiki Ramayan Does not say Rama was born in > Madhu Masa. > 2.Rama was born in the month of Chaitra . This is > Lunar month linked with star chitra. > 3.Kindly refer Taittiriya Samhita 7.4.8 = > 'Chaitra full moon is the mouth of the Sambatsar' > 4.Whole India is following SIDREAL SAMVATSAR > for last 4000 years continuously . On this basis. > we now have vikram samvatsar of 2066. > 5.Six ritu only means -' after one solar year'. > 6.Ramayana does not say it was Sukla paksha, > it is only inference. > Regards, > > > G.K.GOEL > Ph: 09350311433 > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR > NEW DELHI-110 076 > INDIA > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > jyotirved jyotirved@ > > Cc: hinducalendar; indian_astrology_ group_daily_ digest@grou ps.com; subash razdan subashrazdan@ ; indiaarchaeology; Vedic AstrologyForum > Thu, 15 October, 2009 9:32:58 PM > [ind. & West. Astrology] [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: Dating of Ramayana Period > > > Dear Shri > Gopal Krishna Goel-ji, > Gopal > Krishna ki jai! > In your > original post of Oct 8 you have said: > " 1. > There may be some reasons to believe, but sloka does not say that Rama > was born in dark or bright half of the lunar month. > 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was referred in > the text. In that case Sun can be either in Pisces or > Aries " .†> Since you > are a scholar of the Valmiki Ramayana, Ramacharitamanasa and Adyatma Ramayana, > you must appreciate that there are a few astronomical impossibilities in this > statement: > 1. The > Valmiki Ramayana 1/18/8 has said > tato yajnye > sampate tu ritoonam shat samatyayuh tatashchai dwadashe maase chaitre navamike > tithav > The Gita > Press translation says, “In the meantime six seasons (each consisting of > two months) rolled away after the sacrifice was over. Then on the ninth > lunar day (of the bright fortnight) of Chaitra, the twelfth month after the > conclusion of the sacrifice, .... " > Since twelve > months had elapsed after the sacrifice was over, which was in Vasanta Ritiu, it > was therefore the first month of Vasanta Ritu, which is known as Madhu as per > the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha etc., when Bhagwan Ram incarnated. It > is the same month that is also known as Chaitra in the VJ. Though in the VR no > mention has been made of " Madhu " but only Chaitra, however, the > Adyatma Ramayana, 1/3/14 has said categorically: > 2. Madhumase > site pakshye navamyam karkate shubhe Punarvasu rikshya sahite uchhasthe graha > panchake > Which means, > “In the month of Madhu, in shukla pakshya, navmi tithi, karkata (lagna), > Punarvasu nakshatra and five planets either exalted or in their own > rashisâ€. > Similarly, > Goswami Tulsidas is very sure when he says > 3. Navmi > tithi madhumasa puneeta sukal pachha abhijta haripreeta > i.e. > “It was the holy Madhumasa, navmi tithi, shkula pakshya and abhijit, which > is dear to Godâ€. > It is thus > clear that it was the first month of Vasanta Ritu, the month of > Madhu-cum-Chaitra definitely. It was also a Shukla paksha navmi. > 4. The > Yajurveda says, “madhuschai madhavaschai vasantikav ritoo†i.e. > Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu. > Now if it > was Madhumasa, and if, against all the prevailing logic and reasons, we presume > that Mesha etc. rashis did exist in India in about 7300 BCE, then Madhumasa and > Sun in Mina---and not in Mesha----can exist simultaneously only if the sun is > in the so called sayana Mina Rashi! > 5. If you > presume that it is a so called nirayana rashi, which “Vedic > astrologers†call euphemistically sidereal rashis, then we have to take > into account the Ayanamsha which is without any rhyme or reason linked to > precession by these very “Vedic astrologersâ€. > “almighty†Lahiri Ayanamsha as on December 4, 7323 BCE, the date of > birth of Bhagwan Ram as per Dr. Vartak, was, plus 103°-41’. It means the > “almighty†Lahiri sun would have to be somewhere in Karkata, even > if we presume that it was Madhumasa on December 4, 7323 BCE, which it was not > actually, as we shall see shortly! > Thus linking > of Madhumasa-cum- Chaitra to a so called nirayana Mina or Mesha rashi as back as > 7323 BCE is in itself a self-defeating premise even if we ignore other anachronisms > like Punarvasu nakshatra cum shukla paksha navmi of Madhumasa, with the moon in > Karkata and the sun in Mina/Mesha etc.! > You have > also said, “DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail is not > question his findingsâ€. > 6. We must > come out of the habit of taking “findings†of “authorities†> at their face value and not questioning their veracity! It is our blind faith > in Maya the mlechha’s dictum that the Surya Sidhanta was a “revelation†> by Surya Bhagwan that has landed the entire Hindu community in such a mess that > we are celebrating all our festivals on wrong days! > If Dr. > Vartak had even an elementary knowledge of astronomy, he should have known that > if it was Madhu-cum-Chaitra masa, it could never have been so called sayana sun > in Mesha but only in Mina. As he also believes in so called sidereal rashis, > he should have known that a nirayana mina rashi in Madhu-cum-Chaitra would take > place only if it was away by about 180 degrees from Sayana Mina Surya i.e. about > 72 multiplied by 180 = 12960 years before 285 AD, when the so called nirayana Lahiri > zodiac and the so called sayana zodiacs are supposed to have coincided! Thus “Vartak > Ram†should have incarnated in about 13000 BCE (and not in 7323 BCE) if > his sun was in Lahiri Mina, since it was only then that it could have coincided > with Madhu-cum-Chaitra! > I may also mention > here that the actual longitudes of the sun, Moon and Rahu etc. on December 4, > 7323 BCE were: > Sayana sun was > actually about 18 degrees in Tula (about 2 degrees in Lahiri Kumbha)----as > against the Valmiki/AR sun either in Mina or Mesha according to you and other > jyotishis! > Sayana Moon was > actually about zero degrees in Makar (about 13 degrees in Lahiri Mesha)---as > against Karkata Rashi as per the VR/AR etc. > Sayana Mean > Rahu about two degrees in Mithuna (about 15 degrees in Lahiri Kanya)---as > against Mina Rashi of jyotishis! > It was > Shukla Paksha Shashthi (and not navmi) besides Sayana Uttarashada and Lahiri > Magha nakshatra on December 4, 7323 BCE, without any corrections for Delta > Time. Even if we presume that the difference in Delta Time was about seven > days in 7000 BCE, things are not going to be much different! > It was > neither the month of Madhu-cum-Chaitra nor Vasanta Ritu! > Thus > everything on December 4, 7323 BCE was contrary to what is supposed to have > been given in the VR/AR and what Dr. Vartak claims to have deciphered on that > date! > All the > above details can be checked from Vishnu.exe program that anybody can download > for free from hinducalendar forum and calculate vara (weekday), tithi, > nakshatra, yoga, karna and the longitudes of the sun, moon and mean Rahu (both > sayana and Lahiri) from 10000 BCE to 12030 AD in a jiffy! > I, > therefore, think that we should close this Rama-janma-kundali prakran, since > there should not be any doubt in anybody’s mind now that the month of > Madhu-cum-Chaitra cannot go with the sun in Mina Rashi, unless it is a so > called sayana Mina Rashi, and “Vedic jyotishis†are not going to > accept it at any cost. We must also bear in mind that there were no Mesha etc. > rashis anywhere in the world in about 3000 BCE at the earliest, so to presume > that someone could have calculated Bhagwan Ram’s birth chart in 7323 BCE > is extremely farfetched, to say the least! It actually presents a very poor > picture of the entire Hindu community, as to how gullible we can be. > THE JYOTISHA > JARGON ABOUT THE PLANETARY POSITION IN THE VALMIKI AND ADYATMA RAMAYANA IS THUS > AN INTERPLATION AND NOTHING BUT AN INTERPOLATION BY SOME GOOD FOR NOTHING > JYOTISHI. > Gopal Krishna > ki jai. > A K Kaul > > , > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a > wrote: > > > > Dear Goelji, > > > > Kindly have a look at the following analysis. > > > > 1) > > Dr. Vartak manually calculated the approximate year of Lord Rama's birth > from precessional data. He has given all these details in his book on the date > of Ramayana. One must give credit to him for that. For those interested in > Ancient Indian History this alone is sufficient as this date is corroborated by > the Surya-vamsha lineage given in the Puranas. > > 2) > > Dr. Vartak also mentioned about a Buddhist text which gives the time-gap > between the year of Lord Rama's going to Sri Lanka and the Parinirvana of > Lord Buddha. Dr. Vartak could not relate that date as he was not aware > that Lord Buddha passed away in 1807 BCE. At that time of writing his > book he was aware of the Max Mullerian date in the 5th century BCE only. > The year 1807 BCE as the date of parinirvana of Lord Buddha was worked > out by Late Kota Venkatachalam from the Puranic data and the work of > Prof. Narahari Achar using Astrological data and my own work from study of the > Dotted Record confirm the date of Kota Venkatachalam. Now it is seen that the > precessional data and the information from the Buudhist text quoted by Dr. > Vartak tallies. > > > > Now coming to the exact day from the astrlogical data I agree that it is a > contentious issue but by applying our mind we can sort out the issue from the > following analysis : > > > > 3) > > Lord Rama was born at noon. So the Sun was in the tenth house or > near the tenth house. If his ascendent is Cancer then the Sun has to be either > in the Arties or closest to the Aries. > > 4) > > Adhyatma Ramayana, a later day text from Purana, says that the Sun was > reaching Aries. It could mean that the Sun was closest to Aries. > > 5) > > Now if the Sun is closest to aries and the Moon is in Cancer then it means > that Lord Rama was born in a Shuklapaksha Navam and not Krishnapaksha Navami. > > 6) > > The Sun actually appears to be around 27 degree in Pisces. This > surprisingly means that Budha (Mercury) is in the nakshatra Revati, which it > rules. Astrologically speaking had the Sun been at the Aries (ie. in Lord > Rama's tenth sign) Kaikeyi would not have succeeded in taking away the kingship > from Lord Rama. It is another matter that he was born to take away Ravana from > the earth. > > 7) > > Five planets were in sva and / or uccha. The Moon and Jupiter in cancer > means the Moon was in Sva-hiouse and Juoiter in the house of exaltation. It is > quite possible that the Mars, Venus and Saturn could have been in sva- houes / > exalted. Now the Saturn's position can be found out if one knows the > approximate date as in the geo-centric model it takes the longest time among > the Grahas to move round the earth. From the precessional data Dr. vartak found > out the approximate year of Lord Rama's birth and that fixes the position of > saturn in Libra. So some unceratinty remains regarding the fast moving planets > Mars and Venus. > > > > Dr. Vartak did all calculations manually and gives full deatils of those > in his book. His is an open book and he found the year of Lord Rama's birth > closest to the date he arrived from the precessional data. But he too goofed up > regarding the position of the Sun. He took the Sun at Aries. The Buddist text > he quotes helps us find the date as 7329 BCE whereas Dr. Vartak arrived at the > date of 7323 BCE. > > > > This does not matter, as for the purpose of fixing the day for festivals > we have all the required data and the historian also cannot complain as they > get a figure, which fits in with all the puranic data The Puranic yuga > calculation also tallies with this date in the Treta yuga. To my mind Dr. > Vartak's date of Lord Rama is the best astronomical date found so far. > The date of Bharata and of Lakhna and Shatrughna is very clear. Bharat was born > in the Pushya makshatra and Mina Lagna, ie. late in the night following Lord > Rama's birth. It is interesting to see that he got the kingship as the Sun was > in his Lagna. Lakshmana and Shatrughna were born in the Ashlesh nakshatra > (ie. the Moon was in the Ashlesha Nakshatra) and at Sunrise (and that > means in in Cancer Lagna). This is for astrological discussions only > and the historians will not be interested in these finer details. > > > > Finally I would ike to submit that though I love astrology and picking up > the pebbles on the sea shore I look at the chrological matters more through the > historical ( that includes puranic records too) and astronomical data than > through astrology alone. > > > > Regards, > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > --- On Thu, 10/8/09, gopal krishna goel g.k.goel@ > wrote: > > > > gopal krishna goel g.k.goel@ > > RE: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: Dating of Ramayana Period > > ancient_indian_ astrology, @ . com, vedic astrology, vedic_research_ institute, indiaarchaeology > > Thursday, October 8, 2009, 5:45 AM > > > Dear BHATTACHARJYA JI, > > DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail is not > > question his findings. In any case this is an unending debate > > which never dies. > > I have some observations: > > Slola 1-18-8and 9 may mean as under: > > After completion of yajna and lapse of 6 seasons,Rama was born > > in 12th month of Chaitra , on ninth tithi(NAVAMIKE) , > > in Punarvasu Nakshatra, five planets were in their own and exalted signs > > (SAVOCHCHASANSTHESH U)-THIS MAY MEAN THAT FIVE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR > > OWN EXALTED SIGNS OR THESE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR OWN AND/OR EXALTED SIGNS- > > cancer LAGNA WITH JUPITER AND Moon (VAKPATAVIDUNA SAH) > > THE following OBSERVATION can be made: > > 1. There may be some reasons to believe , but sloka does not say > that Rama was born > > in dark or bright half of the lunar month. > > 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was refered > in the text. > > In that case Sun can be either inPisces or > Aries. > > 3. What was the method of counting of tithis in those days?Probably > mathematical tithi > > were not in use in those days.Even , diva and ratri karna. > > 4. What type of calander was in use in those days.Panch yugi calender was > in common use > > having 62 months of 30 solar days each. > > 5 If it is assumed that Five planets were in their exalted signs > then Sun ,Jupiter, > > Saturn, Mars and Venus were in exaltation signs.But if sloka > means that five planets were in > > own (sva) and Uchcha signs , Then their is no requirememt that Sun > should also be in Aries, > > In that case Moon , Jupiter,Saturn, Mars and Venus will meet the > requirement of > > of sloka regarding five planets. > > 6. In any case if Sun is in Aries , it is dificult to explain that > moon was in last pada of > > Punarvasu nakshatra in cancer. > > As regard following sloka: > > > > puShye jaataH tu bharato mIna lagne prasanna dhIH | > > saarpe jaatau tu saumitrI kuLIre abhyudite ravau || 1-18-15 > > > > " The meaning are clear - After Sun rise (abhyudite ravau), Bharat was > born in > > pisces Lagna and Pusya Nakchatra.And two sons of Sumitra were born > > in aslesha nakshatra and cancer sign. " > > It may be mentioned that 'Vakpati means Jupiter as well as Pusya > Nakshatra. > > > > This mail is just to seek clarifications on the points which are not clear > to me thus far. > > It would be intresting to know the parametres which Dr. Vartak fed in the > computer to arrive a particular date. At least that date can be relied upon > upto the extent and on the basis of these parameteres. > > Best regards, > > > > > > G. K. Goel > > > > > Connect more, do more and share more with India Mail. Learn more. http://in.overview. mail.. com/ > --- End forwarded message --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 Shri Kaulji, You said Fine, but Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya says that the janma-kundali of Bhagwan Ram also was not given by Valmiki himself, since, according to him, both the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda in the VR are a much later addition by somebody else! He is more comfortabole with the janma-kundali of Bhgwan Ram in the Adyatma Ramayana, which is supposed to have been given by Krishna Dwaipayana Vedavyasa. Did I say anywhere that the contents of the Balakanda are not authentic? Did I say that they are wrong? I said that Lord Rama has been presented in the Balakanda as God and don't you think that is correct. Anybody with common sense will wonder why is it that in the Balakanda and Uttara kanda Lord Rama had been shown as God and in the middle five kandas He has been shown as man, after reading the whole of the Ramayana. I wonder why you did not notice that or did you not read the entire Ramayana yourself?. Any intelligent person will notice that and Sunil Bhattacharya is not required to tell that. Do you understand that Shri Kaul? It could even be that the sage Valmiki wrote the middle five kandas first and then he thought it fit to add the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda later and there he presented him as God as he realised what a divine person Lord Rama was. Treating Lord Rama as God the Divya-varsha has been interpreted in the Siddhantic way by multiplying it by 360. The year was not taken as the Solar year as it should have been. I explained that in earlier mails. I am sure except you every intelligent person could understand that whoever read my mail.I hope it will be understood by you now once for all and for Lord Rama's sake you will not repeat your false statement as is your habit. Secondly why are you telling an untruth by saying that I am more comfortable with the janma kundali of Lord Ram in Adhyaqtma Ramayana. Where did I say that? My stand has always been that Adhyatma Ramayana, which presents Lord Rama as God corroborates what is said in the Valmiki Ramayana, more so in the Balakanda, where also Lord Rama is presented as God. I have already shown that Lord Rama was born in the Shukla Navami of the Chaitra month and the statement of the Balakanda on that is correct. For the Navami to occur in Punarvasu the Sun will have to be around 27 degree in the Mina Rashi and this means that the next Purnima had occurred when the Sun came to around 3 degrees of the Mesha. For the Purnima to occur the Moon will have to 180 degrees away from the Sun ie the Moon would have been at the longitude of around 183 degrees in the Chitra nakshatra. Thus the purnimanta Month was Chaitra and it ended with this purnima. This definitely shows that Lord Rama was born in the Chaitra month and the Hindus are observing the Ram Navami correctly. If you are not aware let me tell you that the seasonal months go on changing. Even if it was the seasonal Madhu month at that time it will always not coincide with the Chaitra month so your bringing up the issue of the seasonal month has no sense at all. I explained it in detail so that your misconception is removed and you should accept it unless you have some ulterior reasons. You have addressed the mail to Shri Goyelji but I do not know if Goyelji is a member of this forum. If he is he can still express his views.  Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya S.K.Bhattacjharjya --- On Sun, 10/18/09, Krishen <jyotirved wrote: Krishen <jyotirved [ind-Arch] Re: Dating of Ramayana Period indiaarchaeology Sunday, October 18, 2009, 10:24 PM  --- AKKaul@@ wrote: Shri Gopal Krishna Geolji, Gopal Krishna ki jai! < 1.Valmiki Ramayan Does not say Rama was born in Madhu Masa.> Fine, but Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya says that the janma-kundali of Bhagwan Ram also was not given by Valmiki himself, since, according to him, both the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda in the VR are a much later addition by somebody else! He is more comfortabole with the janma-kundali of Bhgwan Ram in the Adyatma Ramayana, which is supposed to have been given by Krishna Dwaipayana Vedavyasa. And the Adyatma Ramayana 1/3/14 has said categorically that Bhagwan Ram was born in Madhu-masa! In any case, even if we forget Madhumasa for the moment, VR 1/13/1 says, " The vernal season (i.e. Vasanta Ritu) having appeared again and the powerful monarch Dasharatha called on Vasishtha with a view to commencing the horse sacrifice for the sake of a progeny " . Then in 1/14/1 the same VR says, " The aforementioned horse having returned on the completion of a twelve-month after its release, the horse sacrifice commenced on the northern bank of the Sarayu " Thus the " yajnya " was completed in Vasanta Ritu itelf! In 1/18/8, the same VR has said, " In the meantime six seasons (each consisting of two months) rolled away after the scrifice was over, then on the ninth lunar day of Chaitra, the twelfth month after the conclusion of the sacrifice, when the asterism Punarvasu (presided over by Aditi) was in the ascendant... .Shri Ram was born " . It thus leaves no doubut in anybody's mind that Bhagwan Ram had incarnated in the first month of Vasanta Ritu, that was known as Chaitra as per the VR and Madhu as per the Adyatma Ramayana and Goswami Tulsidas and the Vedanga Jyotisha and the Puranas etc.! The Vedanga Jyotisha, Rik-Jyotisha fifth and Yajur-jyotisha sixth mantra---say that when the Sun and the Moon come together in Danishtha, it is the month of Magha as well as Tapah.... If Magha = Tapah, Phalguna is equal to Tapasya and Chaitra is equal to Madhu in that order! So Bhagwan Ram was born in Madhu-cum-Chaitra, which is a so called sayana phenomenon! It also appears you have not gone through BVB6.doc at all, though it has been posted several times in several forums, the latest one being a few days back under " no subject " heading! Kindly do peruse it and you will see that the Puranas also talk of Madhava = Vaishakha = sun in Mesha which means Madhu is equal to Chaitra = sun in Mina! I have already quoted Vedic mantras as saying " madhuschai madhavashchai vasantikav ritoo " i.e. Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu! If you take Lahiri Ephemeris (the bible of nirayanawalas! ) you will see that also talking of Madhu and Vedic Chaitra in the same breath! Thus whicdhever way you look at it, the sun could neither be in so called Sayana Mesha nor in so called nirayana (or even Sayana) Mina at the time of birth of Bhagwan Ram, since that is an asronomically impossible combination! Gopal Krishna Ki Jai! A K Kaul Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com, GKGoel@@ wrote: > > Dear Kaul Sahib apki jai. > 1.Valmiki Ramayan Does not say Rama was born in > Madhu Masa. > 2.Rama was born in the month of Chaitra . This is > Lunar month linked with star chitra. > 3.Kindly refer Taittiriya Samhita 7.4.8 = > 'Chaitra full moon is the mouth of the Sambatsar' > 4.Whole India is following SIDREAL SAMVATSAR > for last 4000 years continuously . On this basis. > we now have vikram samvatsar of 2066. > 5.Six ritu only means -' after one solar year'. > 6.Ramayana does not say it was Sukla paksha, > it is only inference. > Regards, > > > G.K.GOEL > Ph: 09350311433 > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR > NEW DELHI-110 076 > INDIA > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > jyotirved jyotirved@ > > Cc: hinducalendar; indian_astrology_ group_daily_ digest@grou ps.com; subash razdan subashrazdan@ ; indiaarchaeology; Vedic AstrologyForum > Thu, 15 October, 2009 9:32:58 PM > [ind. & West. Astrology] [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: Dating of Ramayana Period > > > Dear Shri > Gopal Krishna Goel-ji, > Gopal > Krishna ki jai! > In your > original post of Oct 8 you have said: > " 1. > There may be some reasons to believe, but sloka does not say that Rama > was born in dark or bright half of the lunar month. > 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was referred in > the text. In that case Sun can be either in Pisces or > Aries " .†> Since you > are a scholar of the Valmiki Ramayana, Ramacharitamanasa and Adyatma Ramayana, > you must appreciate that there are a few astronomical impossibilities in this > statement: > 1. The > Valmiki Ramayana 1/18/8 has said > tato yajnye > sampate tu ritoonam shat samatyayuh tatashchai dwadashe maase chaitre navamike > tithav > The Gita > Press translation says, “In the meantime six seasons (each consisting of > two months) rolled away after the sacrifice was over. Then on the ninth > lunar day (of the bright fortnight) of Chaitra, the twelfth month after the > conclusion of the sacrifice, .... " > Since twelve > months had elapsed after the sacrifice was over, which was in Vasanta Ritiu, it > was therefore the first month of Vasanta Ritu, which is known as Madhu as per > the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha etc., when Bhagwan Ram incarnated. It > is the same month that is also known as Chaitra in the VJ. Though in the VR no > mention has been made of " Madhu " but only Chaitra, however, the > Adyatma Ramayana, 1/3/14 has said categorically: > 2. Madhumase > site pakshye navamyam karkate shubhe Punarvasu rikshya sahite uchhasthe graha > panchake > Which means, > “In the month of Madhu, in shukla pakshya, navmi tithi, karkata (lagna), > Punarvasu nakshatra and five planets either exalted or in their own > rashisâ€. > Similarly, > Goswami Tulsidas is very sure when he says > 3. Navmi > tithi madhumasa puneeta sukal pachha abhijta haripreeta > i.e. > “It was the holy Madhumasa, navmi tithi, shkula pakshya and abhijit, which > is dear to Godâ€. > It is thus > clear that it was the first month of Vasanta Ritu, the month of > Madhu-cum-Chaitra definitely. It was also a Shukla paksha navmi. > 4. The > Yajurveda says, “madhuschai madhavaschai vasantikav ritoo†i.e. > Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu. > Now if it > was Madhumasa, and if, against all the prevailing logic and reasons, we presume > that Mesha etc. rashis did exist in India in about 7300 BCE, then Madhumasa and > Sun in Mina---and not in Mesha----can exist simultaneously only if the sun is > in the so called sayana Mina Rashi! > 5. If you > presume that it is a so called nirayana rashi, which “Vedic > astrologers†call euphemistically sidereal rashis, then we have to take > into account the Ayanamsha which is without any rhyme or reason linked to > precession by these very “Vedic astrologersâ€. > “almighty†Lahiri Ayanamsha as on December 4, 7323 BCE, the date of > birth of Bhagwan Ram as per Dr. Vartak, was, plus 103°-41’. It means the > “almighty†Lahiri sun would have to be somewhere in Karkata, even > if we presume that it was Madhumasa on December 4, 7323 BCE, which it was not > actually, as we shall see shortly! > Thus linking > of Madhumasa-cum- Chaitra to a so called nirayana Mina or Mesha rashi as back as > 7323 BCE is in itself a self-defeating premise even if we ignore other anachronisms > like Punarvasu nakshatra cum shukla paksha navmi of Madhumasa, with the moon in > Karkata and the sun in Mina/Mesha etc.! > You have > also said, “DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail is not > question his findingsâ€. > 6. We must > come out of the habit of taking “findings†of “authorities†> at their face value and not questioning their veracity! It is our blind faith > in Maya the mlechha’s dictum that the Surya Sidhanta was a “revelation†> by Surya Bhagwan that has landed the entire Hindu community in such a mess that > we are celebrating all our festivals on wrong days! > If Dr. > Vartak had even an elementary knowledge of astronomy, he should have known that > if it was Madhu-cum-Chaitra masa, it could never have been so called sayana sun > in Mesha but only in Mina. As he also believes in so called sidereal rashis, > he should have known that a nirayana mina rashi in Madhu-cum-Chaitra would take > place only if it was away by about 180 degrees from Sayana Mina Surya i.e. about > 72 multiplied by 180 = 12960 years before 285 AD, when the so called nirayana Lahiri > zodiac and the so called sayana zodiacs are supposed to have coincided! Thus “Vartak > Ram†should have incarnated in about 13000 BCE (and not in 7323 BCE) if > his sun was in Lahiri Mina, since it was only then that it could have coincided > with Madhu-cum-Chaitra! > I may also mention > here that the actual longitudes of the sun, Moon and Rahu etc. on December 4, > 7323 BCE were: > Sayana sun was > actually about 18 degrees in Tula (about 2 degrees in Lahiri Kumbha)----as > against the Valmiki/AR sun either in Mina or Mesha according to you and other > jyotishis! > Sayana Moon was > actually about zero degrees in Makar (about 13 degrees in Lahiri Mesha)---as > against Karkata Rashi as per the VR/AR etc. > Sayana Mean > Rahu about two degrees in Mithuna (about 15 degrees in Lahiri Kanya)---as > against Mina Rashi of jyotishis! > It was > Shukla Paksha Shashthi (and not navmi) besides Sayana Uttarashada and Lahiri > Magha nakshatra on December 4, 7323 BCE, without any corrections for Delta > Time. Even if we presume that the difference in Delta Time was about seven > days in 7000 BCE, things are not going to be much different! > It was > neither the month of Madhu-cum-Chaitra nor Vasanta Ritu! > Thus > everything on December 4, 7323 BCE was contrary to what is supposed to have > been given in the VR/AR and what Dr. Vartak claims to have deciphered on that > date! > All the > above details can be checked from Vishnu.exe program that anybody can download > for free from hinducalendar forum and calculate vara (weekday), tithi, > nakshatra, yoga, karna and the longitudes of the sun, moon and mean Rahu (both > sayana and Lahiri) from 10000 BCE to 12030 AD in a jiffy! > I, > therefore, think that we should close this Rama-janma-kundali prakran, since > there should not be any doubt in anybody’s mind now that the month of > Madhu-cum-Chaitra cannot go with the sun in Mina Rashi, unless it is a so > called sayana Mina Rashi, and “Vedic jyotishis†are not going to > accept it at any cost. We must also bear in mind that there were no Mesha etc. > rashis anywhere in the world in about 3000 BCE at the earliest, so to presume > that someone could have calculated Bhagwan Ram’s birth chart in 7323 BCE > is extremely farfetched, to say the least! It actually presents a very poor > picture of the entire Hindu community, as to how gullible we can be. > THE JYOTISHA > JARGON ABOUT THE PLANETARY POSITION IN THE VALMIKI AND ADYATMA RAMAYANA IS THUS > AN INTERPLATION AND NOTHING BUT AN INTERPOLATION BY SOME GOOD FOR NOTHING > JYOTISHI. > Gopal Krishna > ki jai. > A K Kaul > > , > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a > wrote: > > > > Dear Goelji, > > > > Kindly have a look at the following analysis. > > > > 1) > > Dr. Vartak manually calculated the approximate year of Lord Rama's birth > from precessional data. He has given all these details in his book on the date > of Ramayana. One must give credit to him for that. For those interested in > Ancient Indian History this alone is sufficient as this date is corroborated by > the Surya-vamsha lineage given in the Puranas. > > 2) > > Dr. Vartak also mentioned about a Buddhist text which gives the time-gap > between the year of Lord Rama's going to Sri Lanka and the Parinirvana of > Lord Buddha. Dr. Vartak could not relate that date as he was not aware > that Lord Buddha passed away in 1807 BCE. At that time of writing his > book he was aware of the Max Mullerian date in the 5th century BCE only. > The year 1807 BCE as the date of parinirvana of Lord Buddha was worked > out by Late Kota Venkatachalam from the Puranic data and the work of > Prof. Narahari Achar using Astrological data and my own work from study of the > Dotted Record confirm the date of Kota Venkatachalam. Now it is seen that the > precessional data and the information from the Buudhist text quoted by Dr. > Vartak tallies. > > > > Now coming to the exact day from the astrlogical data I agree that it is a > contentious issue but by applying our mind we can sort out the issue from the > following analysis : > > > > 3) > > Lord Rama was born at noon. So the Sun was in the tenth house or > near the tenth house. If his ascendent is Cancer then the Sun has to be either > in the Arties or closest to the Aries. > > 4) > > Adhyatma Ramayana, a later day text from Purana, says that the Sun was > reaching Aries. It could mean that the Sun was closest to Aries. > > 5) > > Now if the Sun is closest to aries and the Moon is in Cancer then it means > that Lord Rama was born in a Shuklapaksha Navam and not Krishnapaksha Navami. > > 6) > > The Sun actually appears to be around 27 degree in Pisces. This > surprisingly means that Budha (Mercury) is in the nakshatra Revati, which it > rules. Astrologically speaking had the Sun been at the Aries (ie. in Lord > Rama's tenth sign) Kaikeyi would not have succeeded in taking away the kingship > from Lord Rama. It is another matter that he was born to take away Ravana from > the earth. > > 7) > > Five planets were in sva and / or uccha. The Moon and Jupiter in cancer > means the Moon was in Sva-hiouse and Juoiter in the house of exaltation. It is > quite possible that the Mars, Venus and Saturn could have been in sva- houes / > exalted. Now the Saturn's position can be found out if one knows the > approximate date as in the geo-centric model it takes the longest time among > the Grahas to move round the earth. From the precessional data Dr. vartak found > out the approximate year of Lord Rama's birth and that fixes the position of > saturn in Libra. So some unceratinty remains regarding the fast moving planets > Mars and Venus. > > > > Dr. Vartak did all calculations manually and gives full deatils of those > in his book. His is an open book and he found the year of Lord Rama's birth > closest to the date he arrived from the precessional data. But he too goofed up > regarding the position of the Sun. He took the Sun at Aries. The Buddist text > he quotes helps us find the date as 7329 BCE whereas Dr. Vartak arrived at the > date of 7323 BCE. > > > > This does not matter, as for the purpose of fixing the day for festivals > we have all the required data and the historian also cannot complain as they > get a figure, which fits in with all the puranic data The Puranic yuga > calculation also tallies with this date in the Treta yuga. To my mind Dr. > Vartak's date of Lord Rama is the best astronomical date found so far. > The date of Bharata and of Lakhna and Shatrughna is very clear. Bharat was born > in the Pushya makshatra and Mina Lagna, ie. late in the night following Lord > Rama's birth. It is interesting to see that he got the kingship as the Sun was > in his Lagna. Lakshmana and Shatrughna were born in the Ashlesh nakshatra > (ie. the Moon was in the Ashlesha Nakshatra) and at Sunrise (and that > means in in Cancer Lagna). This is for astrological discussions only > and the historians will not be interested in these finer details. > > > > Finally I would ike to submit that though I love astrology and picking up > the pebbles on the sea shore I look at the chrological matters more through the > historical ( that includes puranic records too) and astronomical data than > through astrology alone. > > > > Regards, > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > --- On Thu, 10/8/09, gopal krishna goel g.k.goel@ > wrote: > > > > gopal krishna goel g.k.goel@ > > RE: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: Dating of Ramayana Period > > ancient_indian_ astrology, @ . com, vedic astrology, vedic_research_ institute, indiaarchaeology > > Thursday, October 8, 2009, 5:45 AM > > > Dear BHATTACHARJYA JI, > > DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail is not > > question his findings. In any case this is an unending debate > > which never dies. > > I have some observations: > > Slola 1-18-8and 9 may mean as under: > > After completion of yajna and lapse of 6 seasons,Rama was born > > in 12th month of Chaitra , on ninth tithi(NAVAMIKE) , > > in Punarvasu Nakshatra, five planets were in their own and exalted signs > > (SAVOCHCHASANSTHESH U)-THIS MAY MEAN THAT FIVE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR > > OWN EXALTED SIGNS OR THESE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR OWN AND/OR EXALTED SIGNS- > > cancer LAGNA WITH JUPITER AND Moon (VAKPATAVIDUNA SAH) > > THE following OBSERVATION can be made: > > 1. There may be some reasons to believe , but sloka does not say > that Rama was born > > in dark or bright half of the lunar month. > > 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was refered > in the text. > > In that case Sun can be either inPisces or > Aries. > > 3. What was the method of counting of tithis in those days?Probably > mathematical tithi > > were not in use in those days.Even , diva and ratri karna. > > 4. What type of calander was in use in those days.Panch yugi calender was > in common use > > having 62 months of 30 solar days each. > > 5 If it is assumed that Five planets were in their exalted signs > then Sun ,Jupiter, > > Saturn, Mars and Venus were in exaltation signs.But if sloka > means that five planets were in > > own (sva) and Uchcha signs , Then their is no requirememt that Sun > should also be in Aries, > > In that case Moon , Jupiter,Saturn, Mars and Venus will meet the > requirement of > > of sloka regarding five planets. > > 6. In any case if Sun is in Aries , it is dificult to explain that > moon was in last pada of > > Punarvasu nakshatra in cancer. > > As regard following sloka: > > > > puShye jaataH tu bharato mIna lagne prasanna dhIH | > > saarpe jaatau tu saumitrI kuLIre abhyudite ravau || 1-18-15 > > > > " The meaning are clear - After Sun rise (abhyudite ravau), Bharat was > born in > > pisces Lagna and Pusya Nakchatra.And two sons of Sumitra were born > > in aslesha nakshatra and cancer sign. " > > It may be mentioned that 'Vakpati means Jupiter as well as Pusya > Nakshatra. > > > > This mail is just to seek clarifications on the points which are not clear > to me thus far. > > It would be intresting to know the parametres which Dr. Vartak fed in the > computer to arrive a particular date. At least that date can be relied upon > upto the extent and on the basis of these parameteres. > > Best regards, > > > > > > G. K. Goel > > > > > Connect more, do more and share more with India Mail. Learn more. http://in.overview. mail.. com/ > --- End forwarded message --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 Shri Avtar Krishen Kaulji, I think it is better that you have a look at the small book on the dating of Ramayana published by Dr. Vartak. When I was in Pune I had a copy of the book and in fact I met Dr. Vartak myself. I shifted to Mumbai suburbs and presently I am abroad. So you will have to request somebody to help you get that book. No shortcut please and the intenet articles on Dr. Vartak's work may not give evrything given in that book. I shall say that I consider the ballpark figure, arrived at by Dr. Vartak through precessional calculations as sufficiently okay for one interested in the Ramayana chronology. Such people may not be inrterested in the exact date. The exact date arrived at by Dr. Vartak may be questioned but not the approximate date he arrived at through the precessional calculations. As regards the discussions we had on the date of Lord Rama you can go through the previous mails and that is possible simply by going through the search-mail facility in the Internet. For me to retrieve these mails and send to you will take more time than you will need to see those for yourself. Even to make extract of all the mails will take long time. Please do not think of short-cut as the shor-cut will really be the longest cut. As a Hindu I am more concerned about the celebration of Ram Navami and I am happy that we are observing it correctly. The historian in me is satisfied with the ballpark figure from the precessional data and from the Buddhist record cited by Dr. Vartak, combined with my own knowledge of the date of Lord Buddha. I wish some scholars like Dr. Narahari Achar will do some work on this. Dr. Achar's work on the date of Lord Buddha is authentic. Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya Sunil K. BHattacharjya --- On Tue, 10/20/09, Krishen <jyotirved wrote: Krishen <jyotirved [ind-Arch] Re: Dating of Ramayana Period Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 9:15 AM  Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, Jai Shri Ram! There has been so much of to-ing and fro-ing of communications on the above topic that it is extremely difficult to wade through all the threads to arrive at a definite conclusion as to who said what and when. I would therefore request you to please summarize your views about the following points: 1. What are the planetary combinations in the horoscope of Bhagwan Ram as per which shastra/Ramayana/ work according to you? Pl give exact references and their translations, quoting the original Sanskrit shlokas. 2. What are the astronomical implications of those combinations as per which system i.e. whether modern astronomy or sidhantic or some other system? In other words, are those combinations possible astronomically? If yes, is it as per modern astronomy or sidhantic or some other system? 3. In what manner has Dr. P. V. Vartak justified all those astronomical combinations of the different Ramayanas for December 4, 7323 BCE? 4. Kindly give a brief summary of Dr. Vartak's methodology of arriving at those conclusions i.e. what sidereal periods etc. has he taken and on what basis i.e. whether modern astronomy or sidhantic or some other system? After getting all the above information, I think we can discuss the issue in a healthy atmosphere/manner. Jai Shri Ram , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Shri Kaulji, > > You said > > Fine, > but Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya says that the janma-kundali of Bhagwan Ram > also was not given by Valmiki himself, since, according to him, both > the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda in the VR are a much later addition > by somebody else! He is more comfortabole with the janma-kundali of > Bhgwan Ram in the Adyatma Ramayana, which is supposed to have been > given by Krishna Dwaipayana Vedavyasa. > > Did I say anywhere > that the contents of the Balakanda are not authentic? Did I say that they > are wrong? I said that Lord Rama has been presented in the Balakanda as > God and don't you think that is correct. Anybody with common sense will > wonder why is it that in the Balakanda and Uttara kanda Lord Rama had > been shown as God and in the middle five kandas He has been shown as > man, after reading the whole of the Ramayana. I wonder why you did not > notice that or did you not read the entire Ramayana yourself?. Any intelligent > person will notice that and Sunil Bhattacharya is not required to tell > that. Do you understand that Shri Kaul? It could even be that the sage > Valmiki wrote the middle five kandas first and then he thought it fit > to add the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda later and there he presented > him as God as he realised what a divine person Lord Rama was. Treating > Lord Rama as God the Divya-varsha has been interpreted in the > Siddhantic way by multiplying it by 360. The year was not taken as the > Solar year as it should have been. I explained that in earlier mails. I > am sure except you every intelligent person could understand that > whoever read my mail.I hope it will be understood by you now once for > all and for Lord Rama's sake you will not repeat your false statement > as is your habit. > > Secondly why are you telling an untruth by saying that I am more > comfortable with the janma kundali of Lord Ram in Adhyaqtma Ramayana. > Where did I say that? My stand has always been that Adhyatma Ramayana, > which presents Lord Rama as God corroborates what is said in the > Valmiki Ramayana, more so in the Balakanda, where also Lord Rama is > presented as God. > > I have already shown that Lord Rama was born in the Shukla Navami of the Chaitra month and the statement of the Balakanda on that is correct. For the Navami to occur in Punarvasu the Sun will have to be around 27 degree in the Mina Rashi and this means that the next Purnima had occurred when the Sun came to around 3 degrees of the Mesha. For the Purnima to occur the Moon will have to 180 degrees away from the Sun ie the Moon would have been at the longitude of around 183 degrees in the Chitra nakshatra. Thus the purnimanta Month was Chaitra and it ended with this purnima. This definitely shows that Lord Rama was born in the Chaitra month and the Hindus are observing the Ram Navami correctly. If you are not aware let me tell you that the seasonal months go on changing. Even if it was the seasonal Madhu month at that time it will always not coincide with the Chaitra month so your bringing up the issue of the seasonal > month has no sense at all. I explained it in detail so that your misconception is removed and you should accept it unless you have some ulterior reasons. > > You have addressed the mail to Shri Goyelji but I do not know if Goyelji is a member of this forum. If he is he can still express his views. >  > > Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya > > S.K.Bhattacjharjya > > --- On Sun, 10/18/09, Krishen jyotirved@.. . wrote: > > Krishen jyotirved@.. . > [ind-Arch] Re: Dating of Ramayana Period > indiaarchaeology > Sunday, October 18, 2009, 10:24 PM > > > > > > >  > > > > > > --- AKKaul@@ > > wrote: > > > > Shri Gopal Krishna Geolji, > > > > Gopal Krishna ki jai! > > > > < 1.Valmiki Ramayan Does not say Rama was born in Madhu Masa.> > > > > Fine, but Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya says that the janma-kundali of > > Bhagwan Ram also was not given by Valmiki himself, since, according to > > him, both the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda in the VR are a much later > > addition by somebody else! He is more comfortabole with the > > janma-kundali of Bhgwan Ram in the Adyatma Ramayana, which is supposed > > to have been given by Krishna Dwaipayana Vedavyasa. And the Adyatma > > Ramayana 1/3/14 has said categorically that Bhagwan Ram was born in > > Madhu-masa! > > > > In any case, even if we forget Madhumasa for the moment, VR 1/13/1 says, > > " The vernal season (i.e. Vasanta Ritu) having appeared again and the > > powerful monarch Dasharatha called on Vasishtha with a view to > > commencing the horse sacrifice for the sake of a progeny " . Then in > > 1/14/1 the same VR says, " The aforementioned horse having returned on > > the completion of a twelve-month after its release, the horse sacrifice > > commenced on the northern bank of the Sarayu " Thus the " yajnya " was > > completed in Vasanta Ritu itelf! In 1/18/8, the same VR has said, " In > > the meantime six seasons (each consisting of two months) rolled away > > after the scrifice was over, then on the ninth lunar day of Chaitra, the > > twelfth month after the conclusion of the sacrifice, when the asterism > > Punarvasu (presided over by Aditi) was in the ascendant... .Shri Ram was > > born " . > > > > It thus leaves no doubut in anybody's mind that Bhagwan Ram had > > incarnated in the first month of Vasanta Ritu, that was known as Chaitra > > as per the VR and Madhu as per the Adyatma Ramayana and Goswami Tulsidas > > and the Vedanga Jyotisha and the Puranas etc.! > > > > The Vedanga Jyotisha, Rik-Jyotisha fifth and Yajur-jyotisha sixth > > mantra---say that when the Sun and the Moon come together in Danishtha, > > it is the month of Magha as well as Tapah.... If Magha = Tapah, > > Phalguna is equal to Tapasya and Chaitra is equal to Madhu in that > > order! So Bhagwan Ram was born in Madhu-cum-Chaitra, which is a so > > called sayana phenomenon! > > > > It also appears you have not gone through BVB6.doc at all, though it has > > been posted several times in several forums, the latest one being a few > > days back under " no subject " heading! Kindly do peruse it and you will > > see that the Puranas also talk of Madhava = Vaishakha = sun in Mesha > > which means Madhu is equal to Chaitra = sun in Mina! I have already > > quoted Vedic mantras as saying " madhuschai madhavashchai vasantikav > > ritoo " i.e. Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu! > > > > If you take Lahiri Ephemeris (the bible of nirayanawalas! ) you will see > > that also talking of Madhu and Vedic Chaitra in the same breath! > > > > Thus whicdhever way you look at it, the sun could neither be in so > > called Sayana Mesha nor in so called nirayana (or even Sayana) Mina at > > the time of birth of Bhagwan Ram, since that is an asronomically > > impossible combination! > > > > Gopal Krishna Ki Jai! > > > > A K Kaul > > > > Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com, GKGoel@@ > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Kaul Sahib apki jai. > > > 1.Valmiki Ramayan Does not say Rama was born in > > > Madhu Masa. > > > 2.Rama was born in the month of Chaitra . This is > > > Lunar month linked with star chitra. > > > 3.Kindly refer Taittiriya Samhita 7.4.8 = > > > 'Chaitra full moon is the mouth of the Sambatsar' > > > 4.Whole India is following SIDREAL SAMVATSAR > > > for last 4000 years continuously . On this basis. > > > we now have vikram samvatsar of 2066. > > > 5.Six ritu only means -' after one solar year'. > > > 6.Ramayana does not say it was Sukla paksha, > > > it is only inference. > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > G.K.GOEL > > > Ph: 09350311433 > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR > > > NEW DELHI-110 076 > > > INDIA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > jyotirved jyotirved@ > > > > > > Cc: hinducalendar; > > indian_astrology_ group_daily_ digest@grou ps.com; subash razdan > > subashrazdan@ ; indiaarchaeology; > > Vedic AstrologyForum > > > Thu, 15 October, 2009 9:32:58 PM > > > [ind. & West. Astrology] [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: > > Dating of Ramayana Period > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri > > > Gopal Krishna Goel-ji, > > > Gopal > > > Krishna ki jai! > > > In your > > > original post of Oct 8 you have said: > > > " 1. > > > There may be some reasons to believe, but sloka does not say that Rama > > > was born in dark or bright half of the lunar month. > > > 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was referred > > in > > > the text. In that case Sun can be either in Pisces or > > > Aries " .â€� > > > Since you > > > are a scholar of the Valmiki Ramayana, Ramacharitamanasa and Adyatma > > Ramayana, > > > you must appreciate that there are a few astronomical impossibilities > > in this > > > statement: > > > 1. The > > > Valmiki Ramayana 1/18/8 has said > > > tato yajnye > > > sampate tu ritoonam shat samatyayuh tatashchai dwadashe maase chaitre > > navamike > > > tithav > > > The Gita > > > Press translation says, “In the meantime six seasons (each > > consisting of > > > two months) rolled away after the sacrifice was over. Then on the > > ninth > > > lunar day (of the bright fortnight) of Chaitra, the twelfth month > > after the > > > conclusion of the sacrifice, .... " > > > Since twelve > > > months had elapsed after the sacrifice was over, which was in Vasanta > > Ritiu, it > > > was therefore the first month of Vasanta Ritu, which is known as Madhu > > as per > > > the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha etc., when Bhagwan Ram incarnated. > > It > > > is the same month that is also known as Chaitra in the VJ. Though in > > the VR no > > > mention has been made of " Madhu " but only Chaitra, however, the > > > Adyatma Ramayana, 1/3/14 has said categorically: > > > 2. Madhumase > > > site pakshye navamyam karkate shubhe Punarvasu rikshya sahite > > uchhasthe graha > > > panchake > > > Which means, > > > “In the month of Madhu, in shukla pakshya, navmi tithi, karkata > > (lagna), > > > Punarvasu nakshatra and five planets either exalted or in their own > > > rashisâ€�. > > > Similarly, > > > Goswami Tulsidas is very sure when he says > > > 3. Navmi > > > tithi madhumasa puneeta sukal pachha abhijta haripreeta > > > i.e. > > > “It was the holy Madhumasa, navmi tithi, shkula pakshya and > > abhijit, which > > > is dear to Godâ€�. > > > It is thus > > > clear that it was the first month of Vasanta Ritu, the month of > > > Madhu-cum-Chaitra definitely. It was also a Shukla paksha navmi. > > > 4. The > > > Yajurveda says, “madhuschai madhavaschai vasantikav > > ritooâ€� i.e. > > > Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu. > > > Now if it > > > was Madhumasa, and if, against all the prevailing logic and reasons, > > we presume > > > that Mesha etc. rashis did exist in India in about 7300 BCE, then > > Madhumasa and > > > Sun in Mina---and not in Mesha----can exist simultaneously only if the > > sun is > > > in the so called sayana Mina Rashi! > > > 5. If you > > > presume that it is a so called nirayana rashi, which “Vedic > > > astrologersâ€� call euphemistically sidereal rashis, then we have > > to take > > > into account the Ayanamsha which is without any rhyme or reason linked > > to > > > precession by these very “Vedic astrologersâ€�. > > > “almightyâ€� Lahiri Ayanamsha as on December 4, 7323 BCE, > > the date of > > > birth of Bhagwan Ram as per Dr. Vartak, was, plus 103°-41’. > > It means the > > > “almightyâ€� Lahiri sun would have to be somewhere in > > Karkata, even > > > if we presume that it was Madhumasa on December 4, 7323 BCE, which it > > was not > > > actually, as we shall see shortly! > > > Thus linking > > > of Madhumasa-cum- Chaitra to a so called nirayana Mina or Mesha rashi > > as back as > > > 7323 BCE is in itself a self-defeating premise even if we ignore other > > anachronisms > > > like Punarvasu nakshatra cum shukla paksha navmi of Madhumasa, with > > the moon in > > > Karkata and the sun in Mina/Mesha etc.! > > > You have > > > also said, “DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail > > is not > > > question his findingsâ€�. > > > 6. We must > > > come out of the habit of taking “findingsâ€� of > > “authoritiesâ€� > > > at their face value and not questioning their veracity! It is our > > blind faith > > > in Maya the mlechha’s dictum that the Surya Sidhanta was a > > “revelationâ€� > > > by Surya Bhagwan that has landed the entire Hindu community in such a > > mess that > > > we are celebrating all our festivals on wrong days! > > > If Dr. > > > Vartak had even an elementary knowledge of astronomy, he should have > > known that > > > if it was Madhu-cum-Chaitra masa, it could never have been so called > > sayana sun > > > in Mesha but only in Mina. As he also believes in so called sidereal > > rashis, > > > he should have known that a nirayana mina rashi in Madhu-cum-Chaitra > > would take > > > place only if it was away by about 180 degrees from Sayana Mina Surya > > i.e. about > > > 72 multiplied by 180 = 12960 years before 285 AD, when the so called > > nirayana Lahiri > > > zodiac and the so called sayana zodiacs are supposed to have > > coincided! Thus “Vartak > > > Ramâ€� should have incarnated in about 13000 BCE (and not in 7323 > > BCE) if > > > his sun was in Lahiri Mina, since it was only then that it could have > > coincided > > > with Madhu-cum-Chaitra! > > > I may also mention > > > here that the actual longitudes of the sun, Moon and Rahu etc. on > > December 4, > > > 7323 BCE were: > > > Sayana sun was > > > actually about 18 degrees in Tula (about 2 degrees in Lahiri > > Kumbha)----as > > > against the Valmiki/AR sun either in Mina or Mesha according to you > > and other > > > jyotishis! > > > Sayana Moon was > > > actually about zero degrees in Makar (about 13 degrees in Lahiri > > Mesha)---as > > > against Karkata Rashi as per the VR/AR etc. > > > Sayana Mean > > > Rahu about two degrees in Mithuna (about 15 degrees in Lahiri > > Kanya)---as > > > against Mina Rashi of jyotishis! > > > It was > > > Shukla Paksha Shashthi (and not navmi) besides Sayana Uttarashada and > > Lahiri > > > Magha nakshatra on December 4, 7323 BCE, without any corrections for > > Delta > > > Time. Even if we presume that the difference in Delta Time was about > > seven > > > days in 7000 BCE, things are not going to be much different! > > > It was > > > neither the month of Madhu-cum-Chaitra nor Vasanta Ritu! > > > Thus > > > everything on December 4, 7323 BCE was contrary to what is supposed to > > have > > > been given in the VR/AR and what Dr. Vartak claims to have deciphered > > on that > > > date! > > > All the > > > above details can be checked from Vishnu.exe program that anybody can > > download > > > for free from hinducalendar forum and calculate vara (weekday), tithi, > > > nakshatra, yoga, karna and the longitudes of the sun, moon and mean > > Rahu (both > > > sayana and Lahiri) from 10000 BCE to 12030 AD in a jiffy! > > > I, > > > therefore, think that we should close this Rama-janma-kundali prakran, > > since > > > there should not be any doubt in anybody’s mind now that the > > month of > > > Madhu-cum-Chaitra cannot go with the sun in Mina Rashi, unless it is a > > so > > > called sayana Mina Rashi, and “Vedic jyotishisâ€� are not > > going to > > > accept it at any cost. We must also bear in mind that there were no > > Mesha etc. > > > rashis anywhere in the world in about 3000 BCE at the earliest, so to > > presume > > > that someone could have calculated Bhagwan Ram’s birth chart in > > 7323 BCE > > > is extremely farfetched, to say the least! It actually presents a very > > poor > > > picture of the entire Hindu community, as to how gullible we can be. > > > THE JYOTISHA > > > JARGON ABOUT THE PLANETARY POSITION IN THE VALMIKI AND ADYATMA > > RAMAYANA IS THUS > > > AN INTERPLATION AND NOTHING BUT AN INTERPOLATION BY SOME GOOD FOR > > NOTHING > > > JYOTISHI. > > > Gopal Krishna > > > ki jai. > > > A K Kaul > > > > > > , > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Goelji, > > > > > > > > Kindly have a look at the following analysis. > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > Dr. Vartak manually calculated the approximate year of Lord Rama's > > birth > > > from precessional data. He has given all these details in his book on > > the date > > > of Ramayana. One must give credit to him for that. For those > > interested in > > > Ancient Indian History this alone is sufficient as this date is > > corroborated by > > > the Surya-vamsha lineage given in the Puranas. > > > > 2) > > > > Dr. Vartak also mentioned about a Buddhist text which gives the > > time-gap > > > between the year of Lord Rama's going to Sri Lanka and the Parinirvana > > of > > > Lord Buddha. Dr. Vartak could not relate that date as he was not aware > > > that Lord Buddha passed away in 1807 BCE. At that time of writing his > > > book he was aware of the Max Mullerian date in the 5th century BCE > > only. > > > The year 1807 BCE as the date of parinirvana of Lord Buddha was worked > > > out by Late Kota Venkatachalam from the Puranic data and the work of > > > Prof. Narahari Achar using Astrological data and my own work from > > study of the > > > Dotted Record confirm the date of Kota Venkatachalam. Now it is seen > > that the > > > precessional data and the information from the Buudhist text quoted by > > Dr. > > > Vartak tallies. > > > > > > > > Now coming to the exact day from the astrlogical data I agree that > > it is a > > > contentious issue but by applying our mind we can sort out the issue > > from the > > > following analysis : > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > Lord Rama was born at noon. So the Sun was in the tenth house or > > > near the tenth house. If his ascendent is Cancer then the Sun has to > > be either > > > in the Arties or closest to the Aries. > > > > 4) > > > > Adhyatma Ramayana, a later day text from Purana, says that the Sun > > was > > > reaching Aries. It could mean that the Sun was closest to Aries. > > > > 5) > > > > Now if the Sun is closest to aries and the Moon is in Cancer then it > > means > > > that Lord Rama was born in a Shuklapaksha Navam and not Krishnapaksha > > Navami. > > > > 6) > > > > The Sun actually appears to be around 27 degree in Pisces. This > > > surprisingly means that Budha (Mercury) is in the nakshatra Revati, > > which it > > > rules. Astrologically speaking had the Sun been at the Aries (ie. in > > Lord > > > Rama's tenth sign) Kaikeyi would not have succeeded in taking away the > > kingship > > > from Lord Rama. It is another matter that he was born to take away > > Ravana from > > > the earth. > > > > 7) > > > > Five planets were in sva and / or uccha. The Moon and Jupiter in > > cancer > > > means the Moon was in Sva-hiouse and Juoiter in the house of > > exaltation. It is > > > quite possible that the Mars, Venus and Saturn could have been in sva- > > houes / > > > exalted. Now the Saturn's position can be found out if one knows the > > > approximate date as in the geo-centric model it takes the longest time > > among > > > the Grahas to move round the earth. From the precessional data Dr. > > vartak found > > > out the approximate year of Lord Rama's birth and that fixes the > > position of > > > saturn in Libra. So some unceratinty remains regarding the fast moving > > planets > > > Mars and Venus. > > > > > > > > Dr. Vartak did all calculations manually and gives full deatils of > > those > > > in his book. His is an open book and he found the year of Lord Rama's > > birth > > > closest to the date he arrived from the precessional data. But he too > > goofed up > > > regarding the position of the Sun. He took the Sun at Aries. The > > Buddist text > > > he quotes helps us find the date as 7329 BCE whereas Dr. Vartak > > arrived at the > > > date of 7323 BCE. > > > > > > > > This does not matter, as for the purpose of fixing the day for > > festivals > > > we have all the required data and the historian also cannot complain > > as they > > > get a figure, which fits in with all the puranic data The Puranic yuga > > > calculation also tallies with this date in the Treta yuga. To my mind > > Dr. > > > Vartak's date of Lord Rama is the best astronomical date found so far. > > > The date of Bharata and of Lakhna and Shatrughna is very clear. Bharat > > was born > > > in the Pushya makshatra and Mina Lagna, ie. late in the night > > following Lord > > > Rama's birth. It is interesting to see that he got the kingship as the > > Sun was > > > in his Lagna. Lakshmana and Shatrughna were born in the Ashlesh > > nakshatra > > > (ie. the Moon was in the Ashlesha Nakshatra) and at Sunrise (and that > > > means in in Cancer Lagna). This is for astrological discussions only > > > and the historians will not be interested in these finer details. > > > > > > > > Finally I would ike to submit that though I love astrology and > > picking up > > > the pebbles on the sea shore I look at the chrological matters more > > through the > > > historical ( that includes puranic records too) and astronomical data > > than > > > through astrology alone. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Thu, 10/8/09, gopal krishna goel g.k.goel@ > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > gopal krishna goel g.k.goel@ > > > > RE: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: Dating of Ramayana > > Period > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, @ > > . com, vedic astrology, vedic_research_ > > institute, indiaarchaeology > > > > Thursday, October 8, 2009, 5:45 AM > > > > > > > Dear BHATTACHARJYA JI, > > > > DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail is not > > > > question his findings. In any case this is an unending debate > > > > which never dies. > > > > I have some observations: > > > > Slola 1-18-8and 9 may mean as under: > > > > After completion of yajna and lapse of 6 seasons,Rama was born > > > > in 12th month of Chaitra , on ninth tithi(NAVAMIKE) , > > > > in Punarvasu Nakshatra, five planets were in their own and exalted > > signs > > > > (SAVOCHCHASANSTHESH U)-THIS MAY MEAN THAT FIVE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR > > > > OWN EXALTED SIGNS OR THESE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR OWN AND/OR EXALTED > > SIGNS- > > > > cancer LAGNA WITH JUPITER AND Moon (VAKPATAVIDUNA SAH) > > > > THE following OBSERVATION can be made: > > > > 1. There may be some reasons to believe , but sloka does not say > > > that Rama was born > > > > in dark or bright half of the lunar month. > > > > 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was refered > > > in the text. > > > > In that case Sun can be either inPisces or > > > Aries. > > > > 3. What was the method of counting of tithis in those days?Probably > > > mathematical tithi > > > > were not in use in those days.Even , diva and ratri karna. > > > > 4. What type of calander was in use in those days.Panch yugi > > calender was > > > in common use > > > > having 62 months of 30 solar days each. > > > > 5 If it is assumed that Five planets were in their exalted signs > > > then Sun ,Jupiter, > > > > Saturn, Mars and Venus were in exaltation signs.But if sloka > > > means that five planets were in > > > > own (sva) and Uchcha signs , Then their is no requirememt that Sun > > > should also be in Aries, > > > > In that case Moon , Jupiter,Saturn, Mars and Venus will meet the > > > requirement of > > > > of sloka regarding five planets. > > > > 6. In any case if Sun is in Aries , it is dificult to explain that > > > moon was in last pada of > > > > Punarvasu nakshatra in cancer. > > > > As regard following sloka: > > > > > > > > puShye jaataH tu bharato mIna lagne prasanna dhIH | > > > > saarpe jaatau tu saumitrI kuLIre abhyudite ravau || 1-18-15 > > > > > > > > " The meaning are clear - After Sun rise (abhyudite ravau), Bharat > > was > > > born in > > > > pisces Lagna and Pusya Nakchatra.And two sons of Sumitra were born > > > > in aslesha nakshatra and cancer sign. " > > > > It may be mentioned that 'Vakpati means Jupiter as well as Pusya > > > Nakshatra. > > > > > > > > This mail is just to seek clarifications on the points which are not > > clear > > > to me thus far. > > > > It would be intresting to know the parametres which Dr. Vartak fed > > in the > > > computer to arrive a particular date. At least that date can be relied > > upon > > > upto the extent and on the basis of these parameteres. > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > G. K. Goel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Connect more, do more and share more with India Mail. Learn > > more. http://in.overview. mail.. com/ > > > > > > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 Shri Avtar Krishen Kaulji,I think it is better that you have a look at the small book on the dating of Ramayana published by Dr. Vartak. When I was in Pune I had a copy of the book and in fact I met Dr. Vartak myself. I shifted to Mumbai suburbs and presently I am abroad. So you will have to request somebody to help you get that book. No shortcut please and the intenet articles on Dr. Vartak's work may not give evrything given in that book. I shall say that I consider the ballpark figure, arrived at by Dr. Vartak through precessional calculations as sufficiently okay for one interested in the Ramayana chronology. Such people may not be inrterested in the exact date. The exact date arrived at by Dr. Vartak may be questioned but not the approximate date he arrived at through the precessional calculations. As regards the discussions we had on the date of Lord Rama you can go through the previous mails and that is possible simply by going through the search-mail facility in the Internet. For me to retrieve these mails and send to you will take more time than you will need to see those for yourself. Even to make extract of all the mails will take long time. Please do not think of short-cut as the shor-cut will really be the longest cut.As a Hindu I am more concerned about the celebration of Ram Navami and I am happy that we are observing it correctly. The historian in me is satisfied with the ballpark figure from the precessional data and from the Buddhist record cited by Dr. Vartak, combined with my own knowledge of the date of Lord Buddha. I wish some scholars like Dr. Narahari Achar will do some work on this. Dr. Achar's work on the date of Lord Buddha is authentic.Om Namo Bhagavate VasudevayaSunil K. BHattacharjya--- On Tue, 10/20/09, Krishen <jyotirved wrote:Krishen <jyotirved [ind-Arch] Re: Dating of Ramayana Period Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 9:15 AM Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, Jai Shri Ram! There has been so much of to-ing and fro-ing of communications on the above topic that it is extremely difficult to wade through all the threads to arrive at a definite conclusion as to who said what and when. I would therefore request you to please summarize your views about the following points: 1. What are the planetary combinations in the horoscope of Bhagwan Ram as per which shastra/Ramayana/ work according to you? Pl give exact references and their translations, quoting the original Sanskrit shlokas. 2. What are the astronomical implications of those combinations as per which system i.e. whether modern astronomy or sidhantic or some other system? In other words, are those combinations possible astronomically? If yes, is it as per modern astronomy or sidhantic or some other system? 3. In what manner has Dr. P. V. Vartak justified all those astronomical combinations of the different Ramayanas for December 4, 7323 BCE? 4. Kindly give a brief summary of Dr. Vartak's methodology of arriving at those conclusions i.e. what sidereal periods etc. has he taken and on what basis i.e. whether modern astronomy or sidhantic or some other system? After getting all the above information, I think we can discuss the issue in a healthy atmosphere/manner. Jai Shri Ram , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Shri Kaulji, > > You said > > Fine, > but Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya says that the janma-kundali of Bhagwan Ram > also was not given by Valmiki himself, since, according to him, both > the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda in the VR are a much later addition > by somebody else! He is more comfortabole with the janma-kundali of > Bhgwan Ram in the Adyatma Ramayana, which is supposed to have been > given by Krishna Dwaipayana Vedavyasa. > > Did I say anywhere > that the contents of the Balakanda are not authentic? Did I say that they > are wrong? I said that Lord Rama has been presented in the Balakanda as > God and don't you think that is correct. Anybody with common sense will > wonder why is it that in the Balakanda and Uttara kanda Lord Rama had > been shown as God and in the middle five kandas He has been shown as > man, after reading the whole of the Ramayana. I wonder why you did not > notice that or did you not read the entire Ramayana yourself?. Any intelligent > person will notice that and Sunil Bhattacharya is not required to tell > that. Do you understand that Shri Kaul? It could even be that the sage > Valmiki wrote the middle five kandas first and then he thought it fit > to add the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda later and there he presented > him as God as he realised what a divine person Lord Rama was. Treating > Lord Rama as God the Divya-varsha has been interpreted in the > Siddhantic way by multiplying it by 360. The year was not taken as the > Solar year as it should have been. I explained that in earlier mails. I > am sure except you every intelligent person could understand that > whoever read my mail.I hope it will be understood by you now once for > all and for Lord Rama's sake you will not repeat your false statement > as is your habit. > > Secondly why are you telling an untruth by saying that I am more > comfortable with the janma kundali of Lord Ram in Adhyaqtma Ramayana. > Where did I say that? My stand has always been that Adhyatma Ramayana, > which presents Lord Rama as God corroborates what is said in the > Valmiki Ramayana, more so in the Balakanda, where also Lord Rama is > presented as God. > > I have already shown that Lord Rama was born in the Shukla Navami of the Chaitra month and the statement of the Balakanda on that is correct. For the Navami to occur in Punarvasu the Sun will have to be around 27 degree in the Mina Rashi and this means that the next Purnima had occurred when the Sun came to around 3 degrees of the Mesha. For the Purnima to occur the Moon will have to 180 degrees away from the Sun ie the Moon would have been at the longitude of around 183 degrees in the Chitra nakshatra. Thus the purnimanta Month was Chaitra and it ended with this purnima. This definitely shows that Lord Rama was born in the Chaitra month and the Hindus are observing the Ram Navami correctly. If you are not aware let me tell you that the seasonal months go on changing. Even if it was the seasonal Madhu month at that time it will always not coincide with the Chaitra month so your bringing up the issue of the seasonal > month has no sense at all. I explained it in detail so that your misconception is removed and you should accept it unless you have some ulterior reasons. > > You have addressed the mail to Shri Goyelji but I do not know if Goyelji is a member of this forum. If he is he can still express his views. >  > > Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya > > S.K.Bhattacjharjya > > --- On Sun, 10/18/09, Krishen jyotirved@.. . wrote: > > Krishen jyotirved@.. . > [ind-Arch] Re: Dating of Ramayana Period > indiaarchaeology > Sunday, October 18, 2009, 10:24 PM  > > > > > > --- AKKaul@@ > > wrote: > > > > Shri Gopal Krishna Geolji, > > > > Gopal Krishna ki jai! > > > > < 1.Valmiki Ramayan Does not say Rama was born in Madhu Masa.> > > > > Fine, but Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya says that the janma-kundali of > > Bhagwan Ram also was not given by Valmiki himself, since, according to > > him, both the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda in the VR are a much later > > addition by somebody else! He is more comfortabole with the > > janma-kundali of Bhgwan Ram in the Adyatma Ramayana, which is supposed > > to have been given by Krishna Dwaipayana Vedavyasa. And the Adyatma > > Ramayana 1/3/14 has said categorically that Bhagwan Ram was born in > > Madhu-masa! > > > > In any case, even if we forget Madhumasa for the moment, VR 1/13/1 says, > > "The vernal season (i.e. Vasanta Ritu) having appeared again and the > > powerful monarch Dasharatha called on Vasishtha with a view to > > commencing the horse sacrifice for the sake of a progeny". Then in > > 1/14/1 the same VR says, "The aforementioned horse having returned on > > the completion of a twelve-month after its release, the horse sacrifice > > commenced on the northern bank of the Sarayu" Thus the "yajnya" was > > completed in Vasanta Ritu itelf! In 1/18/8, the same VR has said, "In > > the meantime six seasons (each consisting of two months) rolled away > > after the scrifice was over, then on the ninth lunar day of Chaitra, the > > twelfth month after the conclusion of the sacrifice, when the asterism > > Punarvasu (presided over by Aditi) was in the ascendant... .Shri Ram was > > born". > > > > It thus leaves no doubut in anybody's mind that Bhagwan Ram had > > incarnated in the first month of Vasanta Ritu, that was known as Chaitra > > as per the VR and Madhu as per the Adyatma Ramayana and Goswami Tulsidas > > and the Vedanga Jyotisha and the Puranas etc.! > > > > The Vedanga Jyotisha, Rik-Jyotisha fifth and Yajur-jyotisha sixth > > mantra---say that when the Sun and the Moon come together in Danishtha, > > it is the month of Magha as well as Tapah.... If Magha = Tapah, > > Phalguna is equal to Tapasya and Chaitra is equal to Madhu in that > > order! So Bhagwan Ram was born in Madhu-cum-Chaitra, which is a so > > called sayana phenomenon! > > > > It also appears you have not gone through BVB6.doc at all, though it has > > been posted several times in several forums, the latest one being a few > > days back under "no subject" heading! Kindly do peruse it and you will > > see that the Puranas also talk of Madhava = Vaishakha = sun in Mesha > > which means Madhu is equal to Chaitra = sun in Mina! I have already > > quoted Vedic mantras as saying "madhuschai madhavashchai vasantikav > > ritoo" i.e. Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu! > > > > If you take Lahiri Ephemeris (the bible of nirayanawalas! ) you will see > > that also talking of Madhu and Vedic Chaitra in the same breath! > > > > Thus whicdhever way you look at it, the sun could neither be in so > > called Sayana Mesha nor in so called nirayana (or even Sayana) Mina at > > the time of birth of Bhagwan Ram, since that is an asronomically > > impossible combination! > > > > Gopal Krishna Ki Jai! > > > > A K Kaul > > > > Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com, GKGoel@@ > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Kaul Sahib apki jai. > > > 1.Valmiki Ramayan Does not say Rama was born in > > > Madhu Masa. > > > 2.Rama was born in the month of Chaitra . This is > > > Lunar month linked with star chitra. > > > 3.Kindly refer Taittiriya Samhita 7.4.8 = > > > 'Chaitra full moon is the mouth of the Sambatsar' > > > 4.Whole India is following SIDREAL SAMVATSAR > > > for last 4000 years continuously . On this basis. > > > we now have vikram samvatsar of 2066. > > > 5.Six ritu only means -' after one solar year'. > > > 6.Ramayana does not say it was Sukla paksha, > > > it is only inference. > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > G.K.GOEL > > > Ph: 09350311433 > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR > > > NEW DELHI-110 076 > > > INDIA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > jyotirved jyotirved@ > > > > > > Cc: hinducalendar; > > indian_astrology_ group_daily_ digest@grou ps.com; subash razdan > > subashrazdan@ ; indiaarchaeology; > > Vedic AstrologyForum > > > Thu, 15 October, 2009 9:32:58 PM > > > [ind. & West. Astrology] [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: > > Dating of Ramayana Period > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri > > > Gopal Krishna Goel-ji, > > > Gopal > > > Krishna ki jai! > > > In your > > > original post of Oct 8 you have said: > > > "1. > > > There may be some reasons to believe, but sloka does not say that Rama > > > was born in dark or bright half of the lunar month. > > > 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was referred > > in > > > the text. In that case Sun can be either in Pisces or > > > Aries".� > > > Since you > > > are a scholar of the Valmiki Ramayana, Ramacharitamanasa and Adyatma > > Ramayana, > > > you must appreciate that there are a few astronomical impossibilities > > in this > > > statement: > > > 1. The > > > Valmiki Ramayana 1/18/8 has said > > > tato yajnye > > > sampate tu ritoonam shat samatyayuh tatashchai dwadashe maase chaitre > > navamike > > > tithav > > > The Gita > > > Press translation says, “In the meantime six seasons (each > > consisting of > > > two months) rolled away after the sacrifice was over. Then on the > > ninth > > > lunar day (of the bright fortnight) of Chaitra, the twelfth month > > after the > > > conclusion of the sacrifice, ...." > > > Since twelve > > > months had elapsed after the sacrifice was over, which was in Vasanta > > Ritiu, it > > > was therefore the first month of Vasanta Ritu, which is known as Madhu > > as per > > > the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha etc., when Bhagwan Ram incarnated. > > It > > > is the same month that is also known as Chaitra in the VJ. Though in > > the VR no > > > mention has been made of "Madhu" but only Chaitra, however, the > > > Adyatma Ramayana, 1/3/14 has said categorically: > > > 2. Madhumase > > > site pakshye navamyam karkate shubhe Punarvasu rikshya sahite > > uchhasthe graha > > > panchake > > > Which means, > > > “In the month of Madhu, in shukla pakshya, navmi tithi, karkata > > (lagna), > > > Punarvasu nakshatra and five planets either exalted or in their own > > > rashis�. > > > Similarly, > > > Goswami Tulsidas is very sure when he says > > > 3. Navmi > > > tithi madhumasa puneeta sukal pachha abhijta haripreeta > > > i.e. > > > “It was the holy Madhumasa, navmi tithi, shkula pakshya and > > abhijit, which > > > is dear to God�. > > > It is thus > > > clear that it was the first month of Vasanta Ritu, the month of > > > Madhu-cum-Chaitra definitely. It was also a Shukla paksha navmi. > > > 4. The > > > Yajurveda says, “madhuschai madhavaschai vasantikav > > ritoo� i.e. > > > Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu. > > > Now if it > > > was Madhumasa, and if, against all the prevailing logic and reasons, > > we presume > > > that Mesha etc. rashis did exist in India in about 7300 BCE, then > > Madhumasa and > > > Sun in Mina---and not in Mesha----can exist simultaneously only if the > > sun is > > > in the so called sayana Mina Rashi! > > > 5. If you > > > presume that it is a so called nirayana rashi, which “Vedic > > > astrologers� call euphemistically sidereal rashis, then we have > > to take > > > into account the Ayanamsha which is without any rhyme or reason linked > > to > > > precession by these very “Vedic astrologers�. > > > “almighty� Lahiri Ayanamsha as on December 4, 7323 BCE, > > the date of > > > birth of Bhagwan Ram as per Dr. Vartak, was, plus 103°-41’. > > It means the > > > “almighty� Lahiri sun would have to be somewhere in > > Karkata, even > > > if we presume that it was Madhumasa on December 4, 7323 BCE, which it > > was not > > > actually, as we shall see shortly! > > > Thus linking > > > of Madhumasa-cum- Chaitra to a so called nirayana Mina or Mesha rashi > > as back as > > > 7323 BCE is in itself a self-defeating premise even if we ignore other > > anachronisms > > > like Punarvasu nakshatra cum shukla paksha navmi of Madhumasa, with > > the moon in > > > Karkata and the sun in Mina/Mesha etc.! > > > You have > > > also said, “DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail > > is not > > > question his findings�. > > > 6. We must > > > come out of the habit of taking “findings� of > > “authorities� > > > at their face value and not questioning their veracity! It is our > > blind faith > > > in Maya the mlechha’s dictum that the Surya Sidhanta was a > > “revelation� > > > by Surya Bhagwan that has landed the entire Hindu community in such a > > mess that > > > we are celebrating all our festivals on wrong days! > > > If Dr. > > > Vartak had even an elementary knowledge of astronomy, he should have > > known that > > > if it was Madhu-cum-Chaitra masa, it could never have been so called > > sayana sun > > > in Mesha but only in Mina. As he also believes in so called sidereal > > rashis, > > > he should have known that a nirayana mina rashi in Madhu-cum-Chaitra > > would take > > > place only if it was away by about 180 degrees from Sayana Mina Surya > > i.e. about > > > 72 multiplied by 180 = 12960 years before 285 AD, when the so called > > nirayana Lahiri > > > zodiac and the so called sayana zodiacs are supposed to have > > coincided! Thus “Vartak > > > Ram� should have incarnated in about 13000 BCE (and not in 7323 > > BCE) if > > > his sun was in Lahiri Mina, since it was only then that it could have > > coincided > > > with Madhu-cum-Chaitra! > > > I may also mention > > > here that the actual longitudes of the sun, Moon and Rahu etc. on > > December 4, > > > 7323 BCE were: > > > Sayana sun was > > > actually about 18 degrees in Tula (about 2 degrees in Lahiri > > Kumbha)----as > > > against the Valmiki/AR sun either in Mina or Mesha according to you > > and other > > > jyotishis! > > > Sayana Moon was > > > actually about zero degrees in Makar (about 13 degrees in Lahiri > > Mesha)---as > > > against Karkata Rashi as per the VR/AR etc. > > > Sayana Mean > > > Rahu about two degrees in Mithuna (about 15 degrees in Lahiri > > Kanya)---as > > > against Mina Rashi of jyotishis! > > > It was > > > Shukla Paksha Shashthi (and not navmi) besides Sayana Uttarashada and > > Lahiri > > > Magha nakshatra on December 4, 7323 BCE, without any corrections for > > Delta > > > Time. Even if we presume that the difference in Delta Time was about > > seven > > > days in 7000 BCE, things are not going to be much different! > > > It was > > > neither the month of Madhu-cum-Chaitra nor Vasanta Ritu! > > > Thus > > > everything on December 4, 7323 BCE was contrary to what is supposed to > > have > > > been given in the VR/AR and what Dr. Vartak claims to have deciphered > > on that > > > date! > > > All the > > > above details can be checked from Vishnu.exe program that anybody can > > download > > > for free from hinducalendar forum and calculate vara (weekday), tithi, > > > nakshatra, yoga, karna and the longitudes of the sun, moon and mean > > Rahu (both > > > sayana and Lahiri) from 10000 BCE to 12030 AD in a jiffy! > > > I, > > > therefore, think that we should close this Rama-janma-kundali prakran, > > since > > > there should not be any doubt in anybody’s mind now that the > > month of > > > Madhu-cum-Chaitra cannot go with the sun in Mina Rashi, unless it is a > > so > > > called sayana Mina Rashi, and “Vedic jyotishis� are not > > going to > > > accept it at any cost. We must also bear in mind that there were no > > Mesha etc. > > > rashis anywhere in the world in about 3000 BCE at the earliest, so to > > presume > > > that someone could have calculated Bhagwan Ram’s birth chart in > > 7323 BCE > > > is extremely farfetched, to say the least! It actually presents a very > > poor > > > picture of the entire Hindu community, as to how gullible we can be. > > > THE JYOTISHA > > > JARGON ABOUT THE PLANETARY POSITION IN THE VALMIKI AND ADYATMA > > RAMAYANA IS THUS > > > AN INTERPLATION AND NOTHING BUT AN INTERPOLATION BY SOME GOOD FOR > > NOTHING > > > JYOTISHI. > > > Gopal Krishna > > > ki jai. > > > A K Kaul > > > > > > , > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Goelji, > > > > > > > > Kindly have a look at the following analysis. > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > Dr. Vartak manually calculated the approximate year of Lord Rama's > > birth > > > from precessional data. He has given all these details in his book on > > the date > > > of Ramayana. One must give credit to him for that. For those > > interested in > > > Ancient Indian History this alone is sufficient as this date is > > corroborated by > > > the Surya-vamsha lineage given in the Puranas. > > > > 2) > > > > Dr. Vartak also mentioned about a Buddhist text which gives the > > time-gap > > > between the year of Lord Rama's going to Sri Lanka and the Parinirvana > > of > > > Lord Buddha. Dr. Vartak could not relate that date as he was not aware > > > that Lord Buddha passed away in 1807 BCE. At that time of writing his > > > book he was aware of the Max Mullerian date in the 5th century BCE > > only. > > > The year 1807 BCE as the date of parinirvana of Lord Buddha was worked > > > out by Late Kota Venkatachalam from the Puranic data and the work of > > > Prof. Narahari Achar using Astrological data and my own work from > > study of the > > > Dotted Record confirm the date of Kota Venkatachalam. Now it is seen > > that the > > > precessional data and the information from the Buudhist text quoted by > > Dr. > > > Vartak tallies. > > > > > > > > Now coming to the exact day from the astrlogical data I agree that > > it is a > > > contentious issue but by applying our mind we can sort out the issue > > from the > > > following analysis : > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > Lord Rama was born at noon. So the Sun was in the tenth house or > > > near the tenth house. If his ascendent is Cancer then the Sun has to > > be either > > > in the Arties or closest to the Aries. > > > > 4) > > > > Adhyatma Ramayana, a later day text from Purana, says that the Sun > > was > > > reaching Aries. It could mean that the Sun was closest to Aries. > > > > 5) > > > > Now if the Sun is closest to aries and the Moon is in Cancer then it > > means > > > that Lord Rama was born in a Shuklapaksha Navam and not Krishnapaksha > > Navami. > > > > 6) > > > > The Sun actually appears to be around 27 degree in Pisces. This > > > surprisingly means that Budha (Mercury) is in the nakshatra Revati, > > which it > > > rules. Astrologically speaking had the Sun been at the Aries (ie. in > > Lord > > > Rama's tenth sign) Kaikeyi would not have succeeded in taking away the > > kingship > > > from Lord Rama. It is another matter that he was born to take away > > Ravana from > > > the earth. > > > > 7) > > > > Five planets were in sva and / or uccha. The Moon and Jupiter in > > cancer > > > means the Moon was in Sva-hiouse and Juoiter in the house of > > exaltation. It is > > > quite possible that the Mars, Venus and Saturn could have been in sva- > > houes / > > > exalted. Now the Saturn's position can be found out if one knows the > > > approximate date as in the geo-centric model it takes the longest time > > among > > > the Grahas to move round the earth. From the precessional data Dr. > > vartak found > > > out the approximate year of Lord Rama's birth and that fixes the > > position of > > > saturn in Libra. So some unceratinty remains regarding the fast moving > > planets > > > Mars and Venus. > > > > > > > > Dr. Vartak did all calculations manually and gives full deatils of > > those > > > in his book. His is an open book and he found the year of Lord Rama's > > birth > > > closest to the date he arrived from the precessional data. But he too > > goofed up > > > regarding the position of the Sun. He took the Sun at Aries. The > > Buddist text > > > he quotes helps us find the date as 7329 BCE whereas Dr. Vartak > > arrived at the > > > date of 7323 BCE. > > > > > > > > This does not matter, as for the purpose of fixing the day for > > festivals > > > we have all the required data and the historian also cannot complain > > as they > > > get a figure, which fits in with all the puranic data The Puranic yuga > > > calculation also tallies with this date in the Treta yuga. To my mind > > Dr. > > > Vartak's date of Lord Rama is the best astronomical date found so far. > > > The date of Bharata and of Lakhna and Shatrughna is very clear. Bharat > > was born > > > in the Pushya makshatra and Mina Lagna, ie. late in the night > > following Lord > > > Rama's birth. It is interesting to see that he got the kingship as the > > Sun was > > > in his Lagna. Lakshmana and Shatrughna were born in the Ashlesh > > nakshatra > > > (ie. the Moon was in the Ashlesha Nakshatra) and at Sunrise (and that > > > means in in Cancer Lagna). This is for astrological discussions only > > > and the historians will not be interested in these finer details. > > > > > > > > Finally I would ike to submit that though I love astrology and > > picking up > > > the pebbles on the sea shore I look at the chrological matters more > > through the > > > historical ( that includes puranic records too) and astronomical data > > than > > > through astrology alone. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Thu, 10/8/09, gopal krishna goel g.k.goel@ > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > gopal krishna goel g.k.goel@ > > > > RE: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: Dating of Ramayana > > Period > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, @ > > . com, vedic astrology, vedic_research_ > > institute, indiaarchaeology > > > > Thursday, October 8, 2009, 5:45 AM > > > > > > > Dear BHATTACHARJYA JI, > > > > DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail is not > > > > question his findings. In any case this is an unending debate > > > > which never dies. > > > > I have some observations: > > > > Slola 1-18-8and 9 may mean as under: > > > > After completion of yajna and lapse of 6 seasons,Rama was born > > > > in 12th month of Chaitra , on ninth tithi(NAVAMIKE) , > > > > in Punarvasu Nakshatra, five planets were in their own and exalted > > signs > > > > (SAVOCHCHASANSTHESH U)-THIS MAY MEAN THAT FIVE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR > > > > OWN EXALTED SIGNS OR THESE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR OWN AND/OR EXALTED > > SIGNS- > > > > cancer LAGNA WITH JUPITER AND Moon (VAKPATAVIDUNA SAH) > > > > THE following OBSERVATION can be made: > > > > 1. There may be some reasons to believe , but sloka does not say > > > that Rama was born > > > > in dark or bright half of the lunar month. > > > > 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was refered > > > in the text. > > > > In that case Sun can be either inPisces or > > > Aries. > > > > 3. What was the method of counting of tithis in those days?Probably > > > mathematical tithi > > > > were not in use in those days.Even , diva and ratri karna. > > > > 4. What type of calander was in use in those days.Panch yugi > > calender was > > > in common use > > > > having 62 months of 30 solar days each. > > > > 5 If it is assumed that Five planets were in their exalted signs > > > then Sun ,Jupiter, > > > > Saturn, Mars and Venus were in exaltation signs.But if sloka > > > means that five planets were in > > > > own (sva) and Uchcha signs , Then their is no requirememt that Sun > > > should also be in Aries, > > > > In that case Moon , Jupiter,Saturn, Mars and Venus will meet the > > > requirement of > > > > of sloka regarding five planets. > > > > 6. In any case if Sun is in Aries , it is dificult to explain that > > > moon was in last pada of > > > > Punarvasu nakshatra in cancer. > > > > As regard following sloka: > > > > > > > > puShye jaataH tu bharato mIna lagne prasanna dhIH | > > > > saarpe jaatau tu saumitrI kuLIre abhyudite ravau || 1-18-15 > > > > > > > > "The meaning are clear - After Sun rise (abhyudite ravau), Bharat > > was > > > born in > > > > pisces Lagna and Pusya Nakchatra.And two sons of Sumitra were born > > > > in aslesha nakshatra and cancer sign." > > > > It may be mentioned that 'Vakpati means Jupiter as well as Pusya > > > Nakshatra. > > > > > > > > This mail is just to seek clarifications on the points which are not > > clear > > > to me thus far. > > > > It would be intresting to know the parametres which Dr. Vartak fed > > in the > > > computer to arrive a particular date. At least that date can be relied > > upon > > > upto the extent and on the basis of these parameteres. > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > G. K. Goel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Connect more, do more and share more with India Mail. Learn > > more. http://in.overview. mail.. com/ > > > > > > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.