Guest guest Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Dear Jain Sir, These are some clerifications. Resp. Luther ji,NamaskarThanks for your reply on my blog “Astrology a science or myth”. I could not find your first mail hence I am thankful for reposting your mail on my email. Sorry for delay. I have gone through your file/excel.Please read my reply in red.Now your clarification about rahu ketu – First of all we must be clear that there was no concept of intersection of orbit of the Sun and Moon in any scripture. Because according to Parashar and all astrologers were of the opinion that Sun is nearer then Moon hence there is no question of covering the Sun by the Moon during solar eclipse. Now as per latest cover-up by the astrologers; Rahu Ketu are intersection point according to concept of solar system. Thus Rahu Ketu which was devised by our sages on the basis of eclipse must be remembered for deciding the motion of Rahu ketu.I do agree that there was no concept of intersection of orbit of the Sun and Moon. I have not come across about the opinion that Sun is nearer than Moon. In fact Rahu and Kethu were not recognized as intersection points but as two shadows in the Universe and they used to grab the Sun or the Moon during respective eclipse. This was a myth and was so because of innocence of astronomy during those days. Now science proves that they are the intersection points and we have to accept now if we want to make astrology more scientific. In case we don’t accept scientific findings we shall remain in the ages of Parasar. In those days people saw the eclipse and related to the nodes. Now it should be reverse sine now we know more about the ascending and descending nodes. We know what they are. We know their longitudes. This should be the revision to be made in astrology. Actually I am able to follow your clarification to some extent. Because I am not able to follow your sentence >>>>>>But by 29 days and 13 hours Zodiac has have moved by 17 degrees 43 minutes <<<<<<<The Moon takes 29 days and 13 hours to complete an orbit of 360 degrees around the Planet Earth. Let us take a fixed point on its orbit for convenience. Let it be Rahu and let it be 0. If moon starts its revolution from O, in 29 days and 13 hours it comes back to 0. During this period the Earth does not stop revolving around the Sun but it continues in its own rate of revolution. Then the Earth would have moved 17 degrees and 43 minutes ahead of 0. So instead of Moon reaching at 0 after 29 days and 13 hours in fact it reaches at 0+ 17degrees and 43 minutes. Suppose we take the 0 as 0 0-00-00 degrees in Aries. Then in fact Moon reaches at Aries 17-43-00. You are requested to supplement with the example given in my previous message. Then it shall be clear.So please clarify this points for further digging. However, you have highlighted as to how 3-11 has been worked out, though it is 3-8 according to your data. Let it be. Please clarify then I will follow your point. 28the September 2007 At this date and hour Moon should have reached at 10-55-13 degrees in Aquarius. But by 29 days and 13 hours Zodiac has have moved by 17 degrees 43 minutes. Thus: - 10-55-13 Aquarius plus 17-43 degrees = 28-38-13 in Aquarius. In ephemeris Moon is found at 26-50 degrees in Aquarius. The difference is negligible... So Moon crossed the ecliptic on this date. Sun transited at 10-36-19 degrees in Virgo and did not make 180 degrees to Moon. So there was no amavasya. The Rahu has been shown on this date at 11-13-18 in Aquarius. On 20th August 2007 Rahu was at 13-07-34 Aquarius. 13-07-54 minus 11-13-18 = 1-54-46 degrees/minutes/seconds. Rahu had retrogression for this distance. In 29 days and 13 hours Rahu had a retrogression of 1 degree-54 minutes and46 secods.If you calculate the motion for one day, it is as follows. 1-54-45 degrees divided by 29..53 = 3 min-53 Secs.( You have mentioned 3 minutes and 11 second). Since my data are not very accurate and yor data is an average , the difference. I have calculated only on example basis. Now I hope one can understand how the nodes move retrograde and at this average rate. There should be no confusion on this. But if you please go through my blog then you will find two examples of eclipse (you may even take any example of eclipse), and on that basis I want to emphasize that Rahu Ketu are not the intersection point of orbit as is being claimed by astrologers. I am again producing them by which you can see that Rahu Ketu are not at intersection point of the orbit, which is your main point.On 12-11-1985 FULL SOLAR ECLIPSESun and Moon 206 deg i.e.. 26 deg of LibraKetu 194 deg i.e. 14 deg of LibraWhy Ketu was 12 deg (206 – 194 deg) away from Sun / Moon.On 3-10-1986 FULL SOLAR ECLIPSESun and Moon 166 deg i..e. 16 deg of VirgoKetu 177 deg i.e. 27 deg of VirgoWhen Ketu was 11 deg away from Sun / Moon.Thus there was clear mistake of about 12 and 11 degrees respectively. Because at the time of total solar eclipse Sun, Moon and rahu / Ketu must be at the same point, as they are intersection point of orbit; and sun moon are intersecting each other at the time of total eclipse. Thus all horoscopes are defective in this light and due to this fundamental positional variation, prediction is also effected. In turn position of Rahu Ketu and their motion is also wrong.I shall work on Solar eclipse and send the message in due course.I hope you will again go through the blog and also clarify other point.To find out the answer you may come forward with your answer or read the scriptures or search the books or ask from astrologers. If you may not able then refer my book.Dr. Luther sanatkumar jain <sanatkumar_jainrathlutherCc: Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 11:17:33 AMRahu Ketu during eclipse Resp. Luther ji,NamaskarThanks for your reply on my blog “Astrology a science or myth”. I could not find your first mail hence I am thankful for reposting your mail on my email. Sorry for delay. I have gone through your file/excel.Now your clarification about rahu ketu – First of all we must be clear that there was no concept of intersection of orbit of the Sun and Moon in any scripture. Because according to Parashar and all astrologers were of the opinion that Sun is nearer then Moon hence there is no question of covering the Sun by the Moon during solar eclipse. Now as per latest coverup by the astrologers; Rahu Ketu are intersection point according to concept of solar system. Thus Rahu Ketu which was devised by our sages on the basis of eclipse must be remembered for deciding the motion of Rahu ketu.Actually I am able to follow your clarification to some extent. Because I am not able to follow your sentence >>>>>>But by 29 days and 13 hours Zodiac has have moved by 17 degrees 43 minutes <<<<<<<So please clarify this points for further digging. However, you have highlighted as to how 3-11 has been worked out, though it is 3-8 according to your data. Let it be. Please clarify then I will follow your point.But if you please go through my blog then you will find two examples of eclipse (you may even take any example of eclipse), and on that basis I want to emphasize that Rahu Ketu are not the intersection point of orbit as is being claimed by astrologers. I am again producing them by which you can see that Rahu Ketu are not at intersection point of the orbit, which is your main point.On 12-11-1985 FULL SOLAR ECLIPSESun and Moon 206 deg i.e. 26 deg of LibraKetu 194 deg i.e. 14 deg of LibraWhy Ketu was 12 deg (206 – 194 deg) away from Sun / Moon.On 3-10-1986 FULL SOLAR ECLIPSESun and Moon 166 deg i.e. 16 deg of VirgoKetu 177 deg i.e. 27 deg of VirgoWhen Ketu was 11 deg away from Sun / Moon.Thus there was clear mistake of about 12 and 11 degrees respectively. Because at the time of total solar eclipse Sun, Moon and rahu / Ketu must be at the same point, as they are intersection point of orbit; and sun moon are intersecting each other at the time of total eclipse. Thus all horoscopes are defective in this light and due to this fundamental positional variation, prediction is also effected. In turn position of Rahu Ketu and their motion is also wrong.I hope you will again go through the blog and also clarify other point.To find out the answer you may come forward with your answer or read the scriptures or search the books or ask from astrologers. If you may not able then refer my book.I invite you to join our discussion group atI hope you will join the group so that we may be able to have interaction on predictive astrology, and our interaction may not create problems to K_P_system forum. Our group has no censorship from moderator hence your msg will immediately be available in the forum. Remember nothing is personal and it is only academic discussionThanks for your painsYours truly,SanatGwalior0751 – 2626868Think differently, Think logically and Think scientifically Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2008 Report Share Posted September 13, 2008 Resp. Luther ji, Namaskar, Thanks for your 2nd and 3rd reply which was received after posting my mail. From these msgs., I can realize your sincerity and pains which you have taken for digging the issue. Thanks for your praising views. But please do not say >>>> I do not deserve to your front by any means.<<<< Knowledge without any inquisitive is useless, and from your msgs and labour I can see your inquisitiveness, which is, I am sorry to say, is definitely missing in the crowd of members in various forums. Hence I appreciate your attempt. Please let me know something about you. If you have no problem. Yes, you are right >>>>>> You have posed 10 riddles of astrology in front of the forum. It comes to my understanding that you definitely know the right answers but wanted to test the .<<<<<< because answer of all issues is very much provided in my books (Jyotish Kitna sahi Kitna galat and astrology a science or myth). But I want to know as to whether socalled astrologer are aware of some fact or simply exploiting innocent public, who is already in the grip of blind faith. On the basis of my findings and research I am of the firm opinion that whole setup of predictive astrology has lost its ground. Thus a new forum “” has been started. But story is the same and members or astrologers do not want to dig and spoil their business because their blind faith is more useful to them. But what I can do except whistling. >>> You have given 6 dates with data except the latitude of Moon on those days. You have given 2 dates of Pournomy (Full-moon) and 4 of Amavasya (New-moon).<<<< Yes, data of Moon was not provided because this point can only be solved by a person who may be aware that on full moon and new moon, position of the moon may be 180 and 0 deg from the sun. Hi Hi Point no 5 (in continuation of my earlier msg) - I have taken the data from the Krishman’s ephimeris, which may be slightly different >>>>. I have verified and rectified the data<<<<< but even then it makes no difference because main point is concept. So let us take your data for solar eclipse as follows 20-7-1982 Can 28 Can 28 79 Solar eclipse (Partial) 1-7-2000 Can 10 Can 10 93 Solar eclipse (partial) 12-11-1985 206 206 194 (Ketu) Solar eclipse (Total) 3-10-1986 Lib 10 Lib 10 177 (Ketu) Solar eclipse (Total) (Libra and Ketu is wrong. Please check) Because first two eclipse were only partial hence leave them (for the present) and we may take only total solar eclipse of 1985 and 1986. As per definition (in all astrological books and as is being supported by astrologers) Rahu ketu are the intersection point of the orbit of the Sun and Moon (this was not the concept of sages Parashar etc., Varahmihir, Bhaskaracharya and so on), . But we all know and ephimeris, astrological books are also claiming that at the time of Total Solar Eclipse (SE), Moon happens to be over the Sun (Again this was not the concept of sages Parashar etc., Varahmihir, Bhaskaracharya and so on). It means longitude of the Sun and Moon must be same at the time of total SE. Now their orbits are inclined hence Moon can only be over the Sun when it intersect the orbit of the Sun. According to the definition of RK they are the intersection point hence R or K must also have same longitude at the time of Total SE. Now you can refer your above data of 1985 and 1986, when there is TSE and longitude of the Ketu is 12 deg back and 7 deg (check your data) ahead. Thus don’t you think that position of Ketu as well as Rahu is wrong in all horoscopes? If you go on checking all TSE (at the time of Partial eclipse intersection point of orbit may not be the point of Sun and Moon) then you will find that RK are never at the intersection point i.e. long. of Sun and Moon. Point 6 - As per your 2nd msg I am ready to take your new data in view of your comment >>>> I have not been able to explain clearly. Time Date Transit of Moon Transit of Kethu 7-45 AM 2-08-2008 116-29 116-28 (full solar ecl) 20-45 PM 31-08-2008 141-45 114-55 First date was selected as solar eclipsed and Second date was selected since it falls after 29 days and 13 hours after the first date. Moon takes this time to make a complete revolution around the earth and expected to cross the ecliptic. The Moon would have crossed at 116-29 conjoining Kethu had the Earth no revolution. Since the Earth revolves the zodiac moves and Moon crosses at 141-45 degrees on 31st August.<<<<< But you are again confusing, because you are saying that due to revolution of the Earth around the sun Moon crosses the ecliptic at 141-45 on 31-8 instead of 116-29. Thus according to definition of RK, Ketu must be at 141-45. Then what he is doing at 114-55. Because you have already taken the position of Ketu at 114-55 (with 3-11 motion) hence there is no question of proving this figure with the difference of the position of Moon / Ketu. Just think. Initially you have fixed the answer and you are proving it correct only by circular calculation. Because according to your clarification either Moon must be 114-55 while crossing the ecliptic (ie location of Ketu) or Ketu must be at 141-45 (ie. Location of Moon after movement of zodiac). Just think. The problem in your above data is that how you can say that Ketu is 114-55. Point No 7 - To solve this problem I am providing you another set of data from Kris. Ephimery (only due to your inquisitiveness. But all these data and analysis, reason, affect, correct motion, position in horoscope etc. has already been provided in my book, in length.). Total solar eclipse due to Ketu :- On 3-10-1986 Sun and Moon were at 166 deg. and after 355 days on 23-9-1987 Sun and Moon were at 156 deg. and after 354 days on 11-9-1988 Sun and Moon were at 145 deg. In between these dates there was no another Total SE hence position of Ketu must be 166, 156 and 145 respectively (as per definition of RK i.e. intersection point, as this can be seen and verified in the form of eclipse) on these dates (the position of Ketu is not according to ephemeris but it is presumed position in view of total SE). If you have some other ephemeris then you can even change the position of the Sun and Moon. I think till now position may be clear. Now we come to main phase. Ketu has shifted from 166 deg. to 156 deg. in 355 days i.e. 10 deg. in 355 days i.e. 1 minute 41 sec. per day; and Ketu shifted from 156 to 145 deg. in 354 days i.e.1 minute 51 sec. per day during these days instead of flat 3-11. Remember that shifting of Ketu is actual in view of Total Solar Eclipse. Thus either motion of RK as 3-11 per day is wrong or astrologers concept that RK is intersection point of orbit is wrong. Now I left it to you as to which way you want to go. I hope you will have followed my point. If you want then you may delete point number 2 and 3 (from my earlier msg) in view of your above explanation. I am waiting your observation on Point no 1, 4 and new 5, 6, 7. We can track our discussion only by point nos. I hope you will agree. Thanks once again for taking so much pains in replying my riddles. Yours truly, Sanat 0751-2626868 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.