Fw: Originality of Suryasiddhanta : Proof

[Guest guest]

Sunil ji,

 

Mr Prafulla Mendki is misleading you, he has written a wrong book and

refused to discuss it openly. In Mahabharata, there are many refences

to Suryasiddhantic system, as well as to divya varsha. For instance,

read Shantiparva - chapter 231, which deals in detail the divisions of

time, and in verse 17 Vyaasa Ji says " One year (of men, cf, verse 15) is

equal to one ahoraatra (day and night) of gods ; division of their days

and night is thus : Uttaraayana is their day and Dakshinaayana is their

night. "

 

 

दैवे रातà¥à¤°à¥à¤¯à¤¹à¤¨à¥€

वरà¥à¤·à¤‚ पà¥à¤°à¤µà¤¿à¤­à¤¾à¤—सà¥à¤¤à¤¯à¥‹à¤ƒ

पà¥à¤¨à¤ƒ ।

 

अहसà¥à¤¤à¤¤à¥à¤°à¥‹à¤¦à¤—यनं

रातà¥à¤°à¤¿à¤ƒ सà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¦à¥

दकà¥à¤·à¤¿à¤£à¤¾à¤¯à¤¨à¤‚।।17।।

 

I am really sorry for you. Instead of accepting the truth, you are

searching for such verses which will not specify whether they are divya

or Maanava years due to requirements of prosody. It is not honesty.

Please do not degrade yourself. If Truth is different from your

misconceptions, do not try to invent new theories against Truth.

 

-Vinay Jha

============== =============

, sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

>

> Dear Prafulla,

> Â

> I am referring to the textavailable from the " Sacred texts " site. Why

don't you give the five verses that you are referring to?

> Â

> SunilK. Bhattacharjya

>

> --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Prafulla Mendki prafulla_mendki wrote:

>

>

> Prafulla Mendki prafulla_mendki

> Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> " Sunil Bhattacharjya " sunil_bhattacharjya

> Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 10:17 PM

>

Dear Sunil

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

> Markandeya Samasyaparva is present.188.22 is on page 1482.Are you

refering to Gitapress or some other Edition?

> Prafulla

> Â

>

>

> --- On Thu, 30/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya

wrote:

>

>

> Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya

> Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> " Prafulla Mendki " prafulla_mendki

> Thursday, 30 April, 2009, 7:46 AM

>

Dear Prafulla,

> Â

> Mahabharata Book - 2 is Sabha-Parva and that does not have the

Markandeya-Samasya Parva. Only the Book - 3 is Vana-Parva or

Aranya-Parva and that has the Markandeya-Samasya Parva. In the

Markandeya-Samasya Parva there is no verse like you have quoted.

> Â

> S.K.BhattacharjyaÂ

>

> --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Prafulla Mendki prafulla_mendki wrote:

>

>

> Prafulla Mendki prafulla_mendki

> Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> sunil_bhattacharjya

> Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 1:58 AM

>

Dear Sunil

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

& 1483

> Chatvaryahu: sahastrani varshanam tat krutam yugam

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

> Prafulla

>

>

> --- On Wed, 29/4/09, sunil_bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya

wrote:

>

>

> sunil_bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya

> Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> " prafulla Vaman Mendki " prafulla_mendki

> Wednesday, 29 April, 2009, 5:05 AM

>

>

Dear friend,

> Â

> The verse (MBH 3.188.22) is as follows:

> Â

>     अनà¥à¤¯à¥Šà¤¨à¥à¤¯à¤‚

परिमà¥à¤·à¥à¤£à¤¨à¥à¤¤à¥Š

हिंसयनà¥à¤¤à¤¶ च मानवाः

>     अजपा

नासà¥à¤¤à¤¿à¤•à¤¾à¤ƒ सतेना

भविषà¥à¤¯à¤¨à¥à¤¤à¤¿ यà¥à¤—कà¥à¤·à¤¯à¥‡

> Â

> This verse does not say what you mentioned. Can you please quote the

Sanskrit verse you arer referring to?

>

> Best wishes,

> Â

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

> --- On Tue, 4/28/09, prafulla Vaman Mendki prafulla_mendki wrote:

>

>

> prafulla Vaman Mendki prafulla_mendki

> Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> " Sunil Bhattacharjya " sunil_bhattacharjya

> Tuesday, April 28, 2009, 6:26 AM

>

>

> prafulla_mendki writes:

>

> Suryasiddhanta was written after start of Kaliyug.

> As per 188.22 in MarkandeyaSamasya parva in Mahabharata,

> Krut,Treta,Dwapar and Kaliyug were 4800,3600,2400 and 1200

> years only.

> The idea of Dev varsha and Manav varsha came after Mahabharata

> i.e. after start of Kaliyug .

> Prafulla

>

> WAVES-Vedic , Sunil Bhattacharjya

sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> > --- On Sat, 4/25/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote:

> >

> >

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya@

> > Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> >

> > Cc:

> > Saturday, April 25, 2009, 3:42 AM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Namaste,

> > Â

> > Vinayji does not know himself as to how many verses were really

there in the Suryasiddhanta and tries to find fault with me even though

I said that  I read the figure of 100,000 in a book long ago

though I do not recollect all the details. If Vinayji thinks I am wrong

let him give the number of verses in the original Suryasiddhanta

straightway without wasting any time.

> > Â

> > Secondly he says as follows:

> > Â

> > Quote

> > Â

> > The date 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta is mentioned in the text of

Suryasiddhanta itself, which says it was given by Lord Surya at the end

of Satayuga. This text says one divya day is of one normal year (verse

13 in Ch-1) and next verse says 360 divya days make one divya year. In

succeeding verses, one Mahayuga is said to be of 12000 divya years,

which is equal to 4320000 normal years. If we accept Sunil ji's absurd

notion of divya year being same as solar year, all siddhantas of ancient

India will have planetary motions being speeded up by 360 times, and it

will be impossible to make any panchanga at all from any traditional

Indian method, because Indians used to give number of planetary

revolutions in terms of revolutions per mahayuga. " Ankaanaam Vaamato

Gati " may be a great discovery for Sunil ji, but it is taught to every

student of Jyotisha at primary level by those experts of Sanskrit

universities who are called " pseudo-scholars " by Sunil ji

> just

> > because Sunil ji has not read original texts and thinks all pandits

are fools.

> > Â

> > Unquote

> > Â

> > Vinayji's yuga calculation will show that Lord Rama was born al

least a million years ago. Any takers of that? Vinayji has not read that

the Saptarshi cycle of 2700 Divya varsha is equal to 3030 Manush varsha.

Hence he is making unnecessary noise here. Let him say what the

Bhagavata purana and Vishnu purana say about the yugas. He has not read

these as his views indicate.

> > Â

> > Regards,

> > Â

> > Sunil Kumar Bhattacharjya

> >

> > --- On Wed, 4/22/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

> > Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> >

> > Wednesday, April 22, 2009, 12:44 AM

> >

> > Namaste,

> >

> > Sunil ji claimed original Suryasiddhanta had 100000 verses. Why he

does not cite the source of this wonderful information instead of

ridiculing me on fictious grounds ?? Sunil ji makes wild claims and then

forgets to substantiate them. Bhatta Utpala quoted many verses of

Suryasiddhanta which are not present in extant version. Bhaskar-II

quoted a formula from Suryasiddhanta in Siddhaanta Shiromani which

differs from the same formula in extant version of Suryasiddhanta, which

Burgess misinterpreted, although Bhaskar had clearly mentioned in his

own commentary on Siddhaanta Shiromani (Vaasanaa-bhaashya, not

translated as yet) that he quoted this formula of Suryasiddhanta from

Shruti (ie, from oral Vedic tradition, and not from any manuscript of

Suryasiddhanta) . If Varaha Mihira had seen manuscript of

Suryasiddhanta, Bhaskara-II must have seen the same, more so because

Bhatta Utpala who preceded Bhaskara by just a century quoted verses from

> Suryasiddhanta.

> > Yet Bhaskar-II clearly says Suryasiddhanta has some items which are

part of Shruti and not being committed to writing !!! Thus, there were

two versions of Suryasiddhanta : written and oral. Written version has

not survived in full, as is clear from Utpala's verses, but the written

verse contains almopst everything required for panchanga making for

astrological purposes, while the items cited from Shruti have serious

differences with extant Suryasiddhanta and tally with modern physical

astronomy with a high degree of precision (wrt precession). Thus, there

were two versions of Suryasiddhanta, which the greatest mediaeval

exponent of Suryasiddhanta Kamlakara Bhatta termed as Drikpaksha and

Saurapaksha . Ketakar ji, proponent of famous of Ketaki system of

panchanga making, follolwed this bifurcation , although Ketakar ji

supported Drikpaksha (like Pandit Samanta Chandrasekha) while Kamlakara

supported Saurapaksha for astrological purposes.

> >

> > Sunil ji makes a wrong statement : " Makaranda developed the tables

the way Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar had done. " The latter followed

Drikpaksha while the former followed Saurapaksha. The only difference of

Makaranda Tables from socalled " modern " Suryasiddhanta is the

incorporation of beeja samskaara in Makaranda Tables, whose magnitudes

were explained in siddhantic terms in Makaranda-vivarana by Diwakar

Bhatta but Western commentators could not understant these differences

which were inflated in tantra method to huge proportions, because the

accumulated beeja of ~2 billion years in siddhanta method is distributed

over ~5000 years in tantra method beginning from Kaliyuga and over few

centuries beginning from some recent zero date. Varah Mihira followed

karana method but the verse mentioning his zero date is missing is

Panchsiddhantika, hence it is not possible to compute anything on the

basis of Panchsiddhantika due to missing verses.

> >

> > Sunil Ji is merely repeating Western propaganda by stating :

" Varahamihira was probably the last person to have seen the original

Suryasiddhanta as well as the Aryasiddhanta of the very first

Aryabhatta. " Varahamihira' s Suryasiddhanta has been called as " old " and

extant version as " new " by Western commentators, in spite of the fact

that he is following karana method and not siddhanta method while

describing Suryasiddhanta. Makarandaachaarya also followed tantra method

(different from Tantras of philosophy) instead of siddhanta method.

Extant version of Suryasiddhanta is the siddhanta method. That is why

those who do not know how to make panchangas from three methods imagine

Varahamihira' s version to be different from that of siddhanta method.

> >

> > I am sorry to disclose these facts to a person who is trying to gain

facts from me by paying me handsome dakshinaa in the form of sarcastic

remarks and non-obscene abuses. Even when he is incapable of refuting

me, he uses words which give an impression that my statements are

unreliable. For instance, he says : " Vinayji claims to have supplied

data for 382 - 1082 CE . " Why he does not falsify my supposed claims ??

I provided DATA, which are facts and not views. It is unfortunate Sunil

ji is unable to differentiate facts from views. He may oppose my views,

but he should not oppose facts. I devoted months over the period 3200

BC, as well as over other period. That is why I said Suryadiddhantic

planets do not tally with physical planets for ANY period. Sunil ji has

no time for making computations, and falsifies my years of research with

his unsubstantiated remarks about my integrity and truthfulness. As for

his own respect for truth, it is clear from

> > following remark.

> >

> > Sunil ji is again taking a recourse to deliberate distortions of my

statements with a view to poke fun at me. I said : " Pragjyotishpur was

the easternmost city of ancient India where first Sunrise (Prak -

jyotish) occurred. " To this, Sunil ji replied : " Regarding the naming of

Pragjyotishpur Vinayji thinks that the ancient Indians thought the

Kamrup district in Assam to be the end of the earth on the eastern

side. " By replacing " India " with " earth " in my statement, whom he

intends to befool ??

> >

> > The date 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta is mentioned in the text of

Suryasiddhanta itself, which says it was given by Lord Surya at the end

of Satayuga. This text says one divya day is of one normal year (verse

13 in Ch-1) and next verse says 360 divya days make one divya year. In

succeeding verses, one Mahayuga is said to be of 12000 divya years,

which is equal to 4320000 normal years. If we accept Sunil ji's absurd

notion of divya year being same as solar year, all siddhantas of ancient

India will have planetary motions being speeded up by 360 times, and it

will be impossible to make any panchanga at all from any traditional

Indian method, because Indians used to give number of planetary

revolutions in terms of revolutions per mahayuga. " Ankaanaam Vaamato

Gati " may be a great discovery for Sunil ji, but it is taught to every

student of Jyotisha at primary level by those experts of Sanskrit

universities who are called " pseudo-scholars " by Sunil ji

> just

> > because Sunil ji has not read original texts and thinks all pandits

are fools.

> >

> > While mentioning that Lord Surya gave present version of

Suryasiddhanta to Maya at the end of present Satyuga, the text also says

that it was given to maharshis in every yuga (ie, in every satyuga).

Hence, according to Suryasiddhanta it was present at the beginning of

Creation ! Whether Suryasiddhanta makes a false or true claim is another

matter, but Sunil ji has no right to call me names ( " pseudo-scholar " )

just because I quote the texts accurately, instead of making wild and

unsubstantiated claims like him. I do not use foul words for him, as he

does for me, but I must counter his wrong statements. He should read a

lot before posting his statements here. Internet fora are not for

misinformation by ignorants. He should study Makarandaprakaasha

(published by Chowkhamba) wrt Suryasiddhanta, which will take months,

before commenting wildly.

> >

> > -VJ

> > ============ = ============ ========= ==

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> > >

> > > Namaste,

> > > Â

> > > Will Vinayji tell us his opinion about the

Makaranda-Tables, which are based on  the Suryasiddhanta, in the

light of what he said here. Makaranda develop[ed the tables the way

Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar had done. While Makaranda corrected

the data for all the grahas probably he did not succeed in

correcting the data for Mars. Mihira (Varahamihira)Â was probably

the last person to have seen the original Suryasiddhanta as well as

the Aryasiddhanta of the very first Aryabhatta.

> > > Â

> > > Vinayji claims to have supplied data for 382 - 1082 CE . Why did

he not try the dates around 3200 BCE, the time around which one

Mayasura helped the Pandavas establish their new capital? There could be

a chance that this Mayasura was the author of the Suryasiddhanta, though

one cannot be sure. At least Vinayji should have tried that date around

3200 BCEÂ instead of saying that he can supply data for other dates

too if Sunilji wants.

> > > Â

> > > Some people who do not have proper knowledge of the Hindu Yuga

system claim that Mayasura was there more than two million years ago.

What can be more ridiculous than that. Kaulji and his likes ridicule the

Hindu Yugas just because some ignorant Hindu scholars stick toÂ

some fantastic lengths for the yugas such as 1,296,000 years for the

Dwapara yuga. One who has read the Puranas know that the length of

the Dwapara yuga is 3600 years and not 1,296,000 years. It is

because those pseudo-scholars do not know the importance of the

need to use the rule " Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati " in the interpretation of

the yuga data and they also do not know that Divya varsha isÂ

nothing but the Solar year, ie. the period the Sun takes to come

back to the same nakshatra or the Nirayana year. I read somewhere that

one author had given the date of 2163101 BCE for Suryasiddhanta. What

can be more damaging to the Hindu Astronomy than this?

> > > Â

> > > Nobody knows exactly as to how many verses the original

Suryasiddhanta contained. I too do not have any first-hand

information on that as I only read about it somewhere long time

ago. Will Vinayji care to tell the group the exact

number of verses in the Suryasiddhanta as composed by Mayasura if he

knows that instead of ridiculing the figure of 100,000 verses? I hope he

will also tell us as to how he is sanguine about the number he may

give if at all he can give the correct number of verses.

> > > Â

> > > Regarding the naming of Pragjyotishpur Vinayji thinks that

the ancient Indians thought the Kamrup district in Assam to be

the end of the earth on the eastern side. Interesting?

> > > Â

> > > Regards,

> > > Â

> > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> > > Â

> > >

> > > --- On Tue, 4/21/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

> > > Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> > >

> > > Tuesday, April 21, 2009, 3:44 AM

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Namaste,

> > >

> > > I support Sunil ji's view that Maya Asura was not a mlechchha. But

I hope my differences with him on following points will be answered in

good spirit.

> > >

> > > Eclipses are based upon relative motion of Moon with respect to

Sun, and is therefore a function of synodical month. Suryasiddhantic

synodical month (29.530587946071718 224742696207476 days = 53433336

synodic revolutions in a Mahayuga of 1577917828 days) is only 0.01204949

seconds longer than long term average value of modern astronomical value

of 29.53058780661 days, which implies a difference of merely 19 seconds

in 1600 years. Hence, Hartley found no major difference between

Suryasiddhantic and pgysical eclipses.

> > >

> > > But it is utterly wrong to say on this basis that Suryasiddhantic

planets tallied with physical planets in the past. It is a false myth

created by modern Western critics posing as experts of Suryasiddhanta. I

have supplied past data about physical and Suryasiddhantic planetary

positions in detail , yet Sunil ji is sticking to false claims that

Suryasiddhantic planets conformed to " real " (ie, physical) positions in

the past. Why he does not back up his false claims with calculations ?

There is no period in past , present or future when Suryasiddhantic

planets show less than ~10 degrees of difference from physical planets.

I have supplied data from 382 - 1082 AD, and I can supply data for other

periods too if Sunil ji wants. But he has no respect for facts and is

propagating fictious ideas. I request him not to give vent to unfounded

assertions based on Western critics.

> > >

> > > His statement is wrong : " The data as corrected by Samantaji holds

good for most of the astronomical calculations " . What is the proof ?

Siddhantic method can never be corrected for giving results acceptable

with refrence to physical planets, whatever corrections we make in terms

used. Sunil ji does not know the siddhantic formulae, that is why makes

such wrong guesses. I had explained four samskaaras made in siddhantic

mean planets, but modern astronomy does not recognize such samskaaras.

Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar used siddhantic method and made changes

merely in the magnitudes of terms. Hence, he got some approximations to

planetary positions of modern astronomy for his year of observation, but

these approximations soon grew upto intolerable differences. That is why

no one accepted Pandit Samanta Chandrasekhar' s method, excepting Sunil

ji who may be celebrating festivals secretly according to Pandit Samanta

Chandrasekhar' s calculations,

> perhaps

> > !!

> > > Only an atheist can say " Only a school-child will ask if Lord

Surya came in person before Mayasura and taught him Astronomy " and that

" skeptics say that there were several Mayasuras " (please take my words

in a friendly manner). Pragjyotishpur was the easternmost city of

ancient India where first Sunrise (Prak - jyotish) occurred.

Pragjyotishpur has no special contribution to astrology. It is useless

to counter such baseless statements. Sunil ji falsely claims that

Suryasiddhanta had 100000 verses originally (only 502 are left)!! He

feels no need of giving proof in favour of his invented myths... He

feels anything can be posted on internet.

> > >

> > > -VJ

> > >

> > > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> > > indiaarchaeology

> > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology; @

. com; vedic_research_ institute

> > > Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:43:22 AM

> > > Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> > >

> > > Dear all.

> > >

> > > Namaskar,

> > >

> > > The Suryasiddhanta, the ancient jewel of Indian Astronomy, has

been spoken of disparagingly by a lot of people, which include both

Western scholars and some Indians. You can see the following facts for

yourself.

> > >

> > > Suryasiddhanta is an ancient text and it is obvious that the data

given therein will not exactly hold for today. It is only imperative

that the data of the Suryasiddhanta should be upgraded from time to time

as the motions as well as the mutual distances of the grahas and the

upagrahas do change with time. Bhaskaracharya and others corrected the

data for their own time. Towards the end of the 19th century CE Pandit

Samanta Chandrasekhar revised the data based on his own naked eye

obsevation of the heavenly bodies. Only after his bok was published that

Samanta Chandrasekhar was given a telescope by a person and he exclaimed

that if only he had it earlier. Samantaji never borrowed any data from

the western scholars though Vinayji guesses that Samantaji got data from

the western scholars. The data as corrected by Samantaji holds good for

most of the astronomical calculations. The calculations of the eclipse

timings may now be somewhat off and one

> > > may need to update that data. In ancient times the astronomers

were not like the arm-chair astronomers of today and therefore such

updation was not a problem at all. Hartley got good results by using the

data from the Suryasiddhanta and he says that the data were more

accurate for past observations. This is in line with the requirement of

updation of the data of Suryasiddhjanta from time to time. Thus

Suryasiddhanta is an astronomical book for all time to come, if viewed

positively. Only an ignorant person will condemn Suryasiddhanta.

Mayasura was the composer of the Suryasiddhanta. Manu smriti tells us

about people using two bhashas ie. Arya-bhasha (refined language such as

sanskrit)) and Mlechha-bhasha (unrefined language). It is known that

Mayasura was definitely not one of the mlecchas as Mayasura wrote the

Suryasiddhanta in the Sanskrit language. Ironically some modern mlecchas

( who use foul words such as charlatan to describe others)

> > > call Mayasura as mleccha. An Asura is not necessarily a bad

peerson either as even Lord Krishna had been called an " Asura " as he

fought with Indra, the king of the suras.

> > >

> > > Mayasura was the author of Suryasiddhanta and he is said to have

got the knowledge of astronomy directly from Lord Surya. This obviously

means that he meditated on Lord Surya and observed the movement of the

heavenly bodies and thus he acquired the knowledge of astronomy. Even in

the 19th century Samanta Chabndrasekhar got his knowledge by direct

observation of the heavenly bodies. Only a school-child will ask if Lord

Surya came in person before Mayasura and taught him Astronomy.

> > >

> > > As regards the date of Mayasura some skeptics say that there were

several Mayasuras. Suffice it to say that the last of the Mayasuras

lived in the days of the Mahabharata war ie towards the end of the

Dwapara yuga. So Suryasiddhanta was composed at least about three

millennia before the Greeks came to know astronomy. It is also known

that the Asura king Bhagadatta brought to Hastinapur, a group of Yavanas

from Pragjyitishpur, which as its name indicates, was the earliest seat

of Jyotisha in the ancient times.

> > >

> > > Hope you will find this information useful.

> > >

> > > regards,

> > >

> > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > --- On Sun, 4/19/09, Avtar Krishen Kaul jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com>

wrote:

> > >

> > > Avtar Krishen Kaul jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com>

> > > [ind-Arch] Fwd: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> > > indiaarchaeology

> > > Sunday, April 19, 2009, 11:49 PM

> > >

> > > Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com,

" Avtar Krishen Kaul " <jyotirved@ ..> wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Vinay Jha-ji,

> > > Namaskar!

> > > Since you have alreadey downloaded a copy of Mahesh/Ganesh program

and maybe even Vasishta program from Hindu calendar forum, I am sure

that by now you are aware that the Surya Sidhanta fundamental arguments

are anything but correct! They are the most monstrous, beyond even the

imagination of a really good astronomer!

> > >

> > > Maya the mlechha is actually a liar of the worst kind since he

claims to have obtained those planetary details direct from Surya

Bhagwan himself at the fag end of the last Satya Yuga, i.e. at least

several million years ago, as per the duration of yugas of the same

Surya Sidhanta which is being eulogized by some " Vedic astrologers " .

> > > Or do you mean to say that it was Surya Bhagwan Himelf who gave

Maya the mlechha wrong arguments, and that also millions of years back?

> > > If we do not have any books even on palm leaves of an era of even

6000 BCE available by now, how come it is only works like Brighu

Samhitas and Surya Sidhanta etc that have survied for millions of years?

> > > If Maya the mlechha of the Surya Sidhanta is the Maya of

Satya/Trea-yuga, he is supposed to be the father-in-law of Rakishasa

king Ravana! How can it be the same so called Maya of the Mahabharata

era? Or do you meant to say that like Brighu Samhita, he also survived

right from the end of Satya-yuga to the fag end of Dwapara-yuga to guide

Arjuna through forest fire?

> > > Thus you have first to see tha janma-patri of Maya himself through

your Kundalee softwaree to acertain his earlier and successive janmas to

decide as to which Maya, if at all it is the real Maya, it is that you

are talking about and defending!

> > > Regards,

> > > A K Kaul

> > > Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com,

" vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > To All :

> > > >

> > > > One proof of archaicness and originality of Suryasiddhanta,

which some

> > > > misguided persons assume to be an adaptation from Greek work.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Mahabharata (MBh) has a story that when Jaraasandha threw his

(tantric)

> > > > gadaa at Mathura, it fell just adjacent to Mathura at a distance

of 99

> > > > yojanas from Girivraja, the ancient capital of Magadha.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Suryasiddhanta says Earth's equatorial diameter is of 1600

yojanas,

> > > > whose modern value is 12756.4 Kms (or 12756.3) . Hence, one

> > > > Suryasiddhantic yojana measures 7.97274625 Kms.

> > > >

> > > > Computed the distance of Girivraja to Mathura and convert it

into

> > > > Suryasiddhantic yojana, it comes to be 98.54 yojanas, which

Vyaasa ji

> > > > rounded off to 99 in his verse.

> > > >

> > > > The value of yojana in Aryabhatiya and Panchsiddhantika was 1.5

times

> > > > greater than that of Suryasiddhantic one. In later ages, it

fluctuated

> > > > towards upper side of Aryabhatta's value, and never came to

lower side

> > > > near to Suryasiddhantic value. Since Panchsiddhantika mentions

> > > > Suryasiddhanta, the latter must be an earliker work than

> > > > Panchsiddhantika. Moreover, before Ajatshatru shifted the

capital of

> > > > Magadha to Pataliputra around ~490 BCE (I forget the exact

year), the

> > > > capital was at Rajgir. Girivraja was the capital in so-called

> > > > prehistoric period (before ~600 BCE), and never in historic

period.

> > > > Therefore, can we not say that this story of MBh and magnitude

of

> > > > Suryasiddhantic yojana belong to a prehistoric period ??? This

story

> > > > cannot be brushed aside as an interpolation, because it forms

part of

> > > > the main story and its mathematical value is also accurate.

> > > >

> > > > Narada Purana is also accredited to Vyaasa Ji, although white

and brown

> > > > sahibs can think otherwise. It gives details which fit well with

> > > > Suryasiddhanta. Moreover, the philosophical and cosmological

framework

> > > > of Suryasiddhanta is perfectly in harmony with Vedic-Puranic-

Epic

> > > > tradition. Therefore, the kernel of all those references to

astrology or

> > > > astronomy in Vedic, Puranic and epic texts must be prehistoric

which fit

> > > > with Suryasiddhantic framework. It is only a summarized view,

one proof

> > > > in favour of which I have cited above.

> > > >

> > > > There are interpolations in epic-Puranic texts which conform to

> > > > Vedic-Puranic- Epic tradition of Suryasiddhantic astrology /

astronomy or

> > > > cosmology, but have a far smaller value of yojana. Such a small

value

> > > > has never been attested in historical period. Hence, I guess

these

> > > > interpolations belong to Harappan period perhaps. Hence, during

the

> > > > entire span of Treta and Dvapar ages, Suryasiddhantic yojana

must have

> > > > in vogue, unless proven otherwise, on account of aforementioned

evidence

> > > > from MBh, and similarity in other writings ascribed to Vyaasa ji

with

> > > > Suryasiddhantic framework.

> > > >

> > > > Now, I come to a difficult point. Almagest (Syntaxis) is a

hotch-potch

> > > > written by a clever plagiarist Ptolemy. Ptolemy is a proven

plagiarist,

> > > > who stole the idea of Hipparchus about precession and ascribed

the

> > > > discovery to his own experiments and observations. But modern

researches

> > > > have shown that those observational values belonged to the epoch

of

> > > > Hipparchus and not of Ptolemy (read the book 'The Crime of

Ptolemy' by a

> > > > modern professor Newton). Another hitherto undiscovered plagiary

of

> > > > Ptolemy is the fact that Suryasiddhanta has an organic unity and

> > > > beautiful systemic coherence which Almagest lacks. It is next to

> > > > impossible to prove this point, because Indians do not study

either

> > > > Almagest or Suryasiddhanta, and Westerners will never listen to

> > > > Suryasiddhantic point of view. One instance of the great

mathematical

> > > > coherence amounting to almost magic can be viewed by Clicking

Here

> > > > <http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Suryasiddanta+

%3A+Proof+ of+Brahma% \

> > > > 27s+Age> . There are many such hidden magics in Suryasiddhanta,

the

> > > > greatest of which is the accuracy of predictive astrology based

on it,

> > > > which was true in the era of Varaha Mihira and is true even

today. I am

> > > > translating my Hindi works and uploading them one by one on the

> > > > internet.

> > > >

> > > > One should test the accuracy of Suryasiddhanta astrologically,

by means

> > > > of Kundalee software. I have nothing to gain from it, because I

never

> > > > earned a paisa out of astrology. Kundalee software will turn

even a

> > > > novice into good astrologer in short time, provided intent is

sincere.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > -VJ

> > > >

> > > > ============ ==== ============ ====

> > > >

> > >

> > > --- End forwarded message ---

> > >

> > >