Fw: Originality of Suryasiddhanta, and Honesty of our Indologists

[Guest guest]

To All :

 

It is amusing to read the discussion among some " learned " indologists in

previous posts under this thread. They have to attack Suryasiddhanta at all

costs, by hook or by crook.

 

Mr Prafulla Mendki said : " I am refering to MBH2( not 3) 188.22 to 188.26(

Gitapress) pages 1482 & 1483 [ " Gitapress Khanda 2(Vanparva and Viratparva) in

which Markandeya Samasyaparva is present.188. 22 is on page 1482. " ]

Chatvaryahu: sahastrani varshanam tat krutam yugam

tasya tavat shati sandhya sandhyansha: ch tathavidha: "

 

And Mr Mendki concluded : " Suryasiddhanta was written after start of

Kaliyug....The idea of Dev varsha and Manav varsha came after Mahabharata i.e.

after start of Kaliyug . "

 

Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya complained that " MBH2( not 3) 188.22 to 188.26(

Gitapress) pages 1482 & 1483 " does not contain aforementioned verse, but Mr

Mendki was adamant. Then, I informed Sunil ji in a private mail that Mr Mendki

was misinforming him. This verse ( chatvaaryaahu: sahasraani varshaanaam

tatkritam yugam...) occurs in 5th Khanda of Gitapress edition, namely

Shaantiparva (chapter 231, verse 20). I said to Sunil Ji : " Read this whole

chapter. Verse 17 gives measure of divya day+night being equal to human year,

and verse 18 says this divya system is henceforth used to describe Brahmaa's

cycle in secceeding mantras. Prafulla Mendki was deliberately misleading you. It

is sad you disbelieve in truth and lend your ear to treacherous and false

persons. "

 

I wonder whether Sunil Ji or Mendki Ji are deliberately distorting facts for

befooling us, or are driven to wrong conclusions out of unwillingness to read

ancient texts directly. If they are sincere, I request them to read ancient

texts properly before deriving any conclusion. If they have no time to search

for truth, they can look at online Mahabharata , which says : " A year (of human

beings) is equal to a day and night of the gods. .... " (verse 17).

 

Instead of retracting his wrong and offensive statements against me, if is

deplorable that Sunil Ji is still looking for or inventing some excuse. Honesty

is best policy. He was accusing me of wrongly interpreting texts, which

according to him said divya year was same as a solar year. Shantiparva, ch-231

is entirely devoted to yuga system, which is completely in line with

Suryasiddhantic framework, and so is Narada Purana, which is the only Purana

that has given a detailed account of ancient astronomy, and this account is 100%

Suryasiddhantic.

 

Suryasiddhanta is the onlt extant archaic siddhanta, and even Varaha Mihira said

it was the ,ost clear of all 5 siddhantas which had survived upto his age :

Suryasiddhanta survived almost completely (excepting its Drikpaksha whch

survived here and there in parts) while all others survived in non-working

conditions or not at all. It is not a coincidence that all opponents of

Vedic-puranic tradition are targeting Suryasiddhanta for attack.

 

I did not give Sunil Ji the address of my website where Drikpakshiya Ganita of

Suryasiddhanta lies, because instead of trying to understand it, he will only

abuse it and me, as he has been doing all along. I gave him one formula of

physical precession which he literally digested without returning any comment or

even his customary " complements " .

 

-Vinay Jha

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

 

 

________________________________

" sunil_bhattacharjya " <sunil_bhattacharjya

Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendki

Cc: ;

Tuesday, May 5, 2009 11:15:21 AM

Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Prafulla,

 

I am referring to the textavailable from the " Sacred texts " site. Why don't you

give the five verses that you are referring to?

 

SunilK. Bhattacharjya

 

--- On Wed, 4/29/09, Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendki@ .co. in> wrote:

 

Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendki@ .co. in>

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

 

 

--- 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@ .co. in>

Thursday, 30 April, 2009, 7:46 AM

 

Dear Prafulla,

 

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.

 

S.K.Bhattacharjya

 

--- On Wed, 4/29/09, Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendki@ .co. in> wrote:

 

Prafulla Mendki <prafulla_mendki@ .co. in>

Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

sunil_bhattacharjya @

Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 1:58 AM

 

Dear Sunil

I am refering to MBH2( not 3) 188.22 to 188.26( Gitapress) pages 1482 & 1483

Chatvaryahu: sahastrani varshanam tat krutam yugam

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

Prafulla

 

--- On Wed, 29/4/09, sunil_bhattacharjya @ <sunil_bhattacharjya

@> wrote:

 

sunil_bhattacharjya @ <sunil_bhattacharjya @>

Re: Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

" prafulla Vaman Mendki " <prafulla_mendki@ .co. in>

Wednesday, 29 April, 2009, 5:05 AM

 

Dear friend,

 

The verse (MBH 3.188.22) is as follows:

 

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¥‡

 

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

verse you arer referring to?

 

Best wishes,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

--- On Tue, 4/28/09, prafulla Vaman Mendki <prafulla_mendki@ .co. in>

wrote:

 

prafulla Vaman Mendki <prafulla_mendki@ .co. in>

Fw: Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

" Sunil Bhattacharjya " <sunil_bhattacharjya @>

Tuesday, April 28, 2009, 6:26 AM

 

prafulla_mendki@ .co. in 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_bhattacharjy

a wrote:

>

>

>

> --- On Sat, 4/25/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

>

> Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a.>

> Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

>

> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology

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

>

>

Namaste,

>

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

>

> Secondly he says as follows:

>

> Quote

>

> 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.

>

> Unquote

>

> 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.

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunil Kumar Bhattacharjya

>

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

>

> vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >

> Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

>

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

>

> Namaste,

>

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

> >

> > 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) was probably the last person to have

seen the original Suryasiddhanta as well as the Aryasiddhanta of the very first

Aryabhatta.

> >

> > 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 BCE instead of saying that he

can supply data for other dates too if Sunilji wants.

> >

> > 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 to 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 is 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?

> >

> > 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.

> >

> > 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?

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> >

> >

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

> >

> >

> > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

> > Re: Re: Originality of Suryasiddhanta

> >

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Namaste,

> >

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

> >

> >