Guest guest Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 > Another point to remember is that while the Bhagavatam does make mention > of astronomy, astrology, ayurveda and numerous other subjects it is not a > text devoted to these subjects. Rather its specialty is the science of > Godhead. Other Vedic texts on jyotish, ayurveda etc may mention Bhagavan > in passing but one could hardly become expert in the science of Krsna by > studing those texts because that is not their aim or subject. Similarly > since the stated aim of Bhagavatam is not anything other than Lord Krsna > we should not expect that it will give detailed or expert knowledge in > other subjects which is not its focus. It's obvious that Bhagavatam is not an astrology schoolbook, but we still expect the little information Bhagavatam gives about astrology to be correct, right? That's intriguing because I don't know any instances where the sidereal zodiac is clearly defined in the Vedas. If there would be clear sastric definition, there wouldn't be so many competing ayanamsas and disagreement between vedic astrologers, right? Does anyone know a clear definition of the sidereal zodiac given in the Vedas? Your servant, Abhirama das 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.