moon/RAHU

[Guest guest]

IM NOT SAYING IT IS CORRECT:-)

JUST FOR INFORMATION

 

Ccd

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

 

EDITORIAL

December 8, 1999 VNN5040 Comment on this story

 

Vedic Shadowy Planet

 

 

------

--------

BY DHARMAPADA DASA

 

EDITORIAL, Dec 8 (VNN) — Vedic " Shadowy Planet, " Chaya-Graha Mandi,

Observed by Astronomers at Lucerne

 

In addition to the seven major planets, Vedic astrology recognises a set

of non-luminous, shadowy planets, the two most famous being Rahu and

Ketu, the Northern and Southern nodes of the Moon. Two others which are

often referred to in the Vedic astrological literature are Gulika and

Mandi. These-non luminous planets have never been considered to have

have physical shape or form, although there are descriptions of them in

the Puranas and calculations are given to find their coordinates.

 

At this moment we shall consider a sighting of what is apparently Mandi,

one of the principal non-luminous planets. In the Vedic astronomical

literature, all non-luminous planets are deemed to have an eclipsing

function, in other words, the Puranas describe that these planets cover

or " swallow " the luminaries.

 

But the lack of any kind of evidence whatsoever of the existence of the

non-luminous planets has always grouped in their belief with the stuff

of fairy tales or imagination.However, the following article from the

August, 1999, edition of the British magazine Astronomy Now seems to

provide documented evidence which supports the existence of the

non-luminous planet Mandi. Such proof seems to be unwittingly provided

by the Western astronomical community itself, which is very ironic as

Western astronomers usually discount the Puranic astronomical

descriptions as being poppycock. At any rate, in the " Key Moments in

Astronomy " column, by Ian Seymour, the article entitled " A Very

Singular Phenomenon " appeared:

 

" Historical sources record many astonishing astronomical events, but

few remain as bewildering as' a very singular phenomenon seen in the

disk of the Sun,' reported by the Annual Register for 1766. The

journal's account warrants full repetition, for events of August 9,

1762, seem both well-attested and unique.

 

On that day ' M. de Rostan, of the economic society at Berne, and of the

medicophysical society a Basle, whilst he was taking the Sun's altitude

with a quadrant at Lucerne ... observed that the Sun gave but a faint

pale light, which he attributed to the vapors of the Leman lake;

however, happening to direct a 14 foot telesope armed with a micrometer,

to the Sun, he he was surprised to see the Eastern side of the Sun, as

it were eclipsed about three digits, taking in a kind of nebulousity,

which environed the opaque body, by which the Sun was eclipsed. In the

space of about two hours and a half, the South side of the said body,

whatever it was, appeared detached from the limb of the Sun; but the

limb, or more properly, the northern extremity of this body, which had

the shape of a spindle, in breadth about three of the Sun's digits, and

nine in length, did not quit the Sun's northern limb. This spindle kept

continually advancing on the Sun's body, from East towards West, with no

more than about half the velocity with which the ordinary spots move;

for it did not disappear till the 7th of September ... M. Rostan, during

that time observed it almost every day: that is to say for near a month:

and, by means of a camera obscura, he delineated the figure of it, which

he sent to the Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris.'

 

The next paragraph raises this observation far above the usual run of

fantastic anecdotes, for ' the same phaenomenon was observed at Sole, in

the bishopric of Basle, situated about 5 and 40 German leagues Northward

of Lausanne. M. Coste ... observed it there, with a telescope of 11

feet,, and found it of the same spindle-like form ... only it was not

quite so broad [ for ] the body began to turn about, and present its

edge. A more remarkable circumstance is, that at Sole it did not answer

to the same point of the Sun as it did at Lausanne: it therefore had a

considerable parallax: but what so very extraordinary a body, placed

between the Sun and us, should be, is not easy to divine. It was no

spot, since its motion was greatly too slow, nor was it a planet or

comet, its figure seemingly proving the contrary. In a word, we know of

nothing to have recourse to in the heavens whereby to explain this

phaenomenon; and, what adds to the oddness of it, M. Messier, who

constantly observed the Sun at Paris during the same time, saw nothing

of such an appearance.'"

 

The reader may note that the phenomenon was not preceived by Messier

observing in Paris. A modern parallel, which has been narrated by Jan

Lamprecht in his book " Hollow Planets," may offer an explanation for

this. In the 1950s, strange situation arose whereby one noted

astronomer, Richard Baum of the British Astronomical Association, and

Patrick Moore, perhaps Britain's most noted astronomer, disagreed on

their observations of the planet Venus. Richard Baum reported seeing

radial spokes emanate from a point on or near the Southern pole of Venus

while Patrick Moore never preceived them. They both had a sensitivity

check done on their eyes, and it was determined that Richard Baum had

quite a bit of sensitivity in the ultra violet band while Patrick Moore

did not. Visual sensitivity could also account for the fact that Messier

did not perceive what the other two did.

 

Ian Seymour concludes his article by commenting " What could this object

have been? ...Natural explanations do not readily come to mind ...."

 

At this point, I would like to offer an explanation for that which was

witnessed by the two astronomers. It was the shadowy planet Mandi of

Vedic astronomy. The celestial coordinates of the Sun and Mandi were

synonomous, I repeat synonomous, during the time period under

consideration. For example, on August 9, 1762, on the first day of M.

Rostan's observations, according to the Vedic Jyotish program Visual

Jyotish, the Sun was in sidereal Cancer at 26*26, while Mandi was at 25*

45of sidereal Cancer. On September 7th, the Sun was at sidereal Leo at

24*27 and Mandi was at 23*46. The half a degree of divergence is

negligible as the above-mentioned software program is not exactly

research grade. The reader may not have much experience with commercial

astronomy or astrology programs, but anytime one takes such a program

back several hundred years, errors of a few minutes start cropping up.

For our purposes right now, however, the information at hand more than

serves the purpose- this scribe will leave it to somebody else to come

along and do any double checking.

 

Not only do we have a match in terms of coordinates, but we also have a

match in terms of a description of the nature and activity of the "

planet " Mandi- it was performing its role as per the Puranas of

engulfing the Sun with its shadow.

 

Now, such an explanation will not probably sit well with the modern,

Western scientific temperament which tends to strongly discount Vedic

astronomical descriptions, maybe because such descriptions arent

understood, and maybe because they seem to be too fantastic. But this

explanation must be dealt with nevertheless because such a close

astronomical correspondence in terms of coordinance cannot be chalked up

to merely chance; nor may a simultaneous correspondence between the

observed effect of the phenomenon and the Puranic descriptions of the

way in which Mandi is supposed to cover or " swallow " the Sun be

chalked up to chance. The correspondences pointed out justify and even

demand investigation by modern astronomers, in the same way that they

justify and demand that the Puranic astronomical descriptions be

revisited with new respect, even though such descriptions may not

tabulate with currently accepted parameters. The timeless wisdom of

Hamlet is very apropriate in this regard as he instructs his friend:"

There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of

in your philosophy." ( Hamlet, I, v, 166 )

 

The indulgence of the readers is duely appreciated and I hope that the

reader's faith in the Vedic version has been solidified.

 

Yours Truly,

 

Dean De Lucia/Dharmapada Dasa