RE: Truthful history of Jyotish? Vedic?

[Guest guest]

>

> Mark Kröger [markkroger]

> Saturday, December 21, 2002 5:02 PM

 

Namaste Mark,

 

Very nice observations.

 

> Some say that Maharishi Parasara was lived around

> 3200 BC and perhaps Maharishi Jaimini too, but it is

> hard to believe that. All evidence date the "Brihat

> Parasara Hora Sashtra" more likely to near the era

> of Aryabhatta and Varahamira, so. 476-587 AD –

> perhaps between the 300-500 AD.

 

The traditional view (ok, the version I know)

attributes Mahabharata to around 3000 B.C., which is

when, actually earlier to that, must have Sage

Parashara lived, for, he was the father of Sage

Vedavyasa who is said to be the author of quite

awesome literature: Mahabharata, Puranas and

Brahmasutras etc.

 

Given that BPHS 'looks' younger than 3000 B.C., it is

possible that there are more Parasharas than the one

we know. It is a possibility not ruled out. Even there

appear to be more than one Vedavyasas.

 

So is the case with Jaimini too. He was a

thoroughgoing mImAmsaka (whose theory is quite

atheistic), later converted into the Vedantic fold by

Vedavyasa. He has written mImAmsa-sUtras also that go

in line with his theory and that contradict some

places in the Jaimini Upadesha sutras.

So it is possible that there are more than one

Jaiminis around. This is not an unusual occurrence.

Yet another well known instance is that of Patanjali;

one who is said to written a spectacular commentary on

Panini's Grammar sutras, while the other is the author

of Yoga-sutras (the system which has developed into

the ubiquitous "Yoga").

 

Another simple possibility is mis-attribution.

Attribute the work to a wellknown person to increase

its acceptability.

 

So, how would you rule out these possibilities?

 

> It is clear, that the Nakshatras and other knowledge

> of Planets was known in very early history of India.

> The ”Astrology” was very observing and serving the

> needs of society. However it wasn´t ”Astrology” in a

 

> sense as we now understand it to be – he

”Horoscope”-

> Astrology developed much later.

 

Quite true. Much of astrology that happens today isn't

the 'Vedanga' i.e., the limb of Veda, is. The limb of

Veda seems to be more observational i.e., related to

astronomy, and related to 'tithis', rather than

predictive and 'horoscope' based. This can also be

seen by the fact that in Chandogya Upanishad (btw,

Upanishads are not Vedangas as Chandrasekhar

mentioned, but a part of Vedas themselves), where Sage

Narada refers to this study as 'nakshatra vidya'

instead of 'jyotisha' that we all use these days.

 

All the 'old' texts, Shatapatha Brahmana, for

instance, they only talk of naxatras and tithis (to do

certain sacrifices), but never of the horoscopes or

anything nearer.

 

Regards,

Nomadeva

 

 

 

 

New DSL Internet Access from SBC &

http://sbc.