Historical question on Vedic Astrology (to Sundeep)

[Guest guest]

Dear Sundeep,

 

> Thank you for your replies, PVRji and Satyaji,

>

> I understand both your points. However, I do not think the writer of

> the article disputes that there is a lot of ORIGINAL "research" in

> Vedic astrology. He does seem to claim that the "seed" was planted by

> Greek influence - after which he says or implies that a "period of

> isolation" allowed Indians to germinate the original seed.

>

> In my viewpoint, the proof that the original "seed" was Greek can

> logically only be concluded if ALL of the following conditions are

> satisfied:

>

> 1) The oldest Indian astrological text is available WITH ITS ORIGINAL

> text. (Parenthetically, if this text is BPHS - do we know for a fact

> that it has been passed down unchanged over the generations?)

 

Nope. None of the teachings of Parasara or Jaimini existed in written form.

These verses were passed down orally from one generation to another. Some

corruption and introduction of modern words is quite possible.

 

In fact, BPHS in its current form was compiled by a few scholars in the last

100-150 years by collecting verses from various traditional pundits in

various corners of India.

 

> 2) This original text contains terms that are the same as of

> contemporary Greek languages.

> 3) These terms are verifiably of independent and (uninfluenced) Greek

> origin (PVRji also pointed out that this has to be proven).

>

> Only you Gurus who can read the original Sanskrit can answer points 1

> and 2.

>

> Thank you,

>

> Sundeep

 

A lot of similarities exist between Sanskrit and European languages. There

are a lot of missing links when we study ancient civilization. It is futile

to _guess_ which language came from which or which astrological tradition

came from which or which civilization borrowed from which. Language based

analysis of astro-history need not be correct.

 

To me, the teachings of Parasara and Jaimini represent something that is

truly brilliant and very complex. Greek astrology and even Indian astrology

of the last 2 millennia is much more simplistic compared to the teachings of

Parasara. You compare BPHS and Jaimini sutras with Brihajjatakam by

Varahamihira (a few centuries after Christ) and Phaladeepija by Mantreswara

(a few centuries ago). You'll see the difference in the level of knowledge.

The level of knowledge contained in the works of Varahamihira, Mantreswara

etc is similar and the one in the works of Parasara and Jaimini is

unquestionally of much higher quality and sophistication.

 

If you say that Hindus borrowed from Greeks, Varahamihira condensed it and

then brilliant research by Parasara and Jaimini made a lot of progress and

then the progress was suddenly undone in a few centuries, with Mantreswara

et al coming back to the level of astrological knowledge that existed at the

time of Varahamihira, I'll find it tough to believe. What is more likely is

this: Once there was a highly sophisticated compilation of knowledge, people

forgot it slowly as Kali Yuga set in (even though a few traditions were

getting the verses by heart and passing them on, like a lot of other ancient

knowledge) and Varahamihira etc revived the astrological knowledge along

with some Greeks. Whatever phenomenal work Varahamihira did ensured that the

level of astrological knowledge was kept at a particular level for almost a

couple of millennia. That explains why the teachings of Mantreswara and

Varahamihira are at similar levels and Parasara and Jaimini are at a much

higher level.

 

Until we know the history of civilization accurately, this cannot be

resolved satisfactorily. According to standard Hindu belief, Parasara lives

more than 5,000 years back.

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha