Guest guest Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Dear Rajeev Namaste Thanks for the wonderful link. >But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, >is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? Dont you feel that every work is 'work' of God. Why to single out Astrologers? Moreover, what is wrong in helping God? Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. AmolMAndar vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote: > Namaste, > > Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. > > I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. > > I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. > > I have following point to support my views > > Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? > > In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. > > Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. > > Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' > http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 > > > > THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH > > The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- > > The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. > Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. > The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. > The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. > Eight kinds of evidence > > > Direct Cognizance. > Inference. > Analogy. > Testimony. > History. > Deduction. > Possibility. > Non-existence or Negation. > > > Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. > But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge > > > > This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. > It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. > Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters > > > > Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. > Inference is of three kinds:- > > Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. > > > Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. > > > Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. > > > Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana > Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. > Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. > > > > > Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. > An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). > > > Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. > > > Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." > > > Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. > > > Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. > > These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* > It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise > > If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. > > > Regards > > Rajeev > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Dear Rajeev, Having established that you have read Vedas. Next question is have you heard about Vedangas? Let us not quote the opinion of Swami Dayanand( for whom I have respect) as Veda. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:48 AMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 If every work is work of God then are adulteration, telling lies , doing fraud with somebody etc. are also work of God. If we accept this then God becomes an adulterator, lier etc. Vedic God does not expect the help of anybody in doing his work because he is all powerful , omniscient. The God which expects help from anybody is not God but a humanbeing or a fraud. Regards Rajeev amolmandar <amolmandar > wrote: Dear Rajeev NamasteThanks for the wonderful link. >But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, >is it not against Vedas and Gita ????Dont you feel that every work is 'work' of God. Why to single out Astrologers? Moreover, what is wrong in helping God? Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.AmolMAndarvedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote:> Namaste,> > Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science.> > I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic.> > I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. > > I have following point to support my views> > Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ????> > In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about.> > Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference.> > Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth '> http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8> > > > THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH > > The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:-> > The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. > Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. > The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. > The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. > Eight kinds of evidence> > > Direct Cognizance. > Inference. > Analogy. > Testimony. > History. > Deduction. > Possibility. > Non-existence or Negation.> > > Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. > But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge> > > > This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. > It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. > Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters> > > > Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. > Inference is of three kinds:-> > Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning.> > > Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. > > > Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first.> > > Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana > Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. > Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. > > > > > Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. > An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). > > > Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. > > > Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." > > > Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. > > > Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. > > These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* > It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise> > If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud.> > > Regards> > Rajeev> > > > > SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design softwareArchives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 I said I am trying to understand Vedas, Yes I have heard about Vedangas as well. But in Manu Smriti it is also written that Vedas are the supreme authority , so in case of doubts over other Vedic scriptures or in any discussion Vedas are the ultimate authority. As Vedas are considered as the word of God where as the Vedangas , Angas , Upvedas are the work of Rishis. ChandrsShekhar Ji I don't have the slightest intention to harm the feeling of anybody but whatever is truth should be known to everybody , because it is the truth alone that further the knowledge of the learned. Regards RajeevChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Having established that you have read Vedas. Next question is have you heard about Vedangas? Let us not quote the opinion of Swami Dayanand( for whom I have respect) as Veda. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:48 AMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Dear Rajeev, Yes, Vedas are the ultimate authority, but this does not mean we can berate the vedangas. Please realize that the vedas were revealed to a rishi, and so every passge in the veda has a rishi associated with it. So, both the vedas and vedangas come to us courtesy of the rishis. One of the famous lineages of the vedic era is Parashara --> Vyaasa --> Jaimini. We have BPHS from the former, and JUS from the later. In BHPS, Parashara says that Jyotisha must be learned by all good people, particularly the brahmins. So, it is more than reasonable to assume that Veda Vyaasa learnt Jyotisha from his father, and in turn taught his son. Thus, Jyotish has the blessings of Vedavyaasa himself. Second, vedanga is oft translated as "limbs of the vedas" including grammar etc. We cannot stand without our limbs....and one cannot even read the Vedas without knowledge of sanskrit grammar. Lastly, what is Jyotish? Is it not a science that is part and parcel of vedic spirituality? Have a look at the secrets which are being revealed by this tradition: Narayana Dasa (movement of Narayana), Sudasa (movement of Lakshmi), Shoola dasa (movment of Rudra), Tithi Pravesha (combination of sun/moon...i.e. purusha/prakriti). In Jaimini Sutras, the first source of strength is based on the placement of AK alone....and we have been taught that this is applicable in dasas like Drig Dasa (spirituality). When we truly understand Jyotish, we will understand Narayana, Lakshmi and Rudra ! Similarly, in some Sanskrit traditions, they try to see spirituality through Sanskrit itself, in each akshara, shabda etc (i.e. mantra shastra) ajit - Rajeev Kumar vedic astrology Thursday, September 04, 2003 6:24 AM RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji, I said I am trying to understand Vedas, Yes I have heard about Vedangas as well. But in Manu Smriti it is also written that Vedas are the supreme authority , so in case of doubts over other Vedic scriptures or in any discussion Vedas are the ultimate authority. As Vedas are considered as the word of God where as the Vedangas , Angas , Upvedas are the work of Rishis. ChandrsShekhar Ji I don't have the slightest intention to harm the feeling of anybody but whatever is truth should be known to everybody , because it is the truth alone that further the knowledge of the learned. Regards RajeevChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Having established that you have read Vedas. Next question is have you heard about Vedangas? Let us not quote the opinion of Swami Dayanand( for whom I have respect) as Veda. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:48 AMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Sir, Just deciphered from what I know in general and having given some thoughts on my own on this subject: I forgot the name, but I know that the puranic demons Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakashipu were born to a sage and his wife. Hiranyakashipu later gave birth to Prahlada (who is considered to be the avataar of VedaVyaasa) and Lord Narayana incarnated as Lakshmi Narasimha to kill Hiranyakashipu and restore peace and order on earth. The enraged brother of Hiranyakashipu, that is Hiranyaksha, wanted to avenge for his brother's death and hence disguised himself initially and stole the 4 vedas from Brahma. The 4 Vedas are thus important for creation since Jyotisha lays out the rules for creation and Brahma follows Jyotisha, ie the essence of Vedas on creation, for the process of creation. Hiranyaksha did so because without Vedas and the rules of Vedas on creation, which is Jyotisha, Brahma cannot create new life. Then he sunk the earth under the deepest of the seas (which I understand to be the darkness of ignorance). The devas and other gods thus suffered a lot because the avir-bagha and other offerings made to them by rishis and munis were not made any further and also no more new life could be created without Vedas and Jyotisha. To end this suffering, and to maintain rule and order, Sriman Narayana once again incarnated into the form of Koorma Avatara and killed Hiranyaksha and brought out earth from the deepest of the oceans, with earth placed between his tusks. Brahma now could carry-on with creation since he got back Jyotisha, or the rules of the Vedas on Creation. The above is purana, from which we understand that Jyotisha is essentially the rules laid down in the Vedas on creation. I understand that all puranas, Vedas, etc. can be interpreted at various levels - one is the obvious meaning and another a more subtle, profoundly spiritual meaning. This profound spiritual meaning in essence is what I consider to be the 'rules' or 'Jyotisha' which all when collectively gathered up from all the 4 vedas constitute the whole science or the whole set of rules, to be followed by Brahma on creation. So naturally, a set of works of the divine having subtle spiritual meaning to decipher a collective set of rules (Vedas on Jyotisha) is not going to refer to these rules in just a single spot, nor is it going to name it explicitly, the extract of the vedas on the rules of creation were to be understood collectively by Brahma and other rishis, and the name of 'Jyotish' may have been given by them. Even according to mythology, the 'Veda Purusha' has 2 eyes - Vedas being one of them and Jyotisha being the other - because both serve the purpose of opening the spiritual eyes of a man and lead him away from ignorance. Also, if you consider what is the impact Jyotishis have on people - Jyotishis never speak or advice people to do anything wrong. Instead, when one learns or follows Jyotish, one understands about the impact of karmas, the need to do good karmas which includes thoughts, speech, listening and action, and hence turns more spiritual. A true believer of Jyotisha turns towards learning Vedas, and worship and never the opposite. And the fact that Jyotisha is a vast set of rules on creation as subtly taught by Vedas explains why it is so vast, and explains why Jyotisha can predict the past, present and future of mankind, afterall the same rules have been used for creation! I hope you will give some thought into Jyotisha being an essence of creation rules as laid down by Vedas. With regards, Jayashree vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote: > Namaste AmolMAndar Ji, > > If every work is work of God then are adulteration, telling lies , doing fraud with somebody etc. are also work of God. If we accept this then God becomes an adulterator, lier etc. > > Vedic God does not expect the help of anybody in doing his work because he is all powerful , omniscient. The God which expects help from anybody is not God but a humanbeing or a fraud. > > Regards > > Rajeev > > > > > amolmandar <amolmandar> wrote: > Dear Rajeev Namaste > > Thanks for the wonderful link. > > >But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, > >is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? > > Dont you feel that every work is 'work' of God. Why to single out > Astrologers? Moreover, what is wrong in helping God? > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > AmolMAndar > > vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> > wrote: > > Namaste, > > > > Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to > brand it as a Vedic science. > > > > I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In > ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an > athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are > anti Vedic. > > > > I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is > for them only I am raising this question. > > > > I have following point to support my views > > > > Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) > and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in > my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in > their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? > > > > In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic > Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts > that astrologers generally talk about. > > > > Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true > sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on > Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. > > > > Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology > is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy > and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' > > http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 > > > > > > > > THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH > > > > The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be > carefully examined by the following five tests:- > > > > The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings > of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is > right, the reverse is wrong. > > Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, > the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without > the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature > can never be true. > > The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, > unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to > their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is > unacceptable. > > The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for > you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to > others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct > towards others. > > Eight kinds of evidence > > > > > > Direct Cognizance. > > Inference. > > Analogy. > > Testimony. > > History. > > Deduction. > > Possibility. > > Non-existence or Negation. > > > > > > Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, > which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their > objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the > senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. > > But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words > with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid > called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some > water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is > water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the > word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct > knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge > > > > > > > > This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient > character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable > circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took > it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and > knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression > of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave > place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the > thing was revealed in the light. > > It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain > in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and > say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take > another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva > Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in > doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your > knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be > that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. > > Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct > Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with > the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances > unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in > character) nor into which any element of doubt enters > > > > > > > > Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows > direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together > at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe > is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For > instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have > had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you > infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of > the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the > present moment. > > Inference is of three kinds:- > > > > Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, > e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, > again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the > wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students > engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they > will become men of learning. > > > > > > Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to > causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it > must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, > you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a > father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the > Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the > elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a > man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a > virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the > consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, > pleasure. > > > > > > Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is > no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the > thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between > the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place > without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a > certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the > latter place by moving from the first. > > > > > > Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness > to another. The thing which is required to be known is called > Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some > kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana > > Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu > Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has > never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva > Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, > his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." > So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing > through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and > thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought > him to his master. > > Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, > some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a > jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once > know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind > of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to > Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana > or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called > Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above > two instances. > > > > > > > > > > Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt > (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. > > An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all > the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, > truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love > for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely > actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, > experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all > A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). > > > > > > Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a > person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, > Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. > NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in > history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the > day. - Tr. > > > > > > Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which > naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one > says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from > a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above > statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," > or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." > > > > > > Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing > that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. > Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, > and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a > child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the > dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted > mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw > horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple > born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not > have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That > alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. > > > > > > Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing > in some other place from its absence from the place where you were > told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and > bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found > that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must > be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the > elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and > brought him to his master. > > > > These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their > number can be reduced to four fi History be included under > Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under > Inference.* > > It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can > ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise > > > > If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. > > > > > > Regards > > > > Rajeev > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology- > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Dear Rajeevkumar, I think that yours is a serious query and therefore I was asking you questions one by one. Here is what Shankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetha tells us about Jyotisha. In hindu religion there is no greater authority that can interprete the Svriptures. "Eye of the Vedapurusa(HinduDharma: Jyotisa) Receive pages from Hindu Dharma in your email Of the fourteen branches of learning basic to our Vedic religion, I have so far dealt with siksa, Vyakarana, Chandas and Nirukta. These four form part of Sadanga (the six limbs of the Vedas). I will now speak about Jyotisa, it being the first of the remaining two of the Sadanga. Jyotisa, which is the science of the celestial bodies and the eye of the Vedapurusa, consists of three "skandhas" or sections. So it is called "Skandha-trayatmakam". Sages like Garga, Narada and Parasura have written samhitas (treatises) on this subject. The sun god, in disguise, taught the science to Maya, the carpenter of the Asuras. The work incorporating his teachings is called the Suryasiddhanta. There are treatises on astronomy written by celestials and sages and ordinary mortals. Of them some are by Varahamihira, Aryabhata and Bhaskaracarya. In recent times we had Sundaresvara Srautin who wrote a work called Siddhanta-Kausthubham. Why is Jyotisa regarded as the eye of the Vedapurusa? What purpose is served by the eye? Near objects may be perceived by the sense of touch. With our eyes we learn about distant objects. Just as our eyes help us to know objects that are distant in space (that is just as we see distant object with our eyes), Jyotisa sastra help us to find out the position of the heavenly bodies that are distant in time (their configuration many years ago in the past or many years hence in future). We can find out directly the positions of the sun and the moon and other heavenly bodies. Just as we can know near objects, even if we are blind, by feeling them with our hands, we can learn about the positions of the heavenly bodies near in time even without the help of astronomy. What is 50 feet away is to be perceived by the eye. Similarly, if you want to know the position of planets 50 years ago or 50 years hence, you have to have recourse to Jyotisa. We cannot, however, form a full picture of near objects only by feeling them. For instance, we cannot know whether they are green or red. For this, we must see them with our eyes. Again, even if we are able to see the planet with our naked eye, we will need the help of astrology to find out its effects on our life, how its positions in the heavens will influence our destiny. This is the reason why Jyotisa is called the eye of the Vedapurusa. Vedic rituals are performed according to the position of the various planets [and the sun and the moon]. There are rules to determine this. The right day and hour [muhurta] for a function is fixed according to the position of the the celestial bodies. Here again, Jyotisa performs the function of the eye. This Anga of the Vedas is indeed called "nayana" which word means "to lead". A blind man needs to be led by another. So it is the eye that leads. Astronomy / Astrology is the eye that enables us to fix the hours for Vedic rituals. " I trust this will remove any misunderstanding you have about jyotisha being Vedic.You may visit the site of Kaaaanchi Kamakoti peetham from the link above and get an authoritative interpretation of the scriptures. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 6:55 PMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji, I said I am trying to understand Vedas, Yes I have heard about Vedangas as well. But in Manu Smriti it is also written that Vedas are the supreme authority , so in case of doubts over other Vedic scriptures or in any discussion Vedas are the ultimate authority. As Vedas are considered as the word of God where as the Vedangas , Angas , Upvedas are the work of Rishis. ChandrsShekhar Ji I don't have the slightest intention to harm the feeling of anybody but whatever is truth should be known to everybody , because it is the truth alone that further the knowledge of the learned. Regards RajeevChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Having established that you have read Vedas. Next question is have you heard about Vedangas? Let us not quote the opinion of Swami Dayanand( for whom I have respect) as Veda. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:48 AMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 My prime question is whether there is refernece to Astrology(as concept of fate) in Vedas. If you say yes then please quote the references. You also said that you respect Swami Dayananda as Veda(Learned, Knowledge) then what's the problem in quoting his opinion ?. And who can deny the tests of truth I gave in my last mail. Jyotish means knowledge of light etymologically. It is used torefer to the science of astronomy. It DOES NOT actually mean astrology even though due to our ignorance we beleive Jyotish to mean astrology.Infact there has been no word in Sanskrit for astrology as the concept of fate being decided by planets was non-existent till very recent times (a few thousand years ago).Those who claim to be masters of vedic astrology are just making false claims since there is not even a remote reference to astrology in Vedas.Thus, you will find that in none of these books on vedic astrology or vedaang jyotish is any shloka or sukta given from vedas. Regards Rajeev Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeevkumar, I think that yours is a serious query and therefore I was asking you questions one by one. Here is what Shankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetha tells us about Jyotisha. In hindu religion there is no greater authority that can interprete the Svriptures. "Eye of the Vedapurusa(HinduDharma: Jyotisa) Receive pages from Hindu Dharma in your email Of the fourteen branches of learning basic to our Vedic religion, I have so far dealt with siksa, Vyakarana, Chandas and Nirukta. These four form part of Sadanga (the six limbs of the Vedas). I will now speak about Jyotisa, it being the first of the remaining two of the Sadanga. Jyotisa, which is the science of the celestial bodies and the eye of the Vedapurusa, consists of three "skandhas" or sections. So it is called "Skandha-trayatmakam". Sages like Garga, Narada and Parasura have written samhitas (treatises) on this subject. The sun god, in disguise, taught the science to Maya, the carpenter of the Asuras. The work incorporating his teachings is called the Suryasiddhanta. There are treatises on astronomy written by celestials and sages and ordinary mortals. Of them some are by Varahamihira, Aryabhata and Bhaskaracarya. In recent times we had Sundaresvara Srautin who wrote a work called Siddhanta-Kausthubham. Why is Jyotisa regarded as the eye of the Vedapurusa? What purpose is served by the eye? Near objects may be perceived by the sense of touch. With our eyes we learn about distant objects. Just as our eyes help us to know objects that are distant in space (that is just as we see distant object with our eyes), Jyotisa sastra help us to find out the position of the heavenly bodies that are distant in time (their configuration many years ago in the past or many years hence in future). We can find out directly the positions of the sun and the moon and other heavenly bodies. Just as we can know near objects, even if we are blind, by feeling them with our hands, we can learn about the positions of the heavenly bodies near in time even without the help of astronomy. What is 50 feet away is to be perceived by the eye. Similarly, if you want to know the position of planets 50 years ago or 50 years hence, you have to have recourse to Jyotisa. We cannot, however, form a full picture of near objects only by feeling them. For instance, we cannot know whether they are green or red. For this, we must see them with our eyes. Again, even if we are able to see the planet with our naked eye, we will need the help of astrology to find out its effects on our life, how its positions in the heavens will influence our destiny. This is the reason why Jyotisa is called the eye of the Vedapurusa. Vedic rituals are performed according to the position of the various planets [and the sun and the moon]. There are rules to determine this. The right day and hour [muhurta] for a function is fixed according to the position of the the celestial bodies. Here again, Jyotisa performs the function of the eye. This Anga of the Vedas is indeed called "nayana" which word means "to lead". A blind man needs to be led by another. So it is the eye that leads. Astronomy / Astrology is the eye that enables us to fix the hours for Vedic rituals. " I trust this will remove any misunderstanding you have about jyotisha being Vedic.You may visit the site of Kaaaanchi Kamakoti peetham from the link above and get an authoritative interpretation of the scriptures. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 6:55 PMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji, I said I am trying to understand Vedas, Yes I have heard about Vedangas as well. But in Manu Smriti it is also written that Vedas are the supreme authority , so in case of doubts over other Vedic scriptures or in any discussion Vedas are the ultimate authority. As Vedas are considered as the word of God where as the Vedangas , Angas , Upvedas are the work of Rishis. ChandrsShekhar Ji I don't have the slightest intention to harm the feeling of anybody but whatever is truth should be known to everybody , because it is the truth alone that further the knowledge of the learned. Regards RajeevChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Having established that you have read Vedas. Next question is have you heard about Vedangas? Let us not quote the opinion of Swami Dayanand( for whom I have respect) as Veda. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:48 AMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Namaste Ajit Ji, My main question is that whether there is any reference to Astrology in Vedas.If you have any then please quote that. I never said to berate Vedangas, only thing I said is that when there are difference of opinion then Vedas are the ultimate authority to know the truth and you also agree to that. Following are the references about revealation of Vedas "In the beginning, God revealed the four Vedas, Rig, Vayu, Sama, and Atharva, to Agni, Vayu, A'ditya and Angira, respectively." SHAPATHA BRAHMAN 11: 4,2.3. "In the beginning after human being had been created, the Supreme Spirit made the Vedas known to Brahma through Agni, etc., i.e., Brahma learnt the four Vedas from Agni, Vayu, A'ditya and Angira." MANU: 23 Following evidences are to prove that the Veda in Sanskrit is of Divine origin and not the work of man? The book in which God is described as He is, viz., Holy, Omniscient, Pure in nature, character and attributes, Just, Merciful, etc., and in which nothing is said that is opposed to the laws of nature, reason, the evidence of direct cognizance, etc., the teachings of the highly learned altruistic teachers of humanity (A'ptas), and the intuition of pure souls, and in which the laws, nature, and properties of matter and the soul are propounded as they are to be inferred from the order of nature as fixed by God, is the book of Divine revelation. Now the Vedas alone fulfil all the above conditions, hence they are the revealed books and not books, like the Bible and the Q'uran . For more references on God and Vedas please refer the links below http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterseven.html www.vjsingh.com/books.html What is the full form of BPHS and JUS ? Names of Great Vedic Rishis were used by fraud masters to meet their ends. The YogDarshna and Gita by Maharishi Vyas speaks out loudly about the great philosophy of Karma(Action) Vedas and firm belief of Vyas Ji in Vedas. How come a Rishi of Vyas Ji level write something anti vedic. Then read the various Purans developed by crooks and branded in the name of Vyas Ji. These Purans are nothing but all nonsense and anti vedic and it is because of the propagation of these false ideas we have so many sects and other bad practices. Ajit Bhai we should always be ready to accept truth and reject untruth. About Jyotish I have written in my previous mail to ChandreShekhar Ji. Regards Rajeev Yes, Vedas are the ultimate authority, but this does not mean we can berate the vedangas. Please realize that the vedas were revealed to a rishi, and so every passge in the veda has a rishi associated with it. So, both the vedas and vedangas come to us courtesy of the rishis. One of the famous lineages of the vedic era is Parashara --> Vyaasa --> Jaimini. We have BPHS from the former, and JUS from the later. In BHPS, Parashara says that Jyotisha must be learned by all good people, particularly the brahmins. So, it is more than reasonable to assume that Veda Vyaasa learnt Jyotisha from his father, and in turn taught his son. Thus, Jyotish has the blessings of Vedavyaasa himself. Second, vedanga is oft translated as "limbs of the vedas" including grammar etc. We cannot stand without our limbs....and one cannot even read the Vedas without knowledge of sanskrit grammar. Lastly, what is Jyotish? Is it not a science that is part and parcel of vedic spirituality? Have a look at the secrets which are being revealed by this tradition: Narayana Dasa (movement of Narayana), Sudasa (movement of Lakshmi), Shoola dasa (movment of Rudra), Tithi Pravesha (combination of sun/moon...i.e. purusha/prakriti). In Jaimini Sutras, the first source of strength is based on the placement of AK alone....and we have been taught that this is applicable in dasas like Drig Dasa (spirituality). When we truly understand Jyotish, we will understand Narayana, Lakshmi and Rudra ! Similarly, in some Sanskrit traditions, they try to see spirituality through Sanskrit itself, in each akshara, shabda etc (i.e. mantra shastra) ajit - Rajeev Kumar vedic astrology Thursday, September 04, 2003 6:24 AM RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji, I said I am trying to understand Vedas, Yes I have heard about Vedangas as well. But in Manu Smriti it is also written that Vedas are the supreme authority , so in case of doubts over other Vedic scriptures or in any discussion Vedas are the ultimate authority. As Vedas are considered as the word of God where as the Vedangas , Angas , Upvedas are the work of Rishis. ChandrsShekhar Ji I don't have the slightest intention to harm the feeling of anybody but whatever is truth should be known to everybody , because it is the truth alone that further the knowledge of the learned. Regards RajeevChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Having established that you have read Vedas. Next question is have you heard about Vedangas? Let us not quote the opinion of Swami Dayanand( for whom I have respect) as Veda. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:48 AMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 ||Om Brihaspataye Namah|| Dear Rajeev, Your position is that Jyotish refers to astronomy and not astrology. That is a point to be considered. However I am interested in knowing how did you prove that Astrology fails the tests of truth given in your email. You have just stated the same without proof. Since you have read or trying to understand the Vedas, I request you to state if atman, birth/rebirth, karma, dharma are vedic concepts or not. May I pose a practical question to you: Based on the vedas, what is the most appropriate time for performing a marriage? By time is meant which period of time shall you choose to perform the ceremony? Please dont give the answer in terms of the age of the individuals who are to be married. Your answer should be in accordance with the principles stated in the Vedas. Broadly speaking, is there any vedic concept such as quality of time (ie., a good time or a bad time)and how is this quality determined? regards Hari PS: I think Chandrasekar made a typo and probably meant "...opinion ON vedas..." and not "...opinion AS vedas...". vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote: > Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, > > My prime question is whether there is refernece to Astrology(as concept of fate) in Vedas. If you say yes then please quote the references. > > You also said that you respect Swami Dayananda as Veda(Learned, Knowledge) then what's the problem in quoting his opinion ?. > > And who can deny the tests of truth I gave in my last mail. > > Jyotish means knowledge of light etymologically. It is used to > refer to the science of astronomy. It DOES NOT actually mean astrology even though due to our ignorance we beleive Jyotish to mean astrology. > Infact there has been no word in Sanskrit for astrology as the concept of fate being decided by planets was non-existent till very recent times (a few thousand years ago). > > Those who claim to be masters of vedic astrology are just making false claims since there is not even a remote reference to astrology in Vedas. > Thus, you will find that in none of these books on vedic astrology or vedaang jyotish is any shloka or sukta given from vedas. > > > > Regards > > Rajeev > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Please read the book 'SatyarthPrakash'(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda .The english translation of this book is also available online. www.vjsingh.com/books.html What you have written does not stand the tests of truth . I had given the tests of truth in my first mail to this group. If you donot agree then apply the tests. I am sure that you( my sister) would not take my response badly as I have not written this with any mal intention but according to whatever knowledge I possesses. Regards Rajeev Jayashree <jayashree_ravi (AT) msn (DOT) com> wrote: Sir,Just deciphered from what I know in general and having given some thoughts on my own on this subject:I forgot the name, but I know that the puranic demons Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakashipu were born to a sage and his wife. Hiranyakashipu later gave birth to Prahlada (who is considered to be the avataar of VedaVyaasa) and Lord Narayana incarnated as Lakshmi Narasimha to kill Hiranyakashipu and restore peace and order on earth. The enraged brother of Hiranyakashipu, that is Hiranyaksha, wanted to avenge for his brother's death and hence disguised himself initially and stole the 4 vedas from Brahma. The 4 Vedas are thus important for creation since Jyotisha lays out the rules for creation and Brahma follows Jyotisha, ie the essence of Vedas on creation, for the process of creation. Hiranyaksha did so because without Vedas and the rules of Vedas on creation, which is Jyotisha, Brahma cannot create new life. Then he sunk the earth under the deepest of the seas (which I understand to be the darkness of ignorance). The devas and other gods thus suffered a lot because the avir-bagha and other offerings made to them by rishis and munis were not made any further and also no more new life could be created without Vedas and Jyotisha. To end this suffering, and to maintain rule and order, Sriman Narayana once again incarnated into the form of Koorma Avatara and killed Hiranyaksha and brought out earth from the deepest of the oceans, with earth placed between his tusks. Brahma now could carry-on with creation since he got back Jyotisha, or the rules of the Vedas on Creation.The above is purana, from which we understand that Jyotisha is essentially the rules laid down in the Vedas on creation. I understand that all puranas, Vedas, etc. can be interpreted at various levels - one is the obvious meaning and another a more subtle, profoundly spiritual meaning. This profound spiritual meaning in essence is what I consider to be the 'rules' or 'Jyotisha' which all when collectively gathered up from all the 4 vedas constitute the whole science or the whole set of rules, to be followed by Brahma on creation. So naturally, a set of works of the divine having subtle spiritual meaning to decipher a collective set of rules (Vedas on Jyotisha) is not going to refer to these rules in just a single spot, nor is it going to name it explicitly, the extract of the vedas on the rules of creation were to be understood collectively by Brahma and other rishis, and the name of 'Jyotish' may have been given by them. Even according to mythology, the 'Veda Purusha' has 2 eyes - Vedas being one of them and Jyotisha being the other - because both serve the purpose of opening the spiritual eyes of a man and lead him away from ignorance.Also, if you consider what is the impact Jyotishis have on people - Jyotishis never speak or advice people to do anything wrong. Instead, when one learns or follows Jyotish, one understands about the impact of karmas, the need to do good karmas which includes thoughts, speech, listening and action, and hence turns more spiritual. A true believer of Jyotisha turns towards learning Vedas, and worship and never the opposite. And the fact that Jyotisha is a vast set of rules on creation as subtly taught by Vedas explains why it is so vast, and explains why Jyotisha can predict the past, present and future of mankind, afterall the same rules have been used for creation!I hope you will give some thought into Jyotisha being an essence of creation rules as laid down by Vedas.With regards,Jayashree --- In vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote:> Namaste AmolMAndar Ji,> > If every work is work of God then are adulteration, telling lies , doing fraud with somebody etc. are also work of God. If we accept this then God becomes an adulterator, lier etc.> > Vedic God does not expect the help of anybody in doing his work because he is all powerful , omniscient. The God which expects help from anybody is not God but a humanbeing or a fraud.> > Regards> > Rajeev > > > > > amolmandar <amolmandar> wrote:> Dear Rajeev Namaste> > Thanks for the wonderful link. > > >But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, > >is it not against Vedas and Gita ????> > Dont you feel that every work is 'work' of God. Why to single out > Astrologers? Moreover, what is wrong in helping God? > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.> > AmolMAndar> > --- In vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> > wrote:> > Namaste,> > > > Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to > brand it as a Vedic science.> > > > I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In > ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an > athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are > anti Vedic.> > > > I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is > for them only I am raising this question. > > > > I have following point to support my views> > > > Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) > and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in > my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in > their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ????> > > > In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic > Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts > that astrologers generally talk about.> > > > Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true > sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on > Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference.> > > > Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology > is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy > and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth '> > http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8> > > > > > > > THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH > > > > The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be > carefully examined by the following five tests:-> > > > The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings > of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is > right, the reverse is wrong. > > Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, > the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without > the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature > can never be true. > > The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, > unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to > their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is > unacceptable. > > The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for > you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to > others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct > towards others. > > Eight kinds of evidence> > > > > > Direct Cognizance. > > Inference. > > Analogy. > > Testimony. > > History. > > Deduction. > > Possibility. > > Non-existence or Negation.> > > > > > Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, > which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their > objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the > senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. > > But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words > with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid > called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some > water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is > water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the > word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct > knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge> > > > > > > > This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient > character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable > circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took > it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and > knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression > of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave > place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the > thing was revealed in the light. > > It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain > in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and > say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take > another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva > Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in > doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your > knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be > that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. > > Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct > Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with > the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances > unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in > character) nor into which any element of doubt enters> > > > > > > > Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows > direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together > at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe > is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For > instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have > had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you > infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of > the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the > present moment. > > Inference is of three kinds:-> > > > Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, > e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, > again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the > wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students > engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they > will become men of learning.> > > > > > Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to > causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it > must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, > you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a > father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the > Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the > elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a > man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a > virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the > consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, > pleasure. > > > > > > Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is > no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the > thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between > the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place > without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a > certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the > latter place by moving from the first.> > > > > > Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness > to another. The thing which is required to be known is called > Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some > kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana > > Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu > Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has > never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva > Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, > his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." > So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing > through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and > thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought > him to his master. > > Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, > some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a > jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once > know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind > of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to > Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana > or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called > Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above > two instances. > > > > > > > > > > Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt > (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. > > An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all > the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, > truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love > for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely > actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, > experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all > A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). > > > > > > Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a > person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, > Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. > NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in > history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the > day. - Tr. > > > > > > Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which > naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one > says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from > a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above > statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," > or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." > > > > > > Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing > that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. > Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, > and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a > child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the > dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted > mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw > horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple > born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not > have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That > alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. > > > > > > Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing > in some other place from its absence from the place where you were > told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and > bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found > that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must > be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the > elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and > brought him to his master. > > > > These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their > number can be reduced to four fi History be included under > Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under > Inference.* > > It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can > ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise> > > > If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud.> > > > > > Regards> > > > Rajeev> > > > > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software> > > Sponsor> Archives: vedic astrology> > Group info: vedic astrology/info.html> > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-> > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......> > > > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design softwareArchives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Dear Rajeev, My knowledge of this subject is not vast enough to answer your question. However, it is well known that the vedas (as we have them today) is incomplete. We are missing entire shakas. Thus, if something is not supported in the incomplete portion of the vedas available to us today, it would not mean that the complete vedas don't support them (using any logic). So, the ball is back in your court. We can only come to a logically sound conclusion if you can give any reference from the vedas that it does not support Jyotish. Please do get back to us when you find a clear passage to this effect. BPHS and JUS stand for Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra and Jaimini Upadesa Sutras respectively. ajit - Rajeev Kumar vedic astrology Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:40 PM Re: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Ajit Ji, My main question is that whether there is any reference to Astrology in Vedas.If you have any then please quote that. I never said to berate Vedangas, only thing I said is that when there are difference of opinion then Vedas are the ultimate authority to know the truth and you also agree to that. Following are the references about revealation of Vedas "In the beginning, God revealed the four Vedas, Rig, Vayu, Sama, and Atharva, to Agni, Vayu, A'ditya and Angira, respectively." SHAPATHA BRAHMAN 11: 4,2.3. "In the beginning after human being had been created, the Supreme Spirit made the Vedas known to Brahma through Agni, etc., i.e., Brahma learnt the four Vedas from Agni, Vayu, A'ditya and Angira." MANU: 23 Following evidences are to prove that the Veda in Sanskrit is of Divine origin and not the work of man? The book in which God is described as He is, viz., Holy, Omniscient, Pure in nature, character and attributes, Just, Merciful, etc., and in which nothing is said that is opposed to the laws of nature, reason, the evidence of direct cognizance, etc., the teachings of the highly learned altruistic teachers of humanity (A'ptas), and the intuition of pure souls, and in which the laws, nature, and properties of matter and the soul are propounded as they are to be inferred from the order of nature as fixed by God, is the book of Divine revelation. Now the Vedas alone fulfil all the above conditions, hence they are the revealed books and not books, like the Bible and the Q'uran . For more references on God and Vedas please refer the links below http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterseven.html www.vjsingh.com/books.html What is the full form of BPHS and JUS ? Names of Great Vedic Rishis were used by fraud masters to meet their ends. The YogDarshna and Gita by Maharishi Vyas speaks out loudly about the great philosophy of Karma(Action) Vedas and firm belief of Vyas Ji in Vedas. How come a Rishi of Vyas Ji level write something anti vedic. Then read the various Purans developed by crooks and branded in the name of Vyas Ji. These Purans are nothing but all nonsense and anti vedic and it is because of the propagation of these false ideas we have so many sects and other bad practices. Ajit Bhai we should always be ready to accept truth and reject untruth. About Jyotish I have written in my previous mail to ChandreShekhar Ji. Regards Rajeev Yes, Vedas are the ultimate authority, but this does not mean we can berate the vedangas. Please realize that the vedas were revealed to a rishi, and so every passge in the veda has a rishi associated with it. So, both the vedas and vedangas come to us courtesy of the rishis. One of the famous lineages of the vedic era is Parashara --> Vyaasa --> Jaimini. We have BPHS from the former, and JUS from the later. In BHPS, Parashara says that Jyotisha must be learned by all good people, particularly the brahmins. So, it is more than reasonable to assume that Veda Vyaasa learnt Jyotisha from his father, and in turn taught his son. Thus, Jyotish has the blessings of Vedavyaasa himself. Second, vedanga is oft translated as "limbs of the vedas" including grammar etc. We cannot stand without our limbs....and one cannot even read the Vedas without knowledge of sanskrit grammar. Lastly, what is Jyotish? Is it not a science that is part and parcel of vedic spirituality? Have a look at the secrets which are being revealed by this tradition: Narayana Dasa (movement of Narayana), Sudasa (movement of Lakshmi), Shoola dasa (movment of Rudra), Tithi Pravesha (combination of sun/moon...i.e. purusha/prakriti). In Jaimini Sutras, the first source of strength is based on the placement of AK alone....and we have been taught that this is applicable in dasas like Drig Dasa (spirituality). When we truly understand Jyotish, we will understand Narayana, Lakshmi and Rudra ! Similarly, in some Sanskrit traditions, they try to see spirituality through Sanskrit itself, in each akshara, shabda etc (i.e. mantra shastra) ajit - Rajeev Kumar vedic astrology Thursday, September 04, 2003 6:24 AM RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji, I said I am trying to understand Vedas, Yes I have heard about Vedangas as well. But in Manu Smriti it is also written that Vedas are the supreme authority , so in case of doubts over other Vedic scriptures or in any discussion Vedas are the ultimate authority. As Vedas are considered as the word of God where as the Vedangas , Angas , Upvedas are the work of Rishis. ChandrsShekhar Ji I don't have the slightest intention to harm the feeling of anybody but whatever is truth should be known to everybody , because it is the truth alone that further the knowledge of the learned. Regards RajeevChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Having established that you have read Vedas. Next question is have you heard about Vedangas? Let us not quote the opinion of Swami Dayanand( for whom I have respect) as Veda. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:48 AMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 Let's first resolve the main issue that whether Astrology( As a concept of fate ) has references in Vedas or not ? Other issues will be resolved later. Yes Karma /Dharma, atman, god are vedic concepts. Regards Rajeev onlyhari <onlyhari > wrote: ||Om Brihaspataye Namah||Dear Rajeev,Your position is that Jyotish refers to astronomy and not astrology. That is a point to be considered.However I am interested in knowing how did you prove that Astrology fails the tests of truth given in your email. You have just stated the same without proof. Since you have read or trying to understand the Vedas, I request you to state if atman, birth/rebirth, karma, dharma are vedic concepts or not.May I pose a practical question to you: Based on the vedas, what is the most appropriate time for performing a marriage? By time is meant which period of time shall you choose to perform the ceremony? Please dont give the answer in terms of the age of the individuals who are to be married. Your answer should be in accordance with the principles stated in the Vedas. Broadly speaking, is there any vedic concept such as quality of time (ie., a good time or a bad time)and how is this quality determined?regardsHariPS: I think Chandrasekar made a typo and probably meant "...opinion ON vedas..." and not "...opinion AS vedas...". vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote:> Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji,> > My prime question is whether there is refernece to Astrology(as concept of fate) in Vedas. If you say yes then please quote the references.> > You also said that you respect Swami Dayananda as Veda(Learned, Knowledge) then what's the problem in quoting his opinion ?.> > And who can deny the tests of truth I gave in my last mail.> > Jyotish means knowledge of light etymologically. It is used to> refer to the science of astronomy. It DOES NOT actually mean astrology even though due to our ignorance we beleive Jyotish to mean astrology.> Infact there has been no word in Sanskrit for astrology as the concept of fate being decided by planets was non-existent till very recent times (a few thousand years ago).> > Those who claim to be masters of vedic astrology are just making false claims since there is not even a remote reference to astrology in Vedas.> Thus, you will find that in none of these books on vedic astrology or vedaang jyotish is any shloka or sukta given from vedas.> > > > Regards> > Rajeev> Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 ||Om Brihaspataye Namah|| Namaste Rajeev, Okay, lets take the central issue as defined by you. You seem to have this understanding that astrology is a concept of fate. I do not think that it can be equated literally to fate. What it does indicate is that based on certain characteristics assigned to each of the planets, a certain event may manifest when a particular planet is at a particular position and future point of time. Astrology, as learnt and practised on this forum, is a study of the probability that a certain event may or may not happen. The fundamental basis is to use astronomy to assess the position of planets in space and time. However the indication that a certain position of the planet may indicate the possibility of an event does not mean that it is destined for us. Birth and death are the only two points pre-destined and anywhere in between, we are free to choose how we may live our lives. My view is that Astrology, at its broadest, is a study of the quality of time and how we may use this to progress or plan our lives. For example, knowing that an event is likely to happen, we can be better prepared to face the event than being taken by surprise and wondering how it came about. In any case, as other members have pointed out, the aim of astrology as practised on this list, is to guide the person in obtaining a greater understanding of God and ultimately, nature. As Chandrasekhar says, other worthies may beg to differ with me. Now you ask for references in the Vedas supporting the existence of Astrology as being different from astronomy. The simple answer is I cannot but since you have read the Vedas, I ask you whether there is any reference to the quality of time and that is why I posed the practical problem to you. I hope that other learned members will be able to correct my reasoning presented here. regards Hari vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote: > Namaste Hari Ji, > > Let's first resolve the main issue that whether Astrology( As a concept of fate ) has references in Vedas or not ? > > Other issues will be resolved later. > > Yes Karma /Dharma, atman, god are vedic concepts. > > Regards > > > > Rajeev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 Going by what you said ,How can you presume that the missing part describes Astrology (concept of fate) ? Second strong logic is that in Vedas there are many mantras on Karma(action) and it is also said in Geeta that result of Karma(action) is in the hand of God himself. So when it is in the hands of God then what these astrologers are doing here but confusing and making money from people? I have already admitted that astronomical,mathematics , geometry etc sciences are in Vedas but not Astrology. Vedas can never have contradicting mantras. Jyotish means knowledge of light etymologically. It is used torefer to the science of astronomy. It DOES NOT actually mean astrology even though due to our ignorance we beleive Jyotish to mean astrology.Infact there has been no word in Sanskrit for astrology as the concept of fate being decided by planets was non-existent till very recent times (a few thousand years ago).Those who claim to be masters of vedic astrology are just making false claims since there is not even a remote reference to astrology in Vedas.Thus, you will find that in none of these books on vedic astrology or vedaang jyotish is any shloka or sukta given from vedas. Regards Rajeev My knowledge of this subject is not vast enough to answer your question. However, it is well known that the vedas (as we have them today) is incomplete. We are missing entire shakas. Thus, if something is not supported in the incomplete portion of the vedas available to us today, it would not mean that the complete vedas don't support them (using any logic). So, the ball is back in your court. We can only come to a logically sound conclusion if you can give any reference from the vedas that it does not support Jyotish. Please do get back to us when you find a clear passage to this effect.BPHS and JUS stand for Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra and Jaimini Upadesa Sutras respectively. ajit - Rajeev Kumar vedic astrology Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:40 PM Re: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Ajit Ji, My main question is that whether there is any reference to Astrology in Vedas.If you have any then please quote that. I never said to berate Vedangas, only thing I said is that when there are difference of opinion then Vedas are the ultimate authority to know the truth and you also agree to that. Following are the references about revealation of Vedas "In the beginning, God revealed the four Vedas, Rig, Vayu, Sama, and Atharva, to Agni, Vayu, A'ditya and Angira, respectively." SHAPATHA BRAHMAN 11: 4,2.3. "In the beginning after human being had been created, the Supreme Spirit made the Vedas known to Brahma through Agni, etc., i.e., Brahma learnt the four Vedas from Agni, Vayu, A'ditya and Angira." MANU: 23 Following evidences are to prove that the Veda in Sanskrit is of Divine origin and not the work of man? The book in which God is described as He is, viz., Holy, Omniscient, Pure in nature, character and attributes, Just, Merciful, etc., and in which nothing is said that is opposed to the laws of nature, reason, the evidence of direct cognizance, etc., the teachings of the highly learned altruistic teachers of humanity (A'ptas), and the intuition of pure souls, and in which the laws, nature, and properties of matter and the soul are propounded as they are to be inferred from the order of nature as fixed by God, is the book of Divine revelation. Now the Vedas alone fulfil all the above conditions, hence they are the revealed books and not books, like the Bible and the Q'uran . For more references on God and Vedas please refer the links below http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterseven.html www.vjsingh.com/books.html What is the full form of BPHS and JUS ? Names of Great Vedic Rishis were used by fraud masters to meet their ends. The YogDarshna and Gita by Maharishi Vyas speaks out loudly about the great philosophy of Karma(Action) Vedas and firm belief of Vyas Ji in Vedas. How come a Rishi of Vyas Ji level write something anti vedic. Then read the various Purans developed by crooks and branded in the name of Vyas Ji. These Purans are nothing but all nonsense and anti vedic and it is because of the propagation of these false ideas we have so many sects and other bad practices. Ajit Bhai we should always be ready to accept truth and reject untruth. About Jyotish I have written in my previous mail to ChandreShekhar Ji. Regards Rajeev Yes, Vedas are the ultimate authority, but this does not mean we can berate the vedangas. Please realize that the vedas were revealed to a rishi, and so every passge in the veda has a rishi associated with it. So, both the vedas and vedangas come to us courtesy of the rishis. One of the famous lineages of the vedic era is Parashara --> Vyaasa --> Jaimini. We have BPHS from the former, and JUS from the later. In BHPS, Parashara says that Jyotisha must be learned by all good people, particularly the brahmins. So, it is more than reasonable to assume that Veda Vyaasa learnt Jyotisha from his father, and in turn taught his son. Thus, Jyotish has the blessings of Vedavyaasa himself. Second, vedanga is oft translated as "limbs of the vedas" including grammar etc. We cannot stand without our limbs....and one cannot even read the Vedas without knowledge of sanskrit grammar. Lastly, what is Jyotish? Is it not a science that is part and parcel of vedic spirituality? Have a look at the secrets which are being revealed by this tradition: Narayana Dasa (movement of Narayana), Sudasa (movement of Lakshmi), Shoola dasa (movment of Rudra), Tithi Pravesha (combination of sun/moon...i.e. purusha/prakriti). In Jaimini Sutras, the first source of strength is based on the placement of AK alone....and we have been taught that this is applicable in dasas like Drig Dasa (spirituality). When we truly understand Jyotish, we will understand Narayana, Lakshmi and Rudra ! Similarly, in some Sanskrit traditions, they try to see spirituality through Sanskrit itself, in each akshara, shabda etc (i.e. mantra shastra) ajit - Rajeev Kumar vedic astrology Thursday, September 04, 2003 6:24 AM RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji, I said I am trying to understand Vedas, Yes I have heard about Vedangas as well. But in Manu Smriti it is also written that Vedas are the supreme authority , so in case of doubts over other Vedic scriptures or in any discussion Vedas are the ultimate authority. As Vedas are considered as the word of God where as the Vedangas , Angas , Upvedas are the work of Rishis. ChandrsShekhar Ji I don't have the slightest intention to harm the feeling of anybody but whatever is truth should be known to everybody , because it is the truth alone that further the knowledge of the learned. Regards RajeevChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Having established that you have read Vedas. Next question is have you heard about Vedangas? Let us not quote the opinion of Swami Dayanand( for whom I have respect) as Veda. Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:48 AMvedic astrologySubject: RE: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji, I am trying to understand Vedas , I am also reading ManuSmriti, Darshans, Upnishads, Gita and 'Satyarth Prakash '(Light of Truth) by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Swami Dayananda Saraswati translated Vedas in Hindi and he has written it very clearly that Astronomy is Vedic but Astrology is fraud. Swami Dayananda was attacked and poisoned many times in his life time as he wanted to free the people from the clutches of different religions and asked them to follow Vedas in their true form. He was finally poisoned to death about 125yrs ago. Vedas are believed as the fountain source of all true knowledge, are regarded as authority over all other Vedic scriptures. Please show me a single reference from Vedas supporting your Astrology, if it is there I will accept it . I can show you number of references from Vedas supporting Karma(Action) Regards Rajeev Please give me the reference of any Vedic mantra supporting Astrology. Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Dear Rajeev, Have you read Vedas? Chandrashekhar. Rajeev Kumar [satpath1 ]Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:12 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: [vedic astrology] Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste, Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to brand it as a Vedic science. I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are anti Vedic. I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is for them only I am raising this question. I have following point to support my views Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts that astrologers generally talk about. Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be carefully examined by the following five tests:- The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true. The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable. The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct towards others. Eight kinds of evidence Direct Cognizance. Inference. Analogy. Testimony. History. Deduction. Possibility. Non-existence or Negation. Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment. Inference is of three kinds:- Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men of learning. Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure. Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first. Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances. Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day. - Tr. Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master. These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four fi History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.* It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. Regards Rajeev Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 Instead of answering my plane and simple question that whether Astrology has any reference in Vedas, you have started mixing astrology with astronomy . Astronomy is indeed a Vedic science but astrology which talks about fortune telling is not vedic . Regards Rajeev onlyhari <onlyhari > wrote: ||Om Brihaspataye Namah||Namaste Rajeev,Okay, lets take the central issue as defined by you.You seem to have this understanding that astrology is a concept of fate. I do not think that it can be equated literally to fate. What it does indicate is that based on certain characteristics assigned to each of the planets, a certain event may manifest when a particular planet is at a particular position and future point of time. Astrology, as learnt and practised on this forum, is a study of the probability that a certain event may or may not happen. The fundamental basis is to use astronomy to assess the position of planets in space and time. However the indication that a certain position of the planet may indicate the possibility of an event does not mean that it is destined for us. Birth and death are the only two points pre-destined and anywhere in between, we are free to choose how we may live our lives. My view is that Astrology, at its broadest, is a study of the quality of time and how we may use this to progress or plan our lives. For example, knowing that an event is likely to happen, we can be better prepared to face the event than being taken by surprise and wondering how it came about.In any case, as other members have pointed out, the aim of astrology as practised on this list, is to guide the person in obtaining a greater understanding of God and ultimately, nature. As Chandrasekhar says, other worthies may beg to differ with me.Now you ask for references in the Vedas supporting the existence of Astrology as being different from astronomy. The simple answer is I cannot but since you have read the Vedas, I ask you whether there is any reference to the quality of time and that is why I posed the practical problem to you. I hope that other learned members will be able to correct my reasoning presented here.regardsHarivedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote:> Namaste Hari Ji,> > Let's first resolve the main issue that whether Astrology( As a concept of fate ) has references in Vedas or not ?> > Other issues will be resolved later.> > Yes Karma /Dharma, atman, god are vedic concepts.> > Regards> > > > RajeevArchives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 Dear Rajeev Namaste Before we get into Good or Bad work and its relation to God,I will try to show some reference of Jyotish and Astrology in the Vedas. For that let me just know will you accept a sukta or Shloka describing that the bodies present in the Brahmanda do affect our life and we should pray for good effects from them, as proof for reference of astrology in any of the four Vedas. Why I am asking this is that I have some shlokas from Vedas describing this. The reference of NAvagraha directly or indirectly in the Veda will be acceptred by you as proof of Astrology in Vedas or not? So if a shloka says that we should pray these hevenly bodies and these bodies should give us Sukha and Shanti then that should be more than enough as proof or not. Or you want all shlokas present in Astrological Granthas to be present in Vedas? Let me know this first and then I will produce for you more than one proof of Jyotish i.e. astrological and not astromonical reference in Vedas. One last thing be very clear that Vedas means 1)Rigveda 2)Yajurveda 3)SamaVeda 4) Atharvaveda. If you agree on this, please let me know. Thanks a lot for your Time and Sapce. AmolMAndar vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote: > Namaste AmolMAndar Ji, > > If every work is work of God then are adulteration, telling lies , doing fraud with somebody etc. are also work of God. If we accept this then God becomes an adulterator, lier etc. > > Vedic God does not expect the help of anybody in doing his work because he is all powerful , omniscient. The God which expects help from anybody is not God but a humanbeing or a fraud. > > Regards > > Rajeev > > > > > amolmandar <amolmandar> wrote: > Dear Rajeev Namaste > > Thanks for the wonderful link. > > >But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, > >is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? > > Dont you feel that every work is 'work' of God. Why to single out > Astrologers? Moreover, what is wrong in helping God? > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > AmolMAndar > > vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> > wrote: > > Namaste, > > > > Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to > brand it as a Vedic science. > > > > I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In > ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an > athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are > anti Vedic. > > > > I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is > for them only I am raising this question. > > > > I have following point to support my views > > > > Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA (Action) > and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in > my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in > their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? > > > > In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic > Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts > that astrologers generally talk about. > > > > Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true > sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on > Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. > > > > Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology > is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy > and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' > > http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 > > > > > > > > THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH > > > > The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be > carefully examined by the following five tests:- > > > > The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings > of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is > right, the reverse is wrong. > > Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, > the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without > the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature > can never be true. > > The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, > unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to > their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is > unacceptable. > > The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for > you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to > others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct > towards others. > > Eight kinds of evidence > > > > > > Direct Cognizance. > > Inference. > > Analogy. > > Testimony. > > History. > > Deduction. > > Possibility. > > Non-existence or Negation. > > > > > > Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, > which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their > objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the > senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. > > But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words > with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid > called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some > water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is > water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the > word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct > knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge > > > > > > > > This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient > character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable > circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took > it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and > knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression > of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave > place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the > thing was revealed in the light. > > It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain > in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and > say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take > another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva > Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in > doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your > knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be > that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. > > Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct > Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with > the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances > unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in > character) nor into which any element of doubt enters > > > > > > > > Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows > direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together > at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe > is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For > instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have > had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you > infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of > the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the > present moment. > > Inference is of three kinds:- > > > > Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, > e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, > again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the > wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students > engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they > will become men of learning. > > > > > > Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to > causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it > must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, > you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a > father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the > Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the > elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a > man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a > virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the > consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, > pleasure. > > > > > > Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is > no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the > thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between > the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place > without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a > certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the > latter place by moving from the first. > > > > > > Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness > to another. The thing which is required to be known is called > Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some > kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana > > Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu > Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has > never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva > Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, > his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." > So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing > through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and > thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought > him to his master. > > Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, > some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a > jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once > know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind > of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to > Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana > or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called > Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above > two instances. > > > > > > > > > > Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt > (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. > > An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all > the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, > truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love > for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely > actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, > experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all > A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). > > > > > > Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a > person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, > Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. > NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in > history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the > day. - Tr. > > > > > > Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which > naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one > says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from > a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above > statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," > or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." > > > > > > Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing > that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. > Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, > and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a > child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the > dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted > mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw > horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple > born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not > have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That > alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. > > > > > > Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing > in some other place from its absence from the place where you were > told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and > bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found > that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must > be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the > elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and > brought him to his master. > > > > These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their > number can be reduced to four fi History be included under > Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under > Inference.* > > It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can > ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise > > > > If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud. > > > > > > Regards > > > > Rajeev > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology- > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 || Om Gurave Namah || Dear Rajeev, You qouted SHAPATHA BRAHMAN 11: 4,2.3. MANU: 23 To prove 'revealation of Vedas' So obviously you are taking the those two books to be Very authentic. Which are not Vedas themselves. Can I ask the list of books which you take as final proof, do you take all the Brahamanas and all the smritis references as proofs. Please give me the entire list of the books (And which translations too If you have anything specific else we can take generic translations), which you take as the final proof. So I may explore in those for the proof for you. I usually go by what I was taught. Warm Regards S. Prabhakaran Om Tat Sat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 Sorry for putting this bluntly. What are you trying to prove? What if Vedas do not support Astrology. We still want to learn it, and as we know, we are all in the right forum to learn the divine science. If your idea is to distract people by creating non-existent controversies, you better find some other group. If you find some people on this list buying your arguement and want to argue with you, I think you are better of arguing off the list, instead of flooding the list with your junk mail. If the Gurus think it is pertinent material for learning Vedic Astrology they would share with us anyway. Hope you understand my point. It is plain and simple --> If you are not contributing to increase the knowledge of Astrology(Vedic or non-Vedic -according to you), we are not happy reading your mails here. I request Guru Narasimha to moderate more closely and try to restrict people who are trying to distract the attention of the students. Sorry if I have hurt anyone's feelings with my mail. Regards, Sai Rajeev Kumar <satpath1 >Date: 2003/09/04 22:36:00vedic astrologyCc: Re: [vedic astrology] Re: Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Hari Ji, Let's first resolve the main issue that whether Astrology( As a concept of fate ) has references in Vedas or not ? Other issues will be resolved later. Yes Karma /Dharma, atman, god are vedic concepts. Regards Rajeev onlyhari <onlyhari > wrote: ||Om Brihaspataye Namah||Dear Rajeev,Your position is that Jyotish refers to astronomy and not astrology. That is a point to be considered.However I am interested in knowing how did you prove that Astrology fails the tests of truth given in your email. You have just stated the same without proof. Since you have read or trying to understand the Vedas, I request you to state if atman, birth/rebirth, karma, dharma are vedic concepts or not.May I pose a practical question to you: Based on the vedas, what is the most appropriate time for performing a marriage? By time is meant which period of time shall you choose to perform the ceremony? Please dont give the answer in terms of the age of the individuals who are to be married. Your answer should be in accordance with the principles stated in the Ve! das. Broadly speaking, is there any vedic concept such as quality of time (ie., a good time or a bad time)and how is this quality determined?regardsHariPS: I think Chandrasekar made a typo and probably meant "...opinion ON vedas..." and not "...opinion AS vedas...". vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote:> Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji,> > My prime question is whether there is refernece to Astrology(as concept of fate) in Vedas. If you say yes then please quote the references.> > You also said that you respect Swami Dayananda as Veda(Learned, Knowledge) then what's the problem in quoting his opinion ?.> > And who can deny the tests of truth I gave in my last mail.> > Jyotish means knowledge of light etymologically. It is used to> refer to the science of astronomy. It DOES NOT actuall! y mean astrology even though due to our ignorance we beleive Jyoti sh to mean astrology.> Infact there has been no word in Sanskrit for astrology as the concept of fate being decided by planets was non-existent till very recent times (a few thousand years ago).> > Those who claim to be masters of vedic astrology are just making false claims since there is not even a remote reference to astrology in Vedas.> Thus, you will find that in none of these books on vedic astrology or vedaang jyotish is any shloka or sukta given from vedas.> > > > Regards> > Rajeev> Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 Dear Guruji's and list members, My pranams. I strongly support Mr.Saikumar's views about our mailbox flooding with junk mail about the "never" ending argument on Astrology being vedic or non vedic as he rightly put it. It is neither pleasing me astrology in some form (whether Vedic or non-vedic again) being called as Fraud. We are not very much concerned about astrology being Vedic or non-vedic but we will try to follow path to light shown by our great saints or simply put it our ancestors who also had life like ours and who had all sorts of miseries or pleasures and tried to find what exactly behind all the life situations when every human attempts fails. Our present masters / gurujis have taken the role of our olden day saints. For Mr.Rajeev, it may be Sri. Dayananda saraswathi for me it may be Sage Parashara for some other member of this group Sage Jaimini someone who inspired and trying to show light. But because someone believe something strongly, he may not be fair in calling his own views only are perfect and correct. In whole, we are trying to learn and know something that is not bound by our logic and senses through this science from learned scholars. Who knows there prevails general feeling that we had lost so much of our monuments - palm scripts - may be large portion of Vedas themselves other evidences on our rich past heritage in the natural disasters / calamities over the yugas which might possibly have proved that Astrology is perfectly vedic if existed now. Yet...Still something is there to prove that astrology is vedic. I suggest Mr.Rajeev to try Naadi Jothisham in Trichy or Vaitheeswaran koil in Tamilnadu (Only genuine readers not conman) without giving any details to the Palm script readers and just by his thumb impression. Then let him come back to this forum and tell us how it sounded to him. I am declaring this confidently because I got perfect reading. Not only me, my whole family. Generally Naadi's are told in the name of sages - Kowshika - Agastya - Vashishta as they said to have revealed our birth and other life details much before (thousands of years back) our birth took place. Astrology cannot be "Vedic" only if those sages are not belonging vedic community. Otherwise "Yes" it is perfectly Vedic. Taking or leaving is one's personal faith and wish and more than anything it is "mindset". Hope this discussion ends here. With best regards, Narrayana G.E. - Saikumar satpath1 Cc: vedic astrology Friday, September 05, 2003 9:44 PM Re: Re: [vedic astrology] Re: Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Dear Rajiv, Sorry for putting this bluntly. What are you trying to prove? What if Vedas do not support Astrology. We still want to learn it, and as we know, we are all in the right forum to learn the divine science. If your idea is to distract people by creating non-existent controversies, you better find some other group. If you find some people on this list buying your arguement and want to argue with you, I think you are better of arguing off the list, instead of flooding the list with your junk mail. If the Gurus think it is pertinent material for learning Vedic Astrology they would share with us anyway. Hope you understand my point. It is plain and simple --> If you are not contributing to increase the knowledge of Astrology(Vedic or non-Vedic -according to you), we are not happy reading your mails here. I request Guru Narasimha to moderate more closely and try to restrict people who are trying to distract the attention of the students. Sorry if I have hurt anyone's feelings with my mail. Regards, Sai Rajeev Kumar <satpath1 >Date: 2003/09/04 22:36:00vedic astrologyCc: Re: [vedic astrology] Re: Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Hari Ji, Let's first resolve the main issue that whether Astrology( As a concept of fate ) has references in Vedas or not ? Other issues will be resolved later. Yes Karma /Dharma, atman, god are vedic concepts. Regards Rajeev onlyhari <onlyhari > wrote: ||Om Brihaspataye Namah||Dear Rajeev,Your position is that Jyotish refers to astronomy and not astrology. That is a point to be considered.However I am interested in knowing how did you prove that Astrology fails the tests of truth given in your email. You have just stated the same without proof. Since you have read or trying to understand the Vedas, I request you to state if atman, birth/rebirth, karma, dharma are vedic concepts or not.May I pose a practical question to you: Based on the vedas, what is the most appropriate time for performing a marriage? By time is meant which period of time shall you choose to perform the ceremony? Please dont give the answer in terms of the age of the individuals who are to be married. Your answer should be in accordance with the principles stated in the Ve! das. Broadly speaking, is there any vedic concept such as quality of time (ie., a good time or a bad time)and how is this quality determined?regardsHariPS: I think Chandrasekar made a typo and probably meant "...opinion ON vedas..." and not "...opinion AS vedas...". --- In vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote:> Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji,> > My prime question is whether there is refernece to Astrology(as concept of fate) in Vedas. If you say yes then please quote the references.> > You also said that you respect Swami Dayananda as Veda(Learned, Knowledge) then what's the problem in quoting his opinion ?.> > And who can deny the tests of truth I gave in my last mail.> > Jyotish means knowledge of light etymologically. It is used to> refer to the science of astronomy. It DOES NOT actuall! y mean astrology even though due to our ignorance we beleive Jyoti sh to mean astrology.> Infact there has been no word in Sanskrit for astrology as the concept of fate being decided by planets was non-existent till very recent times (a few thousand years ago).> > Those who claim to be masters of vedic astrology are just making false claims since there is not even a remote reference to astrology in Vedas.> Thus, you will find that in none of these books on vedic astrology or vedaang jyotish is any shloka or sukta given from vedas.> > > > Regards> > Rajeev> Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 Dear Narayana, I have sent him text of Kanchi Kamakoti peetham Shankaracharya making it clear that Astrology is Vedanga. Let us see his response and decide whether his queries are serious or not. If he disputes Shri Shankaracharya, we can be fairly certain that the posts are frivolous. Chandrashekhar. gnn68310 (AT) sancharnet (DOT) in [gnn68310 (AT) sancharnet (DOT) in]Friday, September 05, 2003 11:21 PMTo: vedic astrologySubject: Re: Re: [vedic astrology] Re: Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Dear Guruji's and list members, My pranams. I strongly support Mr.Saikumar's views about our mailbox flooding with junk mail about the "never" ending argument on Astrology being vedic or non vedic as he rightly put it. It is neither pleasing me astrology in some form (whether Vedic or non-vedic again) being called as Fraud. We are not very much concerned about astrology being Vedic or non-vedic but we will try to follow path to light shown by our great saints or simply put it our ancestors who also had life like ours and who had all sorts of miseries or pleasures and tried to find what exactly behind all the life situations when every human attempts fails. Our present masters / gurujis have taken the role of our olden day saints. For Mr.Rajeev, it may be Sri. Dayananda saraswathi for me it may be Sage Parashara for some other member of this group Sage Jaimini someone who inspired and trying to show light. But because someone believe something strongly, he may not be fair in calling his own views only are perfect and correct. In whole, we are trying to learn and know something that is not bound by our logic and senses through this science from learned scholars. Who knows there prevails general feeling that we had lost so much of our monuments - palm scripts - may be large portion of Vedas themselves other evidences on our rich past heritage in the natural disasters / calamities over the yugas which might possibly have proved that Astrology is perfectly vedic if existed now. Yet...Still something is there to prove that astrology is vedic. I suggest Mr.Rajeev to try Naadi Jothisham in Trichy or Vaitheeswaran koil in Tamilnadu (Only genuine readers not conman) without giving any details to the Palm script readers and just by his thumb impression. Then let him come back to this forum and tell us how it sounded to him. I am declaring this confidently because I got perfect reading. Not only me, my whole family. Generally Naadi's are told in the name of sages - Kowshika - Agastya - Vashishta as they said to have revealed our birth and other life details much before (thousands of years back) our birth took place. Astrology cannot be "Vedic" only if those sages are not belonging vedic community. Otherwise "Yes" it is perfectly Vedic. Taking or leaving is one's personal faith and wish and more than anything it is "mindset". Hope this discussion ends here. With best regards, Narrayana G.E. - Saikumar satpath1 Cc: vedic astrology Friday, September 05, 2003 9:44 PM Re: Re: [vedic astrology] Re: Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Dear Rajiv, Sorry for putting this bluntly. What are you trying to prove? What if Vedas do not support Astrology. We still want to learn it, and as we know, we are all in the right forum to learn the divine science. If your idea is to distract people by creating non-existent controversies, you better find some other group. If you find some people on this list buying your arguement and want to argue with you, I think you are better of arguing off the list, instead of flooding the list with your junk mail. If the Gurus think it is pertinent material for learning Vedic Astrology they would share with us anyway. Hope you understand my point. It is plain and simple --> If you are not contributing to increase the knowledge of Astrology(Vedic or non-Vedic -according to you), we are not happy reading your mails here. I request Guru Narasimha to moderate more closely and try to restrict people who are trying to distract the attention of the students. Sorry if I have hurt anyone's feelings with my mail. Regards, Sai Rajeev Kumar <satpath1 >Date: 2003/09/04 22:36:00vedic astrologyCc: Re: [vedic astrology] Re: Astrology is it Vedic ???????????? Namaste Hari Ji, Let's first resolve the main issue that whether Astrology( As a concept of fate ) has references in Vedas or not ? Other issues will be resolved later. Yes Karma /Dharma, atman, god are vedic concepts. Regards Rajeev onlyhari <onlyhari > wrote: ||Om Brihaspataye Namah||Dear Rajeev,Your position is that Jyotish refers to astronomy and not astrology. That is a point to be considered.However I am interested in knowing how did you prove that Astrology fails the tests of truth given in your email. You have just stated the same without proof. Since you have read or trying to understand the Vedas, I request you to state if atman, birth/rebirth, karma, dharma are vedic concepts or not.May I pose a practical question to you: Based on the vedas, what is the most appropriate time for performing a marriage? By time is meant which period of time shall you choose to perform the ceremony? Please dont give the answer in terms of the age of the individuals who are to be married. Your answer should be in accordance with the principles stated in the Ve! das. Broadly speaking, is there any vedic concept such as quality of time (ie., a good time or a bad time)and how is this quality determined?regardsHariPS: I think Chandrasekar made a typo and probably meant "...opinion ON vedas..." and not "...opinion AS vedas...". --- In vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote:> Namaste Chandrashekhar Ji,> > My prime question is whether there is refernece to Astrology(as concept of fate) in Vedas. If you say yes then please quote the references.> > You also said that you respect Swami Dayananda as Veda(Learned, Knowledge) then what's the problem in quoting his opinion ?.> > And who can deny the tests of truth I gave in my last mail.> > Jyotish means knowledge of light etymologically. It is used to> refer to the science of astronomy. It DOES NOT actuall! y mean astrology even though due to our ignorance we beleive Jyoti sh to mean astrology.> Infact there has been no word in Sanskrit for astrology as the concept of fate being decided by planets was non-existent till very recent times (a few thousand years ago).> > Those who claim to be masters of vedic astrology are just making false claims since there is not even a remote reference to astrology in Vedas.> Thus, you will find that in none of these books on vedic astrology or vedaang jyotish is any shloka or sukta given from vedas.> > > > Regards> > Rajeev> Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 6, 2003 Report Share Posted September 6, 2003 Yes I also agree with you that there are 4 vedas and these are Rig,Yajur,Sam and Atharva. I have already told that we have references to astronomy in Vedas. Please give the references and after analysis of the same I will get back to you. Regards Rajeevamolmandar <amolmandar > wrote: Dear Rajeev NamasteBefore we get into Good or Bad work and its relation to God,I will try to show some reference of Jyotish and Astrology in the Vedas. For that let me just know will you accept a sukta or Shloka describing that the bodies present in the Brahmanda do affect our life and we should pray for good effects from them, as proof for reference of astrology in any of the four Vedas. Why I am asking this is that I have some shlokas from Vedas describing this. The reference of NAvagraha directly or indirectly in the Veda will be acceptred by you as proof of Astrology in Vedas or not? So if a shloka says that we should pray these hevenly bodies and these bodies should give us Sukha and Shanti then that should be more than enough as proof or not. Or you want all shlokas present in Astrological Granthas to be present in Vedas? Let me know this first and then I will produce for you more than one proof of Jyotish i.e. astrological and not astromonical reference in Vedas.One last thing be very clear that Vedas means 1)Rigveda 2)Yajurveda 3)SamaVeda 4) Atharvaveda.If you agree on this, please let me know.Thanks a lot for your Time and Sapce.AmolMAndarvedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote:> Namaste AmolMAndar Ji,> > If every work is work of God then are adulteration, telling lies , doing fraud with somebody etc. are also work of God. If we accept this then God becomes an adulterator, lier etc.> > Vedic God does not expect the help of anybody in doing his work because he is all powerful , omniscient. The God which expects help from anybody is not God but a humanbeing or a fraud.> > Regards> > Rajeev > > > > > amolmandar <amolmandar> wrote:> Dear Rajeev Namaste> > Thanks for the wonderful link. > > >But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their hand, > >is it not against Vedas and Gita ????> > Dont you feel that every work is 'work' of God. Why to single out > Astrologers? Moreover, what is wrong in helping God? > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.> > AmolMAndar> > --- In vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> > wrote:> > Namaste,> > > > Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to > brand it as a Vedic science.> > > > I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In > ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is an > athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are > anti Vedic.> > > > I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it is > for them only I am raising this question. > > > > I have following point to support my views> > > > Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA(Action) > and says that you have right to do the action only and result is in > my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in > their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ????> > > > In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic > Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the acts > that astrologers generally talk about.> > > > Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true > sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found on > Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference.> > > > Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of Astrology > is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a copy > and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth '> > http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8> > > > > > > > THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH > > > > The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be > carefully examined by the following five tests:-> > > > The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the teachings > of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is > right, the reverse is wrong. > > Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is true, > the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without > the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature > can never be true. > > The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, truthful, > unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to > their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is > unacceptable. > > The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good for > you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to > others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct > towards others. > > Eight kinds of evidence> > > > > > Direct Cognizance. > > Inference. > > Analogy. > > Testimony. > > History. > > Deduction. > > Possibility. > > Non-existence or Negation.> > > > > > Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, > which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their > objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the > senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. > > But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words > with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid > called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you some > water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is > water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the > word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct > knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge> > > > > > > > This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient > character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable > circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took > it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and > knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression > of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave > place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the > thing was revealed in the light. > > It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain > in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and > say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or take > another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva > Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in > doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your > knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be > that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. > > Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct > Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with > the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances > unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in > character) nor into which any element of doubt enters> > > > > > > > Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows > direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together > at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the woe > is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For > instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have > had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you > infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of > the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the > present moment. > > Inference is of three kinds:-> > > > Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, > e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, > again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the > wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students > engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they > will become men of learning.> > > > > > Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects to > causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it > must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, > you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a > father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the > Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - the > elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a > man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a > virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the > consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, > pleasure. > > > > > > Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there is > no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the > thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between > the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place > without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a > certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the > latter place by moving from the first.> > > > > > Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness > to another. The thing which is required to be known is called > Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from some > kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana > > Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu > Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has > never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva > Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the affirmative, > his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta." > So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing > through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and > thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought > him to his master. > > Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, > some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a > jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once > know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind > of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to > Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is calledUpamaana > or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called > Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above > two instances. > > > > > > > > > > Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt > (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. > > An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all > the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, > truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love > for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely > actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, > experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all > A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). > > > > > > Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a > person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, > Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. > NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in > history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the > day. - Tr. > > > > > > Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion which > naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one > says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows from > a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above > statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," > or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." > > > > > > Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing > that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. > Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, > and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a > child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the > dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted > mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw > horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple > born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not > have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That > alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. > > > > > > Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a thing > in some other place from its absence from the place where you were > told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go and > bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but found > that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he must > be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the > elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and > brought him to his master. > > > > These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their > number can be reduced to four fi History be included under > Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under > Inference.* > > It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can > ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise> > > > If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a fraud.> > > > > > Regards> > > > Rajeev> > > > > > > > Do you ?> > > > > Sponsor> Archives: vedic astrology> > Group info: vedic astrology/info.html> > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-> > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......> > || Om Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri Krishnaarpanamastu || > > Terms of Service. > > > > > Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 6, 2003 Report Share Posted September 6, 2003 Dear Rajeev NAmaste It is good that we agree on number of AVedas and their names. Now lets move ahead by building confidance. I wrote previous mail to avoid unnecesary debate afterwards. Let it be clear that I have some references but the problem may arise that on hindsight you may put it as astronomy and I may not agree to it. This may cause us to loose the point. So lets be clear what reference will be Astronomy and what will be Astrology. In other words, if you fix up domain of Astronomy it will be good for me to examine myself and then to decide to put them as proof or not. As far as as Jyotish is concerned,it is shastra of Jyotish. Jyoti is obtained from celestial bodies.The branch of Jyotish in which we study physical nature,such as its redius,color,its distance from sun or earth and its speed of rotation is Astronomy.(right?) And the branch of jyotish in which its effect is express and accordingly prayer is given then it is not Astronmy and hence can be Astrology. Do you agree? Many say that basic of Astrology is that Celestial Bodies Affect Our Life(CBAOL). If this(CBAOL) is acknowledge in Vedas then it can be said that vedas have reference of Astrology. Do you agree with this? Lets first fix up line of demarcation between Astronomy and Astrology and then move ahead. But be assured that I do have some references of Astrology based on CBAOL, in Vedas. Thanks alot for your Time and Space. AmolMAndar vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> wrote: > Namaste Amolmandar Ji, > > Yes I also agree with you that there are 4 vedas and these are Rig,Yajur,Sam and Atharva. I have already told that we have references to astronomy in Vedas. Please give the references and after analysis of the same I will get back to you. > > Regards > > Rajeev > > amolmandar <amolmandar> wrote: > Dear Rajeev Namaste > > Before we get into Good or Bad work and its relation to God,I will > try to show some reference of Jyotish and Astrology in the Vedas. > For that let me just know will you accept a sukta or Shloka > describing that the bodies present in the Brahmanda do affect our > life and we should pray for good effects from them, as proof for > reference of astrology in any of the four Vedas. Why I am asking > this is that I have some shlokas from Vedas describing this. The > reference of NAvagraha directly or indirectly in the Veda will be > acceptred by you as proof of Astrology in Vedas or not? So if a > shloka says that we should pray these hevenly bodies and these > bodies should give us Sukha and Shanti then that should be more than > enough as proof or not. Or you want all shlokas present in > Astrological Granthas to be present in Vedas? Let me know this first > and then I will produce for you more than one proof of Jyotish i.e. > astrological and not astromonical reference in Vedas. > > One last thing be very clear that Vedas means 1)Rigveda 2) Yajurveda > 3)SamaVeda 4) Atharvaveda. > > If you agree on this, please let me know. > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Sapce. > > AmolMAndar > > > vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar <satpath1> > wrote: > > Namaste AmolMAndar Ji, > > > > If every work is work of God then are adulteration, telling lies , > doing fraud with somebody etc. are also work of God. If we accept > this then God becomes an adulterator, lier etc. > > > > Vedic God does not expect the help of anybody in doing his work > because he is all powerful , omniscient. The God which expects help > from anybody is not God but a humanbeing or a fraud. > > > > Regards > > > > Rajeev > > > > > > > > > > amolmandar <amolmandar> wrote: > > Dear Rajeev Namaste > > > > Thanks for the wonderful link. > > > > >But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God in their > hand, > > >is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? > > > > Dont you feel that every work is 'work' of God. Why to single out > > Astrologers? Moreover, what is wrong in helping God? > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > AmolMAndar > > > > vedic astrology, Rajeev Kumar > <satpath1> > > wrote: > > > Namaste, > > > > > > Astrology is it Vedic ? or we are using the name Vedas just to > > brand it as a Vedic science. > > > > > > I am of the view that Astrology is not supported by Vedas . In > > ManuSmriti it is written that whoever disobeys/disregard Vedas is > an > > athiest. So those books which are not in accordance with Vedas are > > anti Vedic. > > > > > > I am sure that all people on this forum are not blind and it > is > > for them only I am raising this question. > > > > > > I have following point to support my views > > > > > > Vedas , Gita talk at length about the philosophy of KARMA > (Action) > > and says that you have right to do the action only and result is > in > > my(God) hand. But here the Astrologers have taken the work of God > in > > their hand, is it not against Vedas and Gita ???? > > > > > > In Vedas and other authoritative scriptures of ancient Vedic > > Rishis no where it is written that sun moon planets etc do the > acts > > that astrologers generally talk about. > > > > > > Offcourse Vedas and other vedic scriptures support all the true > > sciences like Astronomy but not even a single word we have found > on > > Astrology. If you came across any then please give the reference. > > > > > > Moreover by applying tests of truth the truthfulness of > Astrology > > is not proved. The tests of truth are as follows. I am making a > copy > > and paste from the following site about the ' Tests of truth ' > > > http://www.vjsingh.com/chapterthree.html#8 > > > > > > > > > > > > THE FIVE TESTS OF TRUTH > > > > > > The truth of every thing that is learnt or taught should be > > carefully examined by the following five tests:- > > > > > > The Veda and nature of God - All that conforms to the > teachings > > of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is > > right, the reverse is wrong. > > > Laws of Nature - All that tallies with laws of nature is > true, > > the reverse untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born > without > > the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of > nature > > can never be true. > > > The practice and teachings of A'ptaas, -i.e., pious, > truthful, > > unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to > > their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is > > unacceptable. > > > The purity and conviction of one's own soul. - What is good > for > > you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to > > others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one's conduct > > towards others. > > > Eight kinds of evidence > > > > > > > > > Direct Cognizance. > > > Inference. > > > Analogy. > > > Testimony. > > > History. > > > Deduction. > > > Possibility. > > > Non-existence or Negation. > > > > > > > > > Direct Cognizance (Praatyaksha) is that kind of knowledge, > > which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with > their > > objects,* of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the > > senses, and of the soul with mind. NYAAYA Shaastraa 1: i, 4. > > > But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of > words > > with the things signified, as of the word "water" with the fluid > > called "water", For example, you ask your servant to bring you > some > > water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says : 'Here is > > water, Sir.' Now, what you and your servant see is not the > > word "water" but the object signified by it. So ou have the direct > > knowledge of the object called water. But the knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient > > character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavourable > > circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and > took > > it for a man , but when it was daylight he found out his mistake > and > > knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first > impression > > of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave > > place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the > > thing was revealed in the light. > > > It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be > certain > > in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and > > say: "Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?" Or > take > > another example, you see a man from a distance and say: Is it Deva > > Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?" Now, as long as you are in > > doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your > > knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be > > that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it. > > > Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct > > Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with > > the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances > > unfavourable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in > > character) nor into which any element of doubt enters > > > > > > > > > > > > Anumaana - inference - Literally it means that which follows > > direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together > > at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the > woe > > is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred.* For > > instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have > > had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill > you > > infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of > > the soul form observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at > the > > present moment. > > > Inference is of three kinds:- > > > > > > Purvavat - is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, > > e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, > > again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the > > wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students > > engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day > they > > will become men of learning. > > > > > > > > > Sheshavat - inference is one, in which you reason from effects > to > > causes. Examples:- You see a flood in the river, and infer that it > > must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. > Again, > > you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a > > father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the > > Spiritual cause - the Creator, as well as of a Material cause - > the > > elementary matter. Or, again, take another example. When you se a > > man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done > a > > virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the > > consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, > > pleasure. > > > > > > > > > Aaamaanyatodrishata - is that kind of inference, in which there > is > > no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the > > thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between > > the two. For example, you know that no one can get another place > > without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at > a > > certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the > > latter place by moving from the first. > > > > > > > > > Upamaana - Analogy - is the knowledge of a thing from its > likeness > > to another. The thing which is required to be known is called > > Saadhya, and tha which becomes the means of this knowledge from > some > > kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana > > > Examples: - a man says to his servant : "Go and fetch Vishnu > > Mittra." The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has > > never seen him before. Thereupon the master says :- You know Deva > > Datta, don't you?" Upon the servant's answering in the > affirmative, > > his master continues: "Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva > Datta." > > So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing > > through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and > > thought that, thta man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith > brought > > him to his master. > > > Or, take another example. You want to know what a Yak is. Well, > > some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a > > jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at > once > > know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind > > of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness > to > > Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is > calledUpamaana > > or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are > called > > Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the > above > > two instances. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shabda - Testimony (literally, word) - "The word of an A'pt > > (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda." NYAAYA Shaastra 1:,i, 7. > > > An A'pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, we versed in all > > the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is > virtuous, > > truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love > > for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely > > actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, > > experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of > all > > A'ptas, HIs word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony). > > > > > > > > > Itihaas - History - is that which tells us that such and such a > > person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other > words, > > Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person. > > NYAAYA Shaastra 2: 2,1.[The experience of the past recorded in > > history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the > > day. - Tr. > > > > > > > > > Arthaapatti - Conclusion or deduction. - It is a conclusion > which > > naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one > > says to another: "Rain falls from clouds" or " and effect flows > from > > a cause." The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above > > statement is: "There can be no rain when there are no clouds," > > or "no effects follow when a cause does not exist." > > > > > > > > > Sambhava - possibility. - When you hear a thing, the first thing > > that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is > possible. > > Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, > > and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that > a > > child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the > > dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted > > mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw > > horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple > > born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not > > have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That > > alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature. > > > > > > > > > Abhaava - Absence or Negation.- You infer the existence of a > thing > > in some other place from its absence from the place where you were > > told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: "Go > and > > bring the elephant from the elephant-house." He went there but > found > > that the elephant was not there. He naturally conclude that he > must > > be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the > > elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and > > brought him to his master. > > > > > > These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their > > number can be reduced to four fi History be included under > > Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under > > Inference.* > > > It is only by means of these five criteria that a man can > > ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise > > > > > > If you test Astrology against these tests it proves to be a > fraud. > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Rajeev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > Group info: vedic- astrology/info.html > > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology- > > > > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... > > > > > > > > Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology- > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > 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.