Sunrise...good morning!

[Guest guest]

|om |

Dear Narasimha

Why is the Sun one point and not a *mandala* as the texts describe it - the

Savitur mandala in the center of which is Narayana. Now the tip should be

Brahma and the bottom or suset tip should be Maheswara and hence the Sun at

Sunrise, Midday and sunset shows the glory of Brahma, Vishnu and Maheswara.

 

I never gave the argument that the planets do not influence when they do not

have light. That is a corollary that has been drawn by implication to the

importance of sunlight and life on earth. It is a scientific fact that you

switch off the Sun for a period of time and the life on earth or any planet in

the solar system will end. That is the point and it cannot be stretched to

imply that the planets do not influence us at night or without light.

 

This *light* theory and misconception has been drawn perhaps due to the *light

of Jupiter* which some may feel is real physical light!!

 

On clouds and other things I have sent another mail. Please mark mails to me if

you want me to read them...got the other mails as well.

 

With best wishes and warm regards,

Sanjay Rath

* * *

Sri Jagannath Center®

15B Gangaram Hospital Road

New Delhi 110060, India

http://srath.com, +91-11-25717162

* * *

-------------------This mailbox protected from

unsolicited email by Spam Alarm from Dignity Software

http://www.dignitysoftware.com

 

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao [pvr (AT) charter (DOT) net] Tuesday, June 21, 2005

8:14 PMJyotisa ShisyaCc: Sanjay RathRe: My Research on "Planetary

Special Lagnas"

Dear Hari,

 

Option C is not exactly "the first ray of sunlight" to reach earth. Rays of Sun

are reflected in the atmosphere and reach earth long before sunrise. That is

why we see some light.

 

Option C is the moment when the tip of Sun is visible, i.e. the first ray of Sun

reaches earth *directly*.

 

You asked me for my opinion. My personal opinion is that this option C is an

"ill-defined construct" in mathematical terms. The refraction in atmosphere

varies drastically based on the atmospheric conditions such as temperature and

pressure. Oneday, there may be heavy clouds and Sun's upper tip may not be

visible at all until noon. Another day, there may be an eclipse at sunrise and

Sun may not be visible until 9 am. What is the definition then? You may say

"assuming that there were no clouds/eclipse, estimate the time when Sun would

have been visible". But, if there were no clouds, probably the atmospheric

conditions would be different and the refraction would be different. What

atmospheric conditions should be taken? As one can see, there is no clear

definition here.

 

When we refer to Sun in astrology, Sun is not a collection of points - he stands

for ONE point with an associated sphuta. That "astrological center" of Sun is

what we find sphuta for. It is either at the center of the physical disk or

close to it. Certainly it is not at the upper tip. I find it illogical to use

one definition of sphuta of Sun when finding the placement of Sun in various

divisions and another definition of sphuta of Sun when finding special lagnas.

Both should be based on the same sphuta.

 

I refuse to believe that planets influence us only thru their light. They

influence us even when their light does not reach us directly.

 

We should distinguish between the civil definition of sunrise based on

visibility - which is subjectively defined - and the astrological definition of

sunrise based on the sphuta of Sun rising - which is objectively defined. In my

view, only the latter is appropriate for use in the definition of special

lagnas.

 

Best regards,

Narasimha