Guest guest Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Dear Sri Vattern Ji, You have beautifully expressed this thought: " > " ARYA BHATT USED HIS SPIRITUAL POWERS TO COMPILE SURYA SIDDHANTIC FORMULA....RATHER THAN UTILISING PURE MATHEMATICS, TRIGONOMETRY AND ASTRONOMY. " Very nice to see it. Yes our systems of solving problems in my humble opinion were INSIDE OUT, than OUT SIDE IN(Like western systems...) Like instead of wasting time in things like modern management(which was also there..but with their own version)... they felt once a person does yoga/pranayama and internal energeis(INSIDE) come in control....so the management of basic internal energies leads to better...external management(OUT) The same is true with other vedic sceinces...which start from OM(INSIDE)..be it maths or anything...(OUT) applies to problem we want to solve in this world.. You have very aptly put up the matter- thanks a lot Sri vattern ji. best regrds, Punkajj , vattem krishnan <bursar_99 wrote: > > Dear friends, > When the thread of Surya Siddhanta was initiated on thing was lingering in most of our most and even some jyotishis often say that this art of prediction does not exactly match or relate to science for any verification.Yet it has the predominant character of science as celestial bodies movement though in in a zig-zag,ecleptical matter has some thing to do with factor known as precision.So it is no wonder that the great scientist,mathematicians too could not base his views on any formula but on some super power(be it intution or something else).We have to be convinced of this position that the working of the nature has something beyond human effort,if that be spirtual power we need to regard jyotish just like any other religious scripts/epics > " ARYA BHATT USED HIS SPIRITUAL POWERS TO COMPILE SURYA SIDDHANTIC FORMULA....RATHER THAN UTILISING PURE MATHEMATICS, TRIGONOMETRY AND ASTRONOMY. " > But then consistency of jyotis with so many variables is also a matter often raised in our discussions how far one can rely/depend on the Astrological forecaste/predictions.is it like any other psephologist giving the opinion polls.Are we really on flimsy ground when we deal with harsh realities and opine based on a zodiacal system? > Siddhanta ofcourse is like any other rule and beyond any interpretation.Even some of the mathematical formulae too have to be accepted as conveyed and told till such time it gets proved otherwise.Today ofcourse Einstien theory has no validation.For some time we have believed and accepted this theory.So sciences too are subjective as is Astrology. > vrkrishnan > > > --- On Fri, 4/24/09, Mrutyunjay Tripathy <astrologer_mrutyunjay wrote: > > Mrutyunjay Tripathy <astrologer_mrutyunjay > SIDDHANTA WERE NOT ASTRONOMICAL TREATIES ! > > Friday, April 24, 2009, 4:45 AM > > Dear friends, > > It is very interesting to hear that SIDDHANTA WERE NOT ASTRONOMICAL TREATEIS. > > Are the SIDDHANTA WERE; SIDDHI + ANTA = CONCLUSIVE PROOFS OF DIVINE POWERS OR SIDDHI, just as VEDANTA ARE CONCLUSIVE PARTS OF OUR VEDAS. > > so the planetary positions of SURYA SIDDHANTA has nothing to do with > > astronomical planetary positions or ASTRONOMY. > > Can it be safely assumed that ARYA BHATT USED HIS SPIRITUAL POWERS TO COMPILE SURYA SIDDHANTIC FORMULA....RATHER THAN UTILISING PURE MATHEMATICS, TRIGONOMETRY AND ASTRONOMY. > > Does it mean that > > (1)NO SIDDHANTA PRIOR TO SURYA SIDDHANTA > > HAS THE CONCEPT OF AYANAMSA IN THEM ? > > (2)WHICH SCIENTIFIC FACT OR ASTRONOMICAL FORMULA SHOWS THAT EARTH CAN TILT ANYWAY(PRESENTLY IT IS AROUND 23 TO 24 DEGREE APPROXIMATELY) AND COMPLETE A FULL CIRCLE OF CHAKRAYANA I.E. SOMEDAY (MAY BE 25,500 YEARS FROM NOW) NORTH POLE AND SOUTH POLE CAN SWAP THEIR PLACES IN THE SPACE WITH REFERENCE TO FIXED SET OF STARS ( BHA CHAKRA)? > > Certainly a good news for the bored Penguins at the South Pole. > > With regards and best wishes to all, > > Mrutyunjay Tripathy > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > AYANAMSHA : Original Definition > > > > Classical texts are NOT silent on ayanamsha. It is a topic of Siddhanta Jyotisha and not Phalita, and is well defined in ancient Sidhhanta, although that definition is knowingly or unknowingly being neglected by many astrologers now. > > > > Ayanamsha is originally a Suryasiddhantic concept, in which it is defined as libration of the " bhachakra " (orbit of lunar asterisms) within a maximum range of 27 degrees, full cycle being of 108 degrees which is derived by multiplying 360 with 0.3 ; someone multiplied again and got a maximum value of 8 degrees which is found in the oldest Western record in Theon of Alexandria (~4th century AD). Later Islamic astrologers put its value aound 9 -10 degrees. Copernicus also used this librating ayanamsha. > > > > Physical astronomy found there is no such thing as libration of the equinoxes, and therefore removed the very notion of libration / trepidation. They were right. Ayanamsha is not a phenomenon of physical world. > > > > Later, Colebrooke & c imposed the physical concept of precession on Indian concept of ayanamsha. Burgess also followed this line , as did Lahiri and all those who wrongly believe Suryasiddhanta to be a work of physical astronomy. Unfortunately, these socalled experts did not even care to translate the original verses of Suryasiddhanta honestly, in which ayanamsha has no relation with movement of equinoxes, but is defined as to and fro libration of the bhachakra. There is no means in physical astronomy through which we can test the validity of this Suryasiddhantic claim, because there is no physical entity at the orbit of 60 years which is said to be the orbit of bhachakra in Suryasiddhanta, and beyond which all objects are deemed to be non-planets, includeing Uranus, Neptune, etc. > > > > Followers of Colebrooke & c had their best exponent in NC Lahiri who used modern value of precession of equinoxes to find the period of zero ayanamsha, and failing to find any noticeable star at the first point of sidereal Aries or start of Ashvini, found Spica at the nakshatra Chitra in 285 AD. This he declared to be the zero date of ayanamsha, which was slavishly accepted by " supporters " of physical astronomy, whio forgot that Chitra was never reference point in any system of astrology or astronomy. The reference point is first point of Ashvini in most cases (and Krittika in some cases like Vimshottari or koorma Chakra), but never Chitra. This prompted Chandrahari to propound his alternative concept of ayanamsha. Chandrahari' s view was conceptually better than Lahiri's, but he followed the false reasonimg of Burgess who deliberately mis-translated relevant verses of Suryasiddhanta and cited some portions of Siddhanta Shiromani to im[pose modern > concept > > of precession on Suryasiddhantic ayanamsha, because Burgess could not believe in the existence of a trepidating equinox and guessed that the verses were mutilated which was the duty of Burgess to rectify. In his zeal, Burgess quoted a verse from Siddhanta Shiromani in which it was said that sampaat point has a periodicity of once revolution per 144000 years. Burgess omitted the whole context, which gives a formula for computing precession of the equinoxes. It was the most accurate formula for preccession till modern times. Hipparchus had a much crude computation, but Bhaskar's accurate formula ( ClickHere ) is never cited by these enthusiasts. > > > > It is noteworthy that while giving an accurate period of precession, Bhaskar-II cites Suryasiddhanta as a source of this ancient formula. This formula of physical or Drikpakshiya worls was known to ancient experts, but they never caleed it ayanamsha. All of them believed in the Suryasiddhantic notion of librating ayanamsha, from India to Europe. Had they no knowledge of actual precession, we could believe in false propaganda of Colebrooke, Burgess, Whitney, Lahiri & c about the mistake of ancients in believing in a vibrating equinox. But Bhaskar makes it clear that chakraayana or circular motion of equinox in ~25500 years was known to Indians since Vedic times, he makes it amply clear by referring to Shruti for his source of Suryasiddhantic formula of precession of equinoxes. > > > > Before Colebrooke, Burgess, Whitney, Lahiri & c , all Indians believed in trepidating ayanamsa, ie ayanamsha as a trepidation of bhachakra and not as precession of equinoxes. Precession of equinox takes place along the full circle which is known as chakraayana in ancient terminilogy, while ayanamsha moves like a pendulum within a maximum range of +27 and -27 degrees which was known as dolaayana. When Suryasiddhantic planetary positions and ayanamsha had great differences with planets of physical world, Suryasiddhanta was universally acclaimed as the best of all siddhantas. Other siddhantas were not even preserved, while astrologically most essential portions of Suryasiddhanta have been preserved. Suryasiddhanta deals with non-physical world or Bhuva-loka on which deities like Surya Deva and Chandra Deva reside, whom we cannot see sensorily, while physical planets reside in the physical world which is open to sense perception. Hence, the only proof of > > Suryasiddhanta is its astrological test, for which Suryasiddhantic software of horoscope can be freely downloaded from Kundalee and messages posted at Support . > > > > -VJ > > ============ ======== ============ ===== > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > <gaurav.ghosh@ ...> > > > > Friday, April 24, 2009 10:33:57 AM > > Re: Lahiri Ayanamsha or Raman Ayanamsha > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Jai Ramakrishna| | > > Dear Chandan, > > Like you even I also wonder, the classical works are based on which Ayanamsha?Almost all classical texts, are silent in this issue--as they have been interested in predictive purposes only, while hardly few works on Samhita & Ganita areas of Astrology. > > Panchasiddhantika has been composed by Shree Mihira Acharya aka Shree Varaha Mihira. > > However, without Sayana Values are nothing but the so-called Tropical Ayanamsha. > > In Tropical Ayanamsha, the position of Sun is given prime importance & is in relation with the movement of the Sun, which is again dependent on the English Calendar, whilst in Nirayana Ayanamsha(Sidereal) is not dependent either on English Calendar nor on the movement. Here movement of Moon is of importance, then the calculation of distance between Sun to calculate tithis & then calculate months & finally apply it for lunar months & solar months as well. > > Thats why you will find " Indian Sun Sign " & " Tropical Sun Sign " or " Zodiac sign " will not match everytime. > > Thank you, > > . > > http://gauravastro. 150m.com > > , " chandan486 " <wavelogix+jyotishr emedies@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > ok .. very nice explanation . but ever tried doing a reading without ayanamsa ? Sayana values ? even there is no mention of ayanamsa in any classical texts such as BPHS or Jaimini Sutras , then i wonder , why so much the hype with this ayanamsa .. ? also , i have experienced personal gains in life on dates which are seemingly contradictory to the laws of transits based on ayanamsa but absolutely fair based on Sayana .. > > > > > > humble regards, > > > chandan s sabarwal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.