Length of Divya Varsha

May 12, 2009

Sunil Ji,

Here are pointwise answers to wrong points raised by you :

<<<

1)Yes, the concept of 4320,000 years for the Mahayuga is wrong as Lord Rama was

born only about 9300 years ago in the Treta yuga.

>>>

Earlier you said the concept of 4320000 years for the Mahayuga was my invention,

now you say this concept is wrong but do not specify whether I introduced this

supposedly wrong concept or it existed before I was born. Lord Rama born about

9300 years ago is your invention, having no evidence of any sort. It is based on

your fictious assumption of 12000 human years in a mahayuga.

<<<

2)When you criticise Burgess's translation as inaccurate then is it not shameful

to quote from the same translation of Burgess. Instead of gracefully accepting

your lapse you are telling me that I am poking fun at you. Did you expect me to

praise you for your double standard?

>>>

Burgess made many serious mistakes in translating some portions, but it does not

mean he is 100% wrong everywhere. In an English forum, I am forced to cite the

only available English translator of Suryasiddhanta, and when I find some wrong

portions in such translations, I have to point out the errors. It is a valid

stand, which you call " shameful " , " lapse " , " double standard " ! I also sent you

names of Sanskrit, Hindi and Bengali translators of Suryasiddhanta, which you

omit to mention and divert the discussion from length of divya varsha in

Suryasiddhanta to a discussion on my " shameful " character , yet charging me of

playing " diversionary tactics " !

<<<

3)You need not give me any unsolicited details as to where to get which book

when you yourself said that you are removing your book from your website so that

I should not be able to see that. Should I send you back your email to refresh

your memory? Another example of your double-standard. Is that the nobility of a

Brahmachari?

>>>

Only 300 copies of my books were printed, and not a single copy was sold. It was

given to chosen persons, none of whom had praised the virtues of wine before me.

I cannot give my book to such a person at any cost, unless he vows never to

drink again. Manusmriti says one should not even talk to a person who drinks

wine. Communication through email is not tantamount to talking. Please do not

take it personally, it is my anability to break my principles. I knew sending

reference to websites which offer ancient texts freely will offend and provok

you , because these ancient siddhantic texts invariably speak of 4320000 solar

years for a mahayuga. For instance, in the first verse of Dashageetikaa of

Aryabhatiya, Sun's bhagana number per (maha)yuga is 4320000 and Earth's

rotations are given to be 1582237500 (1582237828 in Suryasiddhanta, this minor

difference being due to Sunrise system of day count in Aryabhatiya in contrast

to midnight system of

Suryasiddhanta). Brahma-sphuta-siddhaanta(BSS) repeats the mathematics of

Mahabharata (MBh-v-231) in its first chapter verses 4-7, in which 4320000 normal

solar years of humans are said to make one mahayuga (see verses 5-6) and 1000

such mahayugas are said to make one Kalpa (BSS, ch-i, verse 10). Hence,

Suryasiddhanta, Aryabhatiya and Brahma-sphuta-siddhaanta all clearly say one

mahayuga to be equal to 4320000 years and not 43200000 days as you wrongly tried

to prove by misquoting texts. Should I cite your previous mails to remind you of

your own stand ? When I requested you to see original texts and offered you

website addresses where these texts are freely available, why you became

infuriated ? Is truth so abominable to you that you cannot restraint your

violent nature and start abusing my supposedly " shameless " character ? You stand

is refuted by all these ancient texts : Suryasiddhanta, Aryabhatiya and

Brahma-sphuta-siddhaanta, Mahabharata, Narada

Purana, Vishnu Dharmottara Purana, etc, all of which unanimously say that one

mahayuga is of 4320000 years or 1582237828 days which is equal to 12000 divine

years.

<<<

4)Prafulla may be right but he has to give me the reference where it is said

that the span of the Kaliyuga has been selectively extended, as claimed by him.

>>>

The span of the Kaliyuga having been selectively extended is an invention of

Prafulla ji, there is no proof anywhere. But it means he knows the siddhanta

texts which clearly declare a mahayuga to be of 12000 divya and 4320000 human

years, which he imagines to be a later extension of original 12000 years for a

mahayuga which he infers from an out-f-context reading of MBh-ii-188, forgetting

to consult MBh-v-231 where same verse is repeated in fuller context.

<<<

5)The verse in the Mahabharata says about Daiva Varsha, and that is the same as

the polar year where the daylight is there for six months long and the night is

also six months long. Daiva here means the year of the Devas. In Mahabharata the

span is given in terns of Solar years.

>>>

It is welcome that you at least accept the existence of Daiva varsha in

Mahabharata(MBh), but here again you are deliberately distorting the verses of

MBh. MBh does not say its daiva varsha is meant for the (imaginary) residents of

Poles, but says what I earlier communicated. I know you will not accept truth,

because you have no faith neither in Suryasiddhanta(SS) nor in MBh, but I am

here quoting verses of MBh which falsify your stand :

MBh-khanda 5-chapter 231-verse15 says " ahoraatre vibhajate Suryau

maanushalaukike " , which means days and nights of manushya loka is made/divided

by Surya. verse 17 says " Daive raatryahanee varsham pravibhaagastayoh punah ,

ahastatrodagayanam raatrih syad dakshinaayanam " : in which " Daive raatryahanee

varsham " means " varsha is equal to day+night of gods " . Here varsha is varsha

of maanushalaukike which is to be taken from preceding two verses. Rest of verse

17 means " this daiva day+night is divided thus : uttara (ayana) is divine day

and dakshinaayana is divine night " . MBh clearly says that the maanushalaukika

year is solar year : see verse 15 above which says that Sun divides/makes day

and night in maanushalaukika (but not in devaloka).

<<<

6) What the verses say is that as revealed by Brahma he is going to tell about

the span of the yugas. (We all know that Brahma'sday is one Kalpa and that is

equal to 1000 Mahayugas and His night is also of the same length and these are

not included in those few verses.)

>>>

No Sir, you are deliberately misquoting this verse (MBh,v,231,18) which says :

" ye te raatryahanee poorvam keertite Jeevalaukike ,

tayoh samkhyaaya varshaagram Braahme vakshyaamyahahkshape " .

It means :

" These days and nights of Jeevaloka which have been told in preceding

verses (verses 15-17)

On the basis of those year numbers I (Vyaasa Ji) am now telling days and nights

of brahmaa (in following verses) "

In those 'following " verses, Vyaasa ji describes 12000 years in a mahayuga

divided into four yugas, but verse 18 clearly says these durations of year are

according to the ratios described in preceding verses, esp verse 17 which says

one human year is equal to one divine year. Hence, chronology of Brahmaa Ji

cannot be as per maanava varsha but as per divine varsha, if Vyaasa Ji took

Brahmaa to be a divinity.

Apply this sentence to yourself : " Please read my mail carefully and reply to

the point if you want to and not play some diversionary tactics. "

Now I have lost all hopes that you will ever listen to either fact or reason.

You have to distort ancient texts according to your imaginary conceptions. But

why you charged me wrongly of inventing a concept of 4320000 years for a

mahayuga, when it is clearly said in all relevant ancient texts ? If you have to

disown and refute these ancient texts, no one can prevent you, but do it

honestly, instead of taking recourse to deceitful tactics.

-VJ

________________________________

Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan

Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:13:17 AM

BLESSED?

Dear Vinay Jha Ji,

In Mrityuloka and Kaliyuga we all are bound in and limited by -- please educate

the great unwashed us why you call 'crap' nonsense? And why do you give up so

readily and call samkhya crap so readily? Are you not convinced that what you

propose and promote so passionately is worth no attention?

Maybe it is not " what " but 'HOW' that is the problem?

What do I know, after all, but the four yugas as everything else that is

mathematical take me back to jyotish. The quadruplicities, the four elements,

remind me as HOW!

I once wrote about Triplicities and Quadruplicities and while the concept may be

of no significance to modern jyotishis, it was a JOY when it was gifted to me to

get written.

What, How or When had never been a problem and nor has ever been WHO or WHERE!

Blessed then? Shall we leave it at that?

, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

> I hope " sensible " persons will keep away from " crap " (nonsense) like Saamkhya

& c and will devote their precious time to precious things.

>

> -VJ

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> vattem krishnan <bursar_99@. ..>

>

> Tuesday, May 12, 2009 7:12:39 AM

> Re: World Population.. .?

>

> Dear Dada,

> What is needed to understand is " " Beta don't waste your time in all this 'crap'

of magic, study and learn good things. "

> The forum has to get into some kind of learning that really supports the group

and time.

> with regards

> vrkrishnan

>

> --- On Mon, 5/11/09, Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@ hotmail.com> wrote:

>

> Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@ hotmail.com>

> Re: World Population.. .?

>

> Monday, May 11, 2009, 7:09 PM

>

> Dear Vinay Ji,

>

> While I have no difficulty accepting that some bureaucracies may be fudging

some or all kinds of data for all kinds of reasons, I have a simple question:

>

> How will you, a serious researcher which I do not doubt at all that you are,

or anyone count the population and really figure out what the true headcount is

in the world at a given moment? I do realize that you seriously think about what

I am asking and the impossibility of such a quest!

>

> And secondly, do you not believe in reincarnation as many of us hindus (and

some other religions too) do? It is flattering ;-) that you make it sound as if

I am never going to come back and be reborn but I have so much to learn from

many human births still! As they say, I shall return and just as I do now in

some ways, I shall remember certain things when I return and pick up my mission

of observing the human beings and their wonderful richness, again and again.

Including their claims, myths and beliefs and above all their quest of REALITY

while they define it in so many ways, from so many perspectives.

>

> As to the census number, the number you quote of 6227 worldwide has already

been surpassed given that the estimates and census 'data' could be

underestimates and even they are hundreds of millions higher than this special

and concrete number that you speak of.

>

> Like any child I was very much enticed by magic and magicians. A magician yogi

came to our school and being the relative heavy weight he picked me out of the

crowd and asked me to stand on him as he lay down on two long serrated saw

blades! When he beckoned me to climb down, and showed his back with each

saw-tooth showing as a distinct triangle of blanched skin growing reddish as we

watched, I was very impressed and when all were gone, I asked him to teach me

how he did it. I still remember his glance which was almost wistful as he

replied sincerely, " Beta don't waste your time in all this 'crap' of magic,

study and learn good things. " I was kind of crest-fallen but looking back I

sense the sincerity in his gaze.

>

> Then a bit older, I had an occasion to watch the great showman magician P.C.

Sorcar. He was a great showman and all jovial and wonderful but during an act he

spilled some water on a hot flood light. The 2000Watt light popped into

smithereens and the 'light' on the stage suddenly went down perceptibly. Within

a few seconds, the jovial and all-powerful Great Magician turned into a

quivering, neurotic, mess, face twisted, contorted in subdued anger as he urged

his stage help to change the bulb " JAALDI KAARO! " .

>

> Only in these moments of stress which brings out the humanness that is within

all of us and which indeed makes us human are the glimpses of reality!

>

> RR

>

> , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > RR JI,

> >

> > You are citing figures based on projections of past trends. I have years of

experience in serious research works in demography. Census figures are neither

overestimates nor underestimates, esp in developing countries. They are

estimates made from sample surveys, falsely projected as real censuses by a

corrupt bureaucracy which is incapable of undertaking a rwal headcount. Times of

India had made a first page lead story of 2001 census of India, which showed ~25

million more children in 15-20 age groups (perhaps, i do not exactly remember

whether it was 10-15 or 15-20) than the age group 10 years junior in previous

census. In spite of many deaths, 0-5 0r 5-10 age group of 1991 Census added ~25

million new members in 2001 Census !!

> >

> > I hope and pray that you will live long to see my figure (6227 millions)

come true. I have used the term Brahmavaakya, which means I will go to Hell if I

am wrong. I can send you a detailed article, which is too esoteric to be made

public.

> >

> > -VJ

> > ============ == =====

> >

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan@ ...>

> >

> > Monday, May 11, 2009 5:20:43 AM

> > World Population.. .?

> >

> > I found this URL that may be of interest:

> >

> > http://www.census. gov/ipc/www/ popclockworld. html

> >

> > According to this the world population has already exceeded 6778 millions

and counting.

> >

> > It is well known that census figures are underestimates, particularly in

countries that are massively populated, for a variety of reasons.

> >

> > Very interesting. ..!

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

wrote:

> > ><SNIP>

> > >

> > > Human race will never reach 7 billions. Demographers are giving out

projections base on past trends. But 6227 millions is the ultimate Lakshamana

Rekhaa which mankind is incapable of crossing. You will find its proof in about

a decade or two. It is a Brahma-vaakya.

> > >

> > > Sincerely,

> > >

> > > -VJ

> >

> > <SNIP>

> >

May 13, 2009

Dear Vinay Jha JI

Jaya Siyaa Raam

I have been reading about the length of the Divine year for some time. People do

not agree that one Divine year is equal to 360 human years - otherwise why

should it be called Divine year? Both year can be called by the same name.

Bhaagvat Puraan says that one Mahaa Yug consists of 4 Yug - Sat, Tretaa, Dwaapar

and Kali. And they are in the proportion of 4:3:2:1 - means that Sat Yug

contains 4800 Divine years, Tretaa 3600 Divine years, Dwaapar 2400 Divine years

and Kali Yug is the shortest - only 1200 Divine years.

Then if we convert these Divine years into Human years they become - 1,728,000;

1,296,000; 864,000 and 432,000 Human years respectively.

Am I right up to here? I think the same measurementis given in MBH also.

Since Krishn lived only for 123 Human years on this Earth, and as He went to His

Lok, Kali Yug came; and people say that Kali Yug is only 5,000 Human years old -

it means that Krishn was born only some 5123 Human years before.

With the same assumption Raam was born in the end of Tretaa Yug. He ruled for

11,000 Human years. If Dwaapar Yug came when He left this Earth (like Krishn) it

means that He should have been born 5,000 Human Years of (of Kali Yug) + at

least 862,900 Human years (of Dwaapar Yug) = 867,900 Human years ago - at least.

Am I right up to here?

Further, Sir I beg your pardon for my ignorance, please correct me if I am wrong

somewhere - is there any proof which can prove that Raam was born in this 28th

Mahaa Yug only? And was not born in some other Mahaa Yug or even Kalp?

Krishn's birth proof in this 28th Maha Yug is this that He was living in Ved

Vyaas' times and Ved Vyaas Jee was in this 28th Dwaapar Yug. Vishnu Puraan gives

the list of 28 Ved Vyaas and declares that Ashwatthaamaa will be the next 29th

Ved Vyaas.

Can we trust these sources? or do we have to seek some other ones? If yes, then

which ones?

I hope I have not annoyed you.

With regards

Sushma

, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

>

> Sunil Ji,

>

> Here are pointwise answers to wrong points raised by you :

>

> <<<

> 1)Yes, the concept of 4320,000 years for the Mahayuga is wrong as Lord Rama

was born only about 9300 years ago in the Treta yuga.

> >>>

> Earlier you said the concept of 4320000 years for the Mahayuga was my

invention, now you say this concept is wrong but do not specify whether I

introduced this supposedly wrong concept or it existed before I was born. Lord

Rama born about 9300 years ago is your invention, having no evidence of any

sort. It is based on your fictious assumption of 12000 human years in a

mahayuga.

>

> <<<

> 2)When you criticise Burgess's translation as inaccurate then is it not

shameful to quote from the same translation of Burgess. Instead of gracefully

accepting your lapse you are telling me that I am poking fun at you. Did you

expect me to praise you for your double standard?

> >>>

> Burgess made many serious mistakes in translating some portions, but it does

not mean he is 100% wrong everywhere. In an English forum, I am forced to cite

the only available English translator of Suryasiddhanta, and when I find some

wrong portions in such translations, I have to point out the errors. It is a

valid stand, which you call " shameful " , " lapse " , " double standard " ! I also

sent you names of Sanskrit, Hindi and Bengali translators of Suryasiddhanta,

which you omit to mention and divert the discussion from length of divya varsha

in Suryasiddhanta to a discussion on my " shameful " character , yet charging me

of playing " diversionary tactics " !

>

> <<<

> 3)You need not give me any unsolicited details as to where to get which book

when you yourself said that you are removing your book from your website so that

I should not be able to see that. Should I send you back your email to refresh

your memory? Another example of your double-standard. Is that the nobility of a

Brahmachari?

> >>>

> Only 300 copies of my books were printed, and not a single copy was sold. It

was given to chosen persons, none of whom had praised the virtues of wine before

me. I cannot give my book to such a person at any cost, unless he vows never to