Astrology and Karma Theory : Time =Illusion?

--- chandra_hari18 <chandra_hari18 wrote:

> § Talakulathu Bhattatiri had asked in his

> commentary on the

> 4th verse of Brhatjataka (Dasadhyayi).

> " Kathamamûrthasya

> kâlasya mûrttatvamucyte? " " How the

> incomprehensible time

> has been credited with a form?… " " Kathamamûrttasya

> kâlasya murttânâm râsînâm

> saptavimsatinakshatrântarbhûtânâm

> avayavatvamupapadyate? " " How the time has been

> given a shape

> in the sky - a limb structure in the 27 nakshatras

> and rasis?

> Bhattatiri's answer was really scientific:

> Kalpanikatvameva

> phalavijnapakatve... " In terms of modern

> terminology astrology

> involves a modeling of Time, the apparently

> incessant flow of time

> abstracted mathematically as a phenomenal wheel

> manifesting over the

> heavens – computable in terms of the rhythms of

> certain cosmic or

> celestial longitudes.

> Time used in astrology is only a model created by

> Kalpanikata -

> imagination - for predictive purpose. Otherwise time

> is beyond

> comprehension and it is in that sense it is called

> an illusion. Tantrik

> doctrines also describe time as an illusion. Time is

> one of the 5

> aspects of Mahamaya - the Great Illusion.

>

> chandra hari

December 5, 2007

Dear Be-joy !!

Thanks for that supporting piece posting......find it too technical an answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can you come up with easier examples, like our great Kabir, better for us....i.e. Kabir simplied this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & paramatma through his couplets in lay man words.....understandable even to the condemned Shudhra Caste......which have become a folklore today. { I do not believe in caste differentiation, finds mention here for discussion sake - jingoists in the group if any - first note my disclaimer !! }.

Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula - to my memory & follow-up, they are still in theory state of acceptance or some of it was supposed to be rejected in the Physics/Physicists conference a couple of years before.....update us should you happen to know about it

Be-Joy = good name....must be in this state !!

with regards,

sreeram srinivas

, Bejoy <bejoy_cs wrote: Dear all, For those who would like to see time as an illusion, one justification could be the theoretically proved Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation with increase in velocity. As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) , as particle velocity approaches the velocity of light ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In this sense Time is relativistic or an illusion. Would approciate more thoughts on the subject. Regards Bejoy C.S. www.keraladarsan.com

December 5, 2007

Dear Bejoy, Yes, we eartly bodies are stuck in time. With our baggage, we can not travel at the speed of light :-) Only our astral bodies can, I suppose. Regards, KrishnaBejoy <bejoy_cs wrote: Dear all,For those who would like to see time as an illusion,one justification could be the theoretically provedEinstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation withincrease in velocity.As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) , as

particle velocity approaches the velocity of light( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In thissense Time is relativistic or an illusion.Would approciate more thoughts on the subject.RegardsBejoy C.S.www.keraladarsan.com--- chandra_hari18 <chandra_hari18 > wrote:> § Talakulathu Bhattatiri had asked in his> commentary on the> 4th verse of Brhatjataka (Dasadhyayi). > "Kathamamûrthasya> kâlasya mûrttatvamucyte?How the> incomprehensible time> has been credited with a form?…Kathamamûrttasya> kâlasya murttânâm râsînâm> saptavimsatinakshatrântarbhûtânâm> avayavatvamupapadyate?How the time has been> given a shape> in the sky - a limb structure in the 27 nakshatras> and rasis? > Bhattatiri's answer was really scientific:

> Kalpanikatvameva> phalavijnapakatve..." In terms of modern> terminology astrology> involves a modeling of Time, the apparently> incessant flow of time> abstracted mathematically as a phenomenal wheel> manifesting over the> heavens – computable in terms of the rhythms of> certain cosmic or> celestial longitudes.> Time used in astrology is only a model created by> Kalpanikata -> imagination - for predictive purpose. Otherwise time> is beyond> comprehension and it is in that sense it is called> an illusion. Tantrik> doctrines also describe time as an illusion. Time is> one of the 5> aspects of Mahamaya - the Great Illusion.> > chandra hari

Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.

December 5, 2007

Yoga means transcending the illusion of time. Gita has a verse, Na tvevaham jaatu naasam natvam neme janadhipah...etc. Have some contemplation of its meaning. Time is an experience caused by Maya. Time stops when Kundalini goes beyond Ajna Chakram and meets Isvara. Patanjali's has therefore named the divinity of Yoga as Isvara.

chandra hari

, Bejoy <bejoy_cs wrote:>> Dear all,> > For those who would like to see time as an illusion,> one justification could be the theoretically proved> Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation with> increase in velocity.> > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) , > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of light> ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In this> sense Time is relativistic or an illusion.> > Would approciate more thoughts on the subject.> > Regards> > Bejoy C.S.> www.keraladarsan.com> > > > > --- chandra_hari18 chandra_hari18 wrote:> > > § Talakulathu Bhattatiri had asked in his> > commentary on the> > 4th verse of Brhatjataka (Dasadhyayi). > > "Kathamamûrthasya> > kâlasya mûrttatvamucyte?How the> > incomprehensible time> > has been credited with a form?…Kathamamûrttasya> > kâlasya murttânâm râsînâm> > saptavimsatinakshatrântarbhûtânâm> > avayavatvamupapadyate?How the time has been> > given a shape> > in the sky - a limb structure in the 27 nakshatras> > and rasis? > > Bhattatiri's answer was really scientific: > > Kalpanikatvameva> > phalavijnapakatve..." In terms of modern> > terminology astrology> > involves a modeling of Time, the apparently> > incessant flow of time> > abstracted mathematically as a phenomenal wheel> > manifesting over the> > heavens – computable in terms of the rhythms of> > certain cosmic or> > celestial longitudes.> > Time used in astrology is only a model created by> > Kalpanikata -> > imagination - for predictive purpose. Otherwise time> > is beyond> > comprehension and it is in that sense it is called> > an illusion. Tantrik> > doctrines also describe time as an illusion. Time is> > one of the 5> > aspects of Mahamaya - the Great Illusion.> > > > chandra hari>

December 6, 2007

Dear Sreeram and All,

Thanks for the encouraging words.

As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV ) has

talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth and 7

below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is permanent

and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits nicely

with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV

assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable ) ,

its quite probable that the velocity at the highest

orbit should be very close to the velocity of light

and at this stage mass should convert as energy (

E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4 permanent

world lies must be all energy fields only and hence is

not subject to destruction.

The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is then

particles at different mass and hence subject to time

and hence subject to periodic creation and destruction

which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9

earth years ( EY ).

As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or

relativity as we are created and subject to

destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4

permanent worlds are not subject to time as its all

energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy field

must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi

Anatha ( infinite )

Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force., lotus

is a collection of petals and gravity is a centripetal

force )

Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire

cosmic mass goes thru.

Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt sure

.... just another wayward thought on mine.

Regards

Bejoy C.S.

--- sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 wrote:

>

> Dear Be-joy !!

>

> Thanks for that supporting piece posting......find

> it too technical an

> answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can you

> come up with easier

> examples, like our great Kabir, better for

> us....i.e. Kabir simplied

> this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & paramatma

> through his couplets

> in lay man words.....understandable even to the

> condemned Shudhra

> Caste......which have become a folklore today. { I

> do not believe in

> caste differentiation, finds mention here for

> discussion sake -

> jingoists in the group if any - first note my

> disclaimer !! }.

>

> Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula - to

> my memory &

> follow-up, they are still in theory state of

> acceptance or some of it

> was supposed to be rejected in the

> Physics/Physicists conference a

> couple of years before.....update us should you

> happen to know about it

>

> Be-Joy = good name....must be in [: " >] this state

> !!

>

> with regards,

>

> sreeram srinivas

>

> ,

> Bejoy <bejoy_cs

> wrote:

> Dear all,

>

> For those who would like to see time as an

> illusion,

> one justification could be the theoretically

> proved

> Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation with

> increase in velocity.

>

> As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,

> as particle velocity approaches the velocity of

> light

> ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In this

> sense Time is relativistic or an illusion.

>

> Would approciate more thoughts on the subject.

>

> Regards

>

> Bejoy C.S.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

>

______________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

December 6, 2007

Rgveda hymns are so understood in its deeper science interpretation only when juxtaposed with modern scientific discoveries. No Rgvedic scholar has so far made any scientific discovery in advance.

T-shirt hymns can be made fit for any scientific discovery. Once in Kerala I saw similar interpretation being given to the first hymn Agnimele.. etc as referring to the Bigbang and the oscillation theory. But when I questioned the guy took to tears in front of the audience as he never understood what he was speaking.

Science is science and Rgveda is Rgveda. Any effort to draw correspondence is wild imagination.

chandra hari

, Bejoy <bejoy_cs wrote:>> > Dear Sreeram and All,> > Thanks for the encouraging words.> > As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV ) has> talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth and 7> below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is permanent> and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits nicely> with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV> assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.> > If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable ) ,> its quite probable that the velocity at the highest> orbit should be very close to the velocity of light> and at this stage mass should convert as energy (> E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4 permanent> world lies must be all energy fields only and hence is> not subject to destruction.> > The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is then> particles at different mass and hence subject to time> and hence subject to periodic creation and destruction> which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9> earth years ( EY ).> > As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,> here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or> relativity as we are created and subject to> destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4> permanent worlds are not subject to time as its all> energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy field> must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi> > Anatha ( infinite ) > > Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force., lotus> is a collection of petals and gravity is a centripetal> force )> > Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire> cosmic mass goes thru.> > Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt sure> ... just another wayward thought on mine.> > Regards> > Bejoy C.S.> www.keraladarsan.com> > > > > > > > > --- sreeram srinivas sreeram64 wrote:> > > > > Dear Be-joy !!> > > > Thanks for that supporting piece posting......find> > it too technical an> > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can you> > come up with easier> > examples, like our great Kabir, better for> > us....i.e. Kabir simplied> > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & paramatma> > through his couplets> > in lay man words.....understandable even to the> > condemned Shudhra> > Caste......which have become a folklore today. { I> > do not believe in> > caste differentiation, finds mention here for> > discussion sake -> > jingoists in the group if any - first note my> > disclaimer !! }.> > > > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula - to> > my memory & > > follow-up, they are still in theory state of> > acceptance or some of it> > was supposed to be rejected in the> > Physics/Physicists conference a> > couple of years before.....update us should you> > happen to know about it> > > > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [:">] this state> > !!> > > > with regards,> > > > sreeram srinivas> > > > > > ,> > Bejoy bejoy_cs@> > wrote:> > Dear all,> > > > For those who would like to see time as an> > illusion,> > one justification could be the theoretically> > proved> > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation with> > increase in velocity.> > > > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,> > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of> > light> > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In this> > sense Time is relativistic or an illusion.> > > > Would approciate more thoughts on the subject.> > > > Regards> > > > Bejoy C.S.> > www.keraladarsan.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? > Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>

December 7, 2007

Dear Sir,

I am trying to comprehend what you have mentioned in your mail

below. But I am totally confused. Many grey areas may be because of

lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention my doubts here:

" This 3 world theory sits nicely

with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV

assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

"

What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun is static in the

solar system and it is the planets that are moving, as everybody

knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned?

What is the correlation between the 3 worlds above earth and suns 3

higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds above earth are

above sun as well. Right?

You said " The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is then

particles at different mass and hence subject to time "

When we all belong to earth, how can we belong to the temporary

worlds that you say is above the earth?

" As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or...

"

Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally confused. Earlier in

first para it was said, 3 world theory has correlation with sun's 3

orbits (though not clear what these orbits are). But now, as per

the above lines, earth and sun are part of the 3 temporary world.

How come? How can there be worlds above earth and sun be part of

them at the same time?

What is the relevance of Padma, Nabhi here? What does all these

mean?

Can you please clarify ?

Regards,

Jyothi

, Bejoy

<bejoy_cs wrote:

>

> Dear Sreeram and All,

>

> Thanks for the encouraging words.

>

> As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV ) has

> talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth and 7

> below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is permanent

> and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits nicely

> with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV

> assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

>

> If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable ) ,

> its quite probable that the velocity at the highest

> orbit should be very close to the velocity of light

> and at this stage mass should convert as energy (

> E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4 permanent

> world lies must be all energy fields only and hence is

> not subject to destruction.

>

> The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is then

> particles at different mass and hence subject to time

> and hence subject to periodic creation and destruction

> which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9

> earth years ( EY ).

>

> As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

> here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or

> relativity as we are created and subject to

> destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4

> permanent worlds are not subject to time as its all

> energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy field

> must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi

>

> Anatha ( infinite )

>

> Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force., lotus

> is a collection of petals and gravity is a centripetal

> force )

>

> Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire

> cosmic mass goes thru.

>

> Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt sure

> ... just another wayward thought on mine.

>

> Regards

>

> Bejoy C.S.

>

--- sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 wrote:

>

> >

> > Dear Be-joy !!

> >

> > Thanks for that supporting piece posting......find

> > it too technical an

> > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can you

> > come up with easier

> > examples, like our great Kabir, better for

> > us....i.e. Kabir simplied

> > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & paramatma

> > through his couplets

> > in lay man words.....understandable even to the

> > condemned Shudhra

> > Caste......which have become a folklore today. { I

> > do not believe in

> > caste differentiation, finds mention here for

> > discussion sake -

> > jingoists in the group if any - first note my

> > disclaimer !! }.

> >

> > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula - to

> > my memory &

> > follow-up, they are still in theory state of

> > acceptance or some of it

> > was supposed to be rejected in the

> > Physics/Physicists conference a

> > couple of years before.....update us should you

> > happen to know about it

> >

> > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [: " >] this state

> > !!

> >

> > with regards,

> >

> > sreeram srinivas

> >

> > ,

> > Bejoy <bejoy_cs@>

> > wrote:

> > Dear all,

> >

> > For those who would like to see time as an

> > illusion,

> > one justification could be the theoretically

> > proved

> > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation with

> > increase in velocity.

> >

> > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,

> > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of

> > light

> > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In this

> > sense Time is relativistic or an illusion.

> >

> > Would approciate more thoughts on the subject.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Bejoy C.S.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?

> >

>

___________________

_______________

> Looking for last minute shopping deals?

> Find them fast with Search.

category=shopping

>

December 7, 2007

Dear Bejoy, Thanks for presenting an interesting view point. As I am not very familiar with astronomical terms, it helps if you could elaborate a bit on terms like 3 mean motions of Sun and 3 higher orbits of Sun etc. When you say 3 temporary worlds, are you refering to Bhur, Bhuvah, Suvah of Gayathri mantra? Regards, KrishnaBejoy <bejoy_cs wrote: Dear Sreeram and All,Thanks for the encouraging words.As far

as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV ) hastalked in length about 7 worlds above the earth and 7below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is permanentand 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits nicelywith the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RVassuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable ) ,its quite probable that the velocity at the highestorbit should be very close to the velocity of lightand at this stage mass should convert as energy (E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4 permanentworld lies must be all energy fields only and hence isnot subject to destruction.The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is thenparticles at different mass and hence subject to timeand hence subject to periodic creation and destructionwhich again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9earth years ( EY ).As earth and sun are part of this

temporary world,here comes the relevance of illusion or maya orrelativity as we are created and subject todestruction at periodic intervals. While the 4permanent worlds are not subject to time as its allenergy fields. The centre of mass of this energy fieldmust be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhiAnatha ( infinite ) Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force., lotusis a collection of petals and gravity is a centripetalforce )Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entirecosmic mass goes thru.Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt sure... just another wayward thought on mine.RegardsBejoy C.S.www.keraladarsan.com--- sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 (AT) sify (DOT) com> wrote:> > Dear Be-joy !!> > Thanks for that supporting piece posting......find> it too technical an> answer

for members reeling under Maya !! Can you> come up with easier> examples, like our great Kabir, better for> us....i.e. Kabir simplied> this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & paramatma> through his couplets> in lay man words.....understandable even to the> condemned Shudhra> Caste......which have become a folklore today. { I> do not believe in> caste differentiation, finds mention here for> discussion sake -> jingoists in the group if any - first note my> disclaimer !! }.> > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula - to> my memory & > follow-up, they are still in theory state of> acceptance or some of it> was supposed to be rejected in the> Physics/Physicists conference a> couple of years before.....update us should you> happen to know about it> > Be-Joy = good name....must be in

[:">] this state> !!> > with regards,> > sreeram srinivas> > > ,> Bejoy <bejoy_cs> wrote:> Dear all,> > For those who would like to see time as an> illusion,> one justification could be the theoretically> proved> Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation with> increase in velocity.> > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,> as particle velocity approaches the velocity of> light> ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In this> sense Time is relativistic or an illusion.> > Would approciate more thoughts on the subject.> > Regards> > Bejoy C.S.> www.keraladarsan.com> > > >

________Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.

December 8, 2007

Dear Jyothi & All,

To start with, I would like to clarify that am not

knowledegable in astrology / astronomy / astrophysics.

Whatever that has been written by me are my own

thoughts with no proof that I can provide to

substantiate myself.

I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedas

with what is now known as scientific facts.

My interest in this area was triggered just 10 months

back as I by coincidence found Patricia Norelli

Bachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on the

precession of equinox made me think. Please visit PNBs

Aeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known her

already.

Having told this, what I have stated below is infact

at variance to what PNB is trying to say.

To clarify myself more as you wanted ...

Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s.

Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s.

Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s.

It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun actually

is in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so. Its

not immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ). Dont

think if this could be a linear motion. If its not

linear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits, what

is the Sun orbiting - assume X.

RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this assumption

of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking the

Sun along with it ).

Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sun

along ) orbits Brahma.

So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital velocity

must increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting Brahma,

its quite probable that the orbital velocity of Dhruva

is close to the speed of Light ( C ).

At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should convert

into energy so Brahma is the last frontier where mass

could exist and beyond Brahma it should all be energy

field.

At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ),

time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is the

last frontier where time could exist and beyond Brahma

is timelessness.

Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world, Saptarishis

orbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbiting

Brahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to be

temporary as it got mass and time and is subject to

destruction.

Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then, the

centre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi -

energy has got a centripetal nature which I think RV

symbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetric

collection of petals, gravity is a centripetal force

). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4 more

worlds which is permanent - no mass / no time - only

energy ).

I have made many assumptions here which may or may not

be valid. If it is not valid then am wrong.

Regards

Bejoy C.S.

--- jyothi_b_lakshmi <jyothi_b_lakshmi

wrote:

> Dear Sir,

>

> I am trying to comprehend what you have mentioned in

> your mail

> below. But I am totally confused. Many grey areas

> may be because of

> lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention my

> doubts here:

>

> " This 3 world theory sits nicely

> with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV

> assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

> "

> What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun is

> static in the

> solar system and it is the planets that are moving,

> as everybody

> knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned?

>

> What is the correlation between the 3 worlds above

> earth and suns 3

> higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds

> above earth are

> above sun as well. Right?

>

> You said " The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we

> belong ) is then

> particles at different mass and hence subject to

> time "

>

> When we all belong to earth, how can we belong to

> the temporary

> worlds that you say is above the earth?

>

> " As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

> here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or...

> "

> Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally

> confused. Earlier in

> first para it was said, 3 world theory has

> correlation with sun's 3

> orbits (though not clear what these orbits are). But

> now, as per

> the above lines, earth and sun are part of the 3

> temporary world.

> How come? How can there be worlds above earth and

> sun be part of

> them at the same time?

>

> What is the relevance of Padma, Nabhi here? What

> does all these

> mean?

>

> Can you please clarify ?

>

> Regards,

> Jyothi

>

> ,

> Bejoy

> <bejoy_cs wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sreeram and All,

> >

> > Thanks for the encouraging words.

> >

> > As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV )

> has

> > talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth

> and 7

> > below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is

> permanent

> > and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits

> nicely

> > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in

> RV

> > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

> >

> > If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable

> ) ,

> > its quite probable that the velocity at the

> highest

> > orbit should be very close to the velocity of

> light

> > and at this stage mass should convert as energy (

> > E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4

> permanent

> > world lies must be all energy fields only and

> hence is

> > not subject to destruction.

> >

> > The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is

> then

> > particles at different mass and hence subject to

> time

> > and hence subject to periodic creation and

> destruction

> > which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9

> > earth years ( EY ).

> >

> > As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

> > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or

> > relativity as we are created and subject to

> > destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4

> > permanent worlds are not subject to time as its

> all

> > energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy

> field

> > must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi

> >

> > Anatha ( infinite )

> >

> > Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force.,

> lotus

> > is a collection of petals and gravity is a

> centripetal

> > force )

> >

> > Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire

> > cosmic mass goes thru.

> >

> > Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt

> sure

> > ... just another wayward thought on mine.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Bejoy C.S.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

> >

> > --- sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 wrote:

> >

> > >

> > > Dear Be-joy !!

> > >

> > > Thanks for that supporting piece

> posting......find

> > > it too technical an

> > > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can

> you

> > > come up with easier

> > > examples, like our great Kabir, better for

> > > us....i.e. Kabir simplied

> > > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma &

> paramatma

> > > through his couplets

> > > in lay man words.....understandable even to the

> > > condemned Shudhra

> > > Caste......which have become a folklore today. {

> I

> > > do not believe in

> > > caste differentiation, finds mention here for

> > > discussion sake -

> > > jingoists in the group if any - first note my

> > > disclaimer !! }.

> > >

> > > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula -

> to

> > > my memory &

> > > follow-up, they are still in theory state of

> > > acceptance or some of it

> > > was supposed to be rejected in the

> > > Physics/Physicists conference a

> > > couple of years before.....update us should you

> > > happen to know about it

> > >

> > > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [: " >] this

> state

> > > !!

> > >

> > > with regards,

> > >

> > > sreeram srinivas

> > >

> > > ,

> > > Bejoy <bejoy_cs@>

> > > wrote:

> > > Dear all,

> > >

> > > For those who would like to see time as an

> > > illusion,

> > > one justification could be the theoretically

> > > proved

> > > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation

> with

> > > increase in velocity.

> > >

> > > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,

> > > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of

> > > light

> > > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In

> this

>

=== message truncated ===

______________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

December 8, 2007

wow !! I liked it. JagdishBejoy <bejoy_cs wrote: Dear Jyothi & All,To start with, I would like to clarify that am notknowledegable in astrology / astronomy / astrophysics.Whatever that has been written by me are my ownthoughts with no proof that I can provide tosubstantiate myself. I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedaswith what is now known as scientific facts.My interest in this area

was triggered just 10 monthsback as I by coincidence found Patricia NorelliBachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on theprecession of equinox made me think. Please visit PNBsAeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known heralready.Having told this, what I have stated below is infactat variance to what PNB is trying to say.To clarify myself more as you wanted ...Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s.Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s.Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s.It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun actuallyis in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so. Itsnot immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ). Dontthink if this could be a linear motion. If its notlinear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits, whatis the Sun orbiting - assume X.RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here Iassume it to be the Saptarishis

- Ursa Minor - BigDipper. I start with this assumption that the Sunorbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this assumptionof mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking theSun along with it ).Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sunalong ) orbits Brahma.So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital velocitymust increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting Brahma,its quite probable that the orbital velocity of Dhruvais close to the speed of Light ( C ).At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should convertinto energy so Brahma is the last frontier where masscould exist and beyond Brahma it should all be energyfield.At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ),time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is thelast frontier where time could exist and beyond Brahmais timelessness.Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world,

Saptarishisorbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbitingBrahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to betemporary as it got mass and time and is subject todestruction. Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then, thecentre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi -energy has got a centripetal nature which I think RVsymbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetriccollection of petals, gravity is a centripetal force ). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4 moreworlds which is permanent - no mass / no time - onlyenergy ).I have made many assumptions here which may or may notbe valid. If it is not valid then am wrong.RegardsBejoy C.S.www.keraladarsan.com--- jyothi_b_lakshmi <jyothi_b_lakshmi (AT) (DOT) co.in>wrote:> Dear Sir,> > I am trying to comprehend what you have

mentioned in> your mail > below. But I am totally confused. Many grey areas> may be because of > lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention my> doubts here:> > "This 3 world theory sits nicely> with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV> assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.> "> What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun is> static in the > solar system and it is the planets that are moving,> as everybody > knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned?> > What is the correlation between the 3 worlds above> earth and suns 3 > higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds> above earth are > above sun as well. Right?> > You said "The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we> belong ) is then> particles at different mass and hence subject to> time"> > When we all

belong to earth, how can we belong to> the temporary > worlds that you say is above the earth?> > "As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,> here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or...> "> Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally> confused. Earlier in > first para it was said, 3 world theory has> correlation with sun's 3 > orbits (though not clear what these orbits are). But> now, as per > the above lines, earth and sun are part of the 3> temporary world. > How come? How can there be worlds above earth and> sun be part of > them at the same time? > > What is the relevance of Padma, Nabhi here? What> does all these > mean?> > Can you please clarify ?> > > Regards,> Jyothi> > ,> Bejoy > <bejoy_cs wrote:> >> > > > Dear Sreeram and All,> > > > Thanks for the encouraging words.> > > > As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV )> has> > talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth> and 7> > below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is> permanent> > and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits> nicely> > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in> RV> > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.> > > > If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable> ) ,> > its quite probable that the velocity at the> highest> > orbit should be very close to the velocity of> light> >

and at this stage mass should convert as energy (> > E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4> permanent> > world lies must be all energy fields only and> hence is> > not subject to destruction.> > > > The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is> then> > particles at different mass and hence subject to> time> > and hence subject to periodic creation and> destruction> > which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9> > earth years ( EY ).> > > > As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,> > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or> > relativity as we are created and subject to> > destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4> > permanent worlds are not subject to time as its> all> > energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy>

field> > must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi> > > > Anatha ( infinite ) > > > > Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force.,> lotus> > is a collection of petals and gravity is a> centripetal> > force )> > > > Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire> > cosmic mass goes thru.> > > > Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt> sure> > ... just another wayward thought on mine.> > > > Regards> > > > Bejoy C.S.> > www.keraladarsan.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 wrote:> > > > > > > > Dear Be-joy !!> > > > > > Thanks for that supporting piece>

posting......find> > > it too technical an> > > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can> you> > > come up with easier> > > examples, like our great Kabir, better for> > > us....i.e. Kabir simplied> > > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & > paramatma> > > through his couplets> > > in lay man words.....understandable even to the> > > condemned Shudhra> > > Caste......which have become a folklore today. {> I> > > do not believe in> > > caste differentiation, finds mention here for> > > discussion sake -> > > jingoists in the group if any - first note my> > > disclaimer !! }.> > > > > > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula -> to> > > my memory & > > > follow-up, they

are still in theory state of> > > acceptance or some of it> > > was supposed to be rejected in the> > > Physics/Physicists conference a> > > couple of years before.....update us should you> > > happen to know about it> > > > > > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [:">] this> state> > > !!> > > > > > with regards,> > > > > > sreeram srinivas> > > > > > > > > ,> > > Bejoy <bejoy_cs@>> > > wrote:> > > Dear all,> > > > > > For those who would like to see time as an> > > illusion,> > > one justification could be the theoretically> > >

proved> > > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation> with> > > increase in velocity.> > > > > > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,> > > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of> > > light> > > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In> this> === message truncated ===________Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.

December 9, 2007

Dear Krishnamurthy,

Let me direct to the below links which are translation

of the Vishnu Purana.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/vp/vp066.htm

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/vp/vp065.htm

Hope useful.

Regards

Bejoy C.S.

--- Krishnamurthy Seetharama <krishna_1998

wrote:

> Dear Bejoy,

>

> Thanks for presenting an interesting view point.

> As I am not very familiar with astronomical terms,

> it helps if you could elaborate a bit on terms like

> 3 mean motions of Sun and 3 higher orbits of Sun

> etc.

>

> When you say 3 temporary worlds, are you refering

> to Bhur, Bhuvah, Suvah of Gayathri mantra?

>

> Regards,

> Krishna

>

> Bejoy <bejoy_cs wrote:

>

> Dear Sreeram and All,

>

> Thanks for the encouraging words.

>

> As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV ) has

> talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth and

> 7

> below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is

> permanent

> and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits nicely

> with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV

> assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

>

> If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable )

> ,

> its quite probable that the velocity at the highest

> orbit should be very close to the velocity of light

> and at this stage mass should convert as energy (

> E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4 permanent

> world lies must be all energy fields only and hence

> is

> not subject to destruction.

>

> The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is

> then

> particles at different mass and hence subject to

> time

> and hence subject to periodic creation and

> destruction

> which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9

> earth years ( EY ).

>

> As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

> here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or

> relativity as we are created and subject to

> destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4

> permanent worlds are not subject to time as its all

> energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy

> field

> must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi

>

> Anatha ( infinite )

>

> Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force.,

> lotus

> is a collection of petals and gravity is a

> centripetal

> force )

>

> Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire

> cosmic mass goes thru.

>

> Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt

> sure

> ... just another wayward thought on mine.

>

> Regards

>

> Bejoy C.S.

>

> --- sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 wrote:

>

> >

> > Dear Be-joy !!

> >

> > Thanks for that supporting piece posting......find

> > it too technical an

> > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can you

> > come up with easier

> > examples, like our great Kabir, better for

> > us....i.e. Kabir simplied

> > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma &

> paramatma

> > through his couplets

> > in lay man words.....understandable even to the

> > condemned Shudhra

> > Caste......which have become a folklore today. { I

> > do not believe in

> > caste differentiation, finds mention here for

> > discussion sake -

> > jingoists in the group if any - first note my

> > disclaimer !! }.

> >

> > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula - to

> > my memory &

> > follow-up, they are still in theory state of

> > acceptance or some of it

> > was supposed to be rejected in the

> > Physics/Physicists conference a

> > couple of years before.....update us should you

> > happen to know about it

> >

> > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [: " >] this state

> > !!

> >

> > with regards,

> >

> > sreeram srinivas

> >

> > ,

> > Bejoy <bejoy_cs

> > wrote:

> > Dear all,

> >

> > For those who would like to see time as an

> > illusion,

> > one justification could be the theoretically

> > proved

> > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation with

> > increase in velocity.

> >

> > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,

> > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of

> > light

> > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In this

> > sense Time is relativistic or an illusion.

> >

> > Would approciate more thoughts on the subject.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Bejoy C.S.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

> >

>

________

> Looking for last minute shopping deals?

> Find them fast with Search.

>

>

> Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.

______________________________\

____

Be a better friend, newshound, and

know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

December 9, 2007

Dear Bejoy, I am extremely thankful to you for pointing me to these links. I will go through them at leisure. Regards, KrishnaBejoy <bejoy_cs wrote: Dear Krishnamurthy,Let me direct to the below links which are translationof the Vishnu Purana.http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/vp/vp066.htmhttp://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/vp/vp065.htmHope useful.RegardsBejoy C.S.www.keraladarsan.com--- Krishnamurthy Seetharama <krishna_1998 >wrote:> Dear Bejoy,> > Thanks for presenting an interesting view point.> As I am not very familiar with astronomical terms,> it helps if you could elaborate a bit on terms like> 3 mean motions of Sun and 3 higher orbits of Sun> etc.> > When you say 3 temporary worlds, are you refering> to Bhur, Bhuvah, Suvah of Gayathri mantra?> > Regards,> Krishna> > Bejoy <bejoy_cs > wrote:> > Dear Sreeram and All,> > Thanks for the encouraging words.> > As far as

my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV ) has> talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth and> 7> below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is> permanent> and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits nicely> with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV> assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.> > If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable )> ,> its quite probable that the velocity at the highest> orbit should be very close to the velocity of light> and at this stage mass should convert as energy (> E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4 permanent> world lies must be all energy fields only and hence> is> not subject to destruction.> > The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is> then> particles at different mass and hence subject to> time> and hence subject to periodic creation

and> destruction> which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9> earth years ( EY ).> > As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,> here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or> relativity as we are created and subject to> destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4> permanent worlds are not subject to time as its all> energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy> field> must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi> > Anatha ( infinite ) > > Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force.,> lotus> is a collection of petals and gravity is a> centripetal> force )> > Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire> cosmic mass goes thru.> > Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt> sure> ... just another wayward thought on mine.> > Regards>

> Bejoy C.S.> www.keraladarsan.com> > --- sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 (AT) sify (DOT) com> wrote:> > > > > Dear Be-joy !!> > > > Thanks for that supporting piece posting......find> > it too technical an> > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can you> > come up with easier> > examples, like our great Kabir, better for> > us....i.e. Kabir simplied> > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & > paramatma> > through his couplets> > in lay man words.....understandable even to the> > condemned Shudhra> > Caste......which have become a folklore today. { I> > do not believe in> > caste differentiation, finds mention here for> > discussion sake -> > jingoists in the group if any - first note

my> > disclaimer !! }.> > > > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula - to> > my memory & > > follow-up, they are still in theory state of> > acceptance or some of it> > was supposed to be rejected in the> > Physics/Physicists conference a> > couple of years before.....update us should you> > happen to know about it> > > > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [:">] this state> > !!> > > > with regards,> > > > sreeram srinivas> > > > > > ,> > Bejoy <bejoy_cs> > wrote:> > Dear all,> > > > For those who would like to see time as an> > illusion,> > one justification

could be the theoretically> > proved> > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation with> > increase in velocity.> > > > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,> > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of> > light> > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In this> > sense Time is relativistic or an illusion.> > > > Would approciate more thoughts on the subject.> > > > Regards> > > > Bejoy C.S.> > www.keraladarsan.com> > > > > > > > > >________> Looking for last minute shopping deals? > Find them fast with Search.>http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping> > > > > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.________Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

December 9, 2007

Dear Bejoy ji, I liked your thoughts. But -==>RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here Iassume it to be the Saptarishis

- Ursa Minor - BigDipper. I start with this assumption that the Sunorbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this assumptionof mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.<==

You are right in the last statement - your assumption is wrong. The question

is what is at the center of our galaxy? Is it Saptarshis or the black

hole of Sagittarius?

Love and regards,Sreenadh , Prathamesn Chawan <upaoakcrest wrote:>> wow !!> > I liked it. > > > Jagdish> > Bejoy bejoy_cs wrote:> > Dear Jyothi & All,> > To start with, I would like to clarify that am not> knowledegable in astrology / astronomy / astrophysics.> Whatever that has been written by me are my own> thoughts with no proof that I can provide to> substantiate myself. > > I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedas> with what is now known as scientific facts.> > My interest in this area was triggered just 10 months> back as I by coincidence found Patricia Norelli> Bachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on the> precession of equinox made me think. Please visit PNBs> Aeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known her> already.> > Having told this, what I have stated below is infact> at variance to what PNB is trying to say.> > To clarify myself more as you wanted ...> > Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s.> > Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s.> > Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s.> > It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun actually> is in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so. Its> not immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ). Dont> think if this could be a linear motion. If its not> linear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits, what> is the Sun orbiting - assume X.> > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7> horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I> assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big> Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun> orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this assumption> of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.> > Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking the> Sun along with it ).> > Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sun> along ) orbits Brahma.> > So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital velocity> must increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting Brahma,> its quite probable that the orbital velocity of Dhruva> is close to the speed of Light ( C ).> > At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should convert> into energy so Brahma is the last frontier where mass> could exist and beyond Brahma it should all be energy> field.> > At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ),> time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is the> last frontier where time could exist and beyond Brahma> is timelessness.> > Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world, Saptarishis> orbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbiting> Brahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to be> temporary as it got mass and time and is subject to> destruction. > > Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then, the> centre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi -> energy has got a centripetal nature which I think RV> symbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetric> collection of petals, gravity is a centripetal force > ). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4 more> worlds which is permanent - no mass / no time - only> energy ).> > I have made many assumptions here which may or may not> be valid. If it is not valid then am wrong.> > Regards> > Bejoy C.S.> www.keraladarsan.com> > --- jyothi_b_lakshmi jyothi_b_lakshmi wrote:> > > Dear Sir,> > > > I am trying to comprehend what you have mentioned in> > your mail > > below. But I am totally confused. Many grey areas> > may be because of > > lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention my> > doubts here:> > > > "This 3 world theory sits nicely> > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV> > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.> > "> > What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun is> > static in the > > solar system and it is the planets that are moving,> > as everybody > > knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned?> > > > What is the correlation between the 3 worlds above> > earth and suns 3 > > higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds> > above earth are > > above sun as well. Right?> > > > You said "The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we> > belong ) is then> > particles at different mass and hence subject to> > time"> > > > When we all belong to earth, how can we belong to> > the temporary > > worlds that you say is above the earth?> > > > "As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,> > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or...> > "> > Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally> > confused. Earlier in > > first para it was said, 3 world theory has> > correlation with sun's 3 > > orbits (though not clear what these orbits are). But> > now, as per > > the above lines, earth and sun are part of the 3> > temporary world. > > How come? How can there be worlds above earth and> > sun be part of > > them at the same time? > > > > What is the relevance of Padma, Nabhi here? What> > does all these > > mean?> > > > Can you please clarify ?> > > > > > Regards,> > Jyothi> > > > ,> > Bejoy > > bejoy_cs@ wrote:> > >> > > > > > Dear Sreeram and All,> > > > > > Thanks for the encouraging words.> > > > > > As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV )> > has> > > talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth> > and 7> > > below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is> > permanent> > > and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits> > nicely> > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in> > RV> > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.> > > > > > If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable> > ) ,> > > its quite probable that the velocity at the> > highest> > > orbit should be very close to the velocity of> > light> > > and at this stage mass should convert as energy (> > > E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4> > permanent> > > world lies must be all energy fields only and> > hence is> > > not subject to destruction.> > > > > > The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is> > then> > > particles at different mass and hence subject to> > time> > > and hence subject to periodic creation and> > destruction> > > which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9> > > earth years ( EY ).> > > > > > As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,> > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or> > > relativity as we are created and subject to> > > destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4> > > permanent worlds are not subject to time as its> > all> > > energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy> > field> > > must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi> > > > > > Anatha ( infinite ) > > > > > > Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force.,> > lotus> > > is a collection of petals and gravity is a> > centripetal> > > force )> > > > > > Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire> > > cosmic mass goes thru.> > > > > > Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt> > sure> > > ... just another wayward thought on mine.> > > > > > Regards> > > > > > Bejoy C.S.> > > www.keraladarsan.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- sreeram srinivas sreeram64@ wrote:> > > > > > > > > > > Dear Be-joy !!> > > > > > > > Thanks for that supporting piece> > posting......find> > > > it too technical an> > > > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can> > you> > > > come up with easier> > > > examples, like our great Kabir, better for> > > > us....i.e. Kabir simplied> > > > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma & > > paramatma> > > > through his couplets> > > > in lay man words.....understandable even to the> > > > condemned Shudhra> > > > Caste......which have become a folklore today. {> > I> > > > do not believe in> > > > caste differentiation, finds mention here for> > > > discussion sake -> > > > jingoists in the group if any - first note my> > > > disclaimer !! }.> > > > > > > > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula -> > to> > > > my memory & > > > > follow-up, they are still in theory state of> > > > acceptance or some of it> > > > was supposed to be rejected in the> > > > Physics/Physicists conference a> > > > couple of years before.....update us should you> > > > happen to know about it> > > > > > > > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [:">] this> > state> > > > !!> > > > > > > > with regards,> > > > > > > > sreeram srinivas> > > > > > > > > > > > ,> > > > Bejoy <bejoy_cs@>> > > > wrote:> > > > Dear all,> > > > > > > > For those who would like to see time as an> > > > illusion,> > > > one justification could be the theoretically> > > > proved> > > > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation> > with> > > > increase in velocity.> > > > > > > > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,> > > > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of> > > > light> > > > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In> > this> > > === message truncated ===> > ________> Looking for last minute shopping deals? > Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping> > > > > > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.>

December 9, 2007

7 can be the seven Rays. Krishna Yajurveda perhaps has some serious

discussion on the 7 rays of Sun. Sun is also Prana in our body and

Mukhya prana may be 7 footed as we see in the 7 days which reflect 7

macro patterns of Prana_vrtti and Chitta_vrtti.

chandra hari

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Bejoy ji,

> I liked your thoughts. But -

> ==>

> RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

> horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

> assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

> Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

> orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this assumption

> of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

> <==

> You are right in the last statement - your assumption is wrong.

> The question is what is at the center of our galaxy? Is it Saptarshis

or

> the black hole of Sagittarius?

> Love and regards,

> Sreenadh

>

> , Prathamesn Chawan

> upaoakcrest@ wrote:

> >

> > wow !!

> >

> > I liked it.

> >

> > Jagdish

> >

> > Bejoy bejoy_cs@ wrote:

> >

> > Dear Jyothi & All,

> >

> > To start with, I would like to clarify that am not

> > knowledegable in astrology / astronomy / astrophysics.

> > Whatever that has been written by me are my own

> > thoughts with no proof that I can provide to

> > substantiate myself.

> >

> > I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedas

> > with what is now known as scientific facts.

> >

> > My interest in this area was triggered just 10 months

> > back as I by coincidence found Patricia Norelli

> > Bachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on the

> > precession of equinox made me think. Please visit PNBs

> > Aeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known her

> > already.

> >

> > Having told this, what I have stated below is infact

> > at variance to what PNB is trying to say.

> >

> > To clarify myself more as you wanted ...

> >

> > Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s.

> >

> > Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s.

> >

> > Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s.

> >

> > It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun actually

> > is in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so. Its

> > not immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ). Dont

> > think if this could be a linear motion. If its not

> > linear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits, what

> > is the Sun orbiting - assume X.

> >

> > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

> > horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

> > assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

> > Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

> > orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this assumption

> > of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

> >

> > Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking the

> > Sun along with it ).

> >

> > Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sun

> > along ) orbits Brahma.

> >

> > So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital velocity

> > must increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting Brahma,

> > its quite probable that the orbital velocity of Dhruva

> > is close to the speed of Light ( C ).

> >

> > At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should convert

> > into energy so Brahma is the last frontier where mass

> > could exist and beyond Brahma it should all be energy

> > field.

> >

> > At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ),

> > time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is the

> > last frontier where time could exist and beyond Brahma

> > is timelessness.

> >

> > Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world, Saptarishis

> > orbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbiting

> > Brahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to be

> > temporary as it got mass and time and is subject to

> > destruction.

> >

> > Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then, the

> > centre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi -

> > energy has got a centripetal nature which I think RV

> > symbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetric

> > collection of petals, gravity is a centripetal force

> > ). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4 more

> > worlds which is permanent - no mass / no time - only

> > energy ).

> >

> > I have made many assumptions here which may or may not

> > be valid. If it is not valid then am wrong.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Bejoy C.S.

> http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

> >

> > --- jyothi_b_lakshmi jyothi_b_lakshmi@

> > wrote:

> >

> > > Dear Sir,

> > >

> > > I am trying to comprehend what you have mentioned in

> > > your mail

> > > below. But I am totally confused. Many grey areas

> > > may be because of

> > > lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention my

> > > doubts here:

> > >

> > > " This 3 world theory sits nicely

> > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV

> > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

> > > "

> > > What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun is

> > > static in the

> > > solar system and it is the planets that are moving,

> > > as everybody

> > > knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned?

> > >

> > > What is the correlation between the 3 worlds above

> > > earth and suns 3

> > > higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds

> > > above earth are

> > > above sun as well. Right?

> > >

> > > You said " The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we

> > > belong ) is then

> > > particles at different mass and hence subject to

> > > time "

> > >

> > > When we all belong to earth, how can we belong to

> > > the temporary

> > > worlds that you say is above the earth?

> > >

> > > " As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

> > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or...

> > > "

> > > Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally

> > > confused. Earlier in

> > > first para it was said, 3 world theory has

> > > correlation with sun's 3

> > > orbits (though not clear what these orbits are). But

> > > now, as per

> > > the above lines, earth and sun are part of the 3

> > > temporary world.

> > > How come? How can there be worlds above earth and

> > > sun be part of

> > > them at the same time?

> > >

> > > What is the relevance of Padma, Nabhi here? What

> > > does all these

> > > mean?

> > >

> > > Can you please clarify ?

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Jyothi

> > >

> > > ,

> > > Bejoy

> > > bejoy_cs@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Sreeram and All,

> > > >

> > > > Thanks for the encouraging words.

> > > >

> > > > As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV )

> > > has

> > > > talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth

> > > and 7

> > > > below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is

> > > permanent

> > > > and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits

> > > nicely

> > > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in

> > > RV

> > > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

> > > >

> > > > If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable

> > > ) ,

> > > > its quite probable that the velocity at the

> > > highest

> > > > orbit should be very close to the velocity of

> > > light

> > > > and at this stage mass should convert as energy (

> > > > E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4

> > > permanent

> > > > world lies must be all energy fields only and

> > > hence is

> > > > not subject to destruction.

> > > >

> > > > The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is

> > > then

> > > > particles at different mass and hence subject to

> > > time

> > > > and hence subject to periodic creation and

> > > destruction

> > > > which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9

> > > > earth years ( EY ).

> > > >

> > > > As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

> > > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or

> > > > relativity as we are created and subject to

> > > > destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4

> > > > permanent worlds are not subject to time as its

> > > all

> > > > energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy

> > > field

> > > > must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi

> > > >

> > > > Anatha ( infinite )

> > > >

> > > > Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force.,

> > > lotus

> > > > is a collection of petals and gravity is a

> > > centripetal

> > > > force )

> > > >

> > > > Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire

> > > > cosmic mass goes thru.

> > > >

> > > > Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt

> > > sure

> > > > ... just another wayward thought on mine.

> > > >

> > > > Regards

> > > >

> > > > Bejoy C.S.

> > > > www.keraladarsan.com

> > > >

> > > > --- sreeram srinivas sreeram64@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Be-joy !!

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks for that supporting piece

> > > posting......find

> > > > > it too technical an

> > > > > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can

> > > you

> > > > > come up with easier

> > > > > examples, like our great Kabir, better for

> > > > > us....i.e. Kabir simplied

> > > > > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma &

> > > paramatma

> > > > > through his couplets

> > > > > in lay man words.....understandable even to the

> > > > > condemned Shudhra

> > > > > Caste......which have become a folklore today. {

> > > I

> > > > > do not believe in

> > > > > caste differentiation, finds mention here for

> > > > > discussion sake -

> > > > > jingoists in the group if any - first note my

> > > > > disclaimer !! }.

> > > > >

> > > > > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula -

> > > to

> > > > > my memory &

> > > > > follow-up, they are still in theory state of

> > > > > acceptance or some of it

> > > > > was supposed to be rejected in the

> > > > > Physics/Physicists conference a

> > > > > couple of years before.....update us should you

> > > > > happen to know about it

> > > > >

> > > > > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [: " >] this

> > > state

> > > > > !!

> > > > >

> > > > > with regards,

> > > > >

> > > > > sreeram srinivas

> > > > >

> > > > > ,

> > > > > Bejoy <bejoy_cs@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > Dear all,

> > > > >

> > > > > For those who would like to see time as an

> > > > > illusion,

> > > > > one justification could be the theoretically

> > > > > proved

> > > > > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation

> > > with

> > > > > increase in velocity.

> > > > >

> > > > > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,

> > > > > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of

> > > > > light

> > > > > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In

> > > this

> > >

> > === message truncated ===

> >

> > ________

> > Looking for last minute shopping deals?

> > Find them fast with Search.

> >

> > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with

> Search.

> >

>

December 9, 2007

Dear Hari ji,

The 7 horses of sun referred in Vedas are the 7 colors/rays of light

(VIBGIYOR) and many discussions on this has done by many. It was a

convincing explanation -

* If some one argues that it is about 7 Grahas (Planets?), then

since Sun is also a Graha as per ancient indian knowledge, the

question with arise how the Sun can be the in the chariot and a horse

at the same time.

* If we take that view that it is Saptarshis (Ursa Minor

constellation) then the question will arise is it that Sun is moving

around the the Saptarshis, pole or the center of our galaxy, i.e.

milky way (Akasha Ganga) . And certainly any argument in favor of,

the argument 'Sun is moving around Saptarshis' points that - " Ancient

Indians considered Earth as the center of the universe and that they

thought that everything is moving around earth!!! " . Ascribing great

amount of ignorance of those knowledgeable sages, who knew what they

say! And that is truly unacceptable - because we clearly know that,

the vedic sages knew well that -

- all cosmic bodies are shears (that is why the word 'Gola')

- they know well that the planets move around sun.

* I don't resort to the Prana argument as well, because it is a

total confusion whether it is 9 or 10 or 7 and that cannot be tested

as well.

Thus let us resort for the beautiful and argument such as " 7 horses

of sun means 7 colors of light rays present in suns light " supported

by many, and corroborated by much supportive evidence from vedic

literature.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

, " chandra_hari18 "

<chandra_hari18 wrote:

>

> 7 can be the seven Rays. Krishna Yajurveda perhaps has some serious

> discussion on the 7 rays of Sun. Sun is also Prana in our body and

> Mukhya prana may be 7 footed as we see in the 7 days which reflect 7

> macro patterns of Prana_vrtti and Chitta_vrtti.

>

> chandra hari

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Bejoy ji,

> > I liked your thoughts. But -

> > ==>

> > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

> > horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

> > assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

> > Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

> > orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this assumption

> > of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

> > <==

> > You are right in the last statement - your assumption is wrong.

> > The question is what is at the center of our galaxy? Is it Saptarshis

> or

> > the black hole of Sagittarius?

> > Love and regards,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , Prathamesn Chawan

> > upaoakcrest@ wrote:

> > >

> > > wow !!

> > >

> > > I liked it.

> > >

> > > Jagdish

> > >

> > > Bejoy bejoy_cs@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Jyothi & All,

> > >

> > > To start with, I would like to clarify that am not

> > > knowledegable in astrology / astronomy / astrophysics.

> > > Whatever that has been written by me are my own

> > > thoughts with no proof that I can provide to

> > > substantiate myself.

> > >

> > > I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedas

> > > with what is now known as scientific facts.

> > >

> > > My interest in this area was triggered just 10 months

> > > back as I by coincidence found Patricia Norelli

> > > Bachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on the

> > > precession of equinox made me think. Please visit PNBs

> > > Aeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known her

> > > already.

> > >

> > > Having told this, what I have stated below is infact

> > > at variance to what PNB is trying to say.

> > >

> > > To clarify myself more as you wanted ...

> > >

> > > Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s.

> > >

> > > Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s.

> > >

> > > Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s.

> > >

> > > It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun actually

> > > is in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so. Its

> > > not immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ). Dont

> > > think if this could be a linear motion. If its not

> > > linear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits, what

> > > is the Sun orbiting - assume X.

> > >

> > > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

> > > horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

> > > assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

> > > Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

> > > orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this assumption

> > > of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

> > >

> > > Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking the

> > > Sun along with it ).

> > >

> > > Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sun

> > > along ) orbits Brahma.

> > >

> > > So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital velocity

> > > must increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting Brahma,

> > > its quite probable that the orbital velocity of Dhruva

> > > is close to the speed of Light ( C ).

> > >

> > > At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should convert

> > > into energy so Brahma is the last frontier where mass

> > > could exist and beyond Brahma it should all be energy

> > > field.

> > >

> > > At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ),

> > > time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is the

> > > last frontier where time could exist and beyond Brahma

> > > is timelessness.

> > >

> > > Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world, Saptarishis

> > > orbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbiting

> > > Brahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to be

> > > temporary as it got mass and time and is subject to

> > > destruction.

> > >

> > > Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then, the

> > > centre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi -

> > > energy has got a centripetal nature which I think RV

> > > symbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetric

> > > collection of petals, gravity is a centripetal force

> > > ). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4 more

> > > worlds which is permanent - no mass / no time - only

> > > energy ).

> > >

> > > I have made many assumptions here which may or may not

> > > be valid. If it is not valid then am wrong.

> > >

> > > Regards

> > >

> > > Bejoy C.S.

> > > www.keraladarsan.com

> > >

> > > --- jyothi_b_lakshmi jyothi_b_lakshmi@

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > > Dear Sir,

> > > >

> > > > I am trying to comprehend what you have mentioned in

> > > > your mail

> > > > below. But I am totally confused. Many grey areas

> > > > may be because of

> > > > lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention my

> > > > doubts here:

> > > >

> > > > " This 3 world theory sits nicely

> > > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in RV

> > > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

> > > > "

> > > > What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun is

> > > > static in the

> > > > solar system and it is the planets that are moving,

> > > > as everybody

> > > > knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned?

> > > >

> > > > What is the correlation between the 3 worlds above

> > > > earth and suns 3

> > > > higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds

> > > > above earth are

> > > > above sun as well. Right?

> > > >

> > > > You said " The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we

> > > > belong ) is then

> > > > particles at different mass and hence subject to

> > > > time "

> > > >

> > > > When we all belong to earth, how can we belong to

> > > > the temporary

> > > > worlds that you say is above the earth?

> > > >

> > > > " As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

> > > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or...

> > > > "

> > > > Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally

> > > > confused. Earlier in

> > > > first para it was said, 3 world theory has

> > > > correlation with sun's 3

> > > > orbits (though not clear what these orbits are). But

> > > > now, as per

> > > > the above lines, earth and sun are part of the 3

> > > > temporary world.

> > > > How come? How can there be worlds above earth and

> > > > sun be part of

> > > > them at the same time?

> > > >

> > > > What is the relevance of Padma, Nabhi here? What

> > > > does all these

> > > > mean?

> > > >

> > > > Can you please clarify ?

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Jyothi

> > > >

> > > > ,

> > > > Bejoy

> > > > bejoy_cs@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Sreeram and All,

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks for the encouraging words.

> > > > >

> > > > > As far as my understanding goes, Rig Veda ( RV )

> > > > has

> > > > > talked in length about 7 worlds above the earth

> > > > and 7

> > > > > below. Of the 7 that is above, 4 it seems is

> > > > permanent

> > > > > and 3 are temporary. This 3 world theory sits

> > > > nicely

> > > > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said in

> > > > RV

> > > > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

> > > > >

> > > > > If indeed the Sun has 3 higher orbits ( debatable

> > > > ) ,

> > > > > its quite probable that the velocity at the

> > > > highest

> > > > > orbit should be very close to the velocity of

> > > > light

> > > > > and at this stage mass should convert as energy (

> > > > > E=mc^2 ). So beyond this orbit where the 4

> > > > permanent

> > > > > world lies must be all energy fields only and

> > > > hence is

> > > > > not subject to destruction.

> > > > >

> > > > > The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we belong ) is

> > > > then

> > > > > particles at different mass and hence subject to

> > > > time

> > > > > and hence subject to periodic creation and

> > > > destruction

> > > > > which again as RV says the period equal to 4.32E+9

> > > > > earth years ( EY ).

> > > > >

> > > > > As earth and sun are part of this temporary world,

> > > > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya or

> > > > > relativity as we are created and subject to

> > > > > destruction at periodic intervals. While the 4

> > > > > permanent worlds are not subject to time as its

> > > > all

> > > > > energy fields. The centre of mass of this energy

> > > > field

> > > > > must be Vishnu or AmanthaPadmaNabhi

> > > > >

> > > > > Anatha ( infinite )

> > > > >

> > > > > Padma ( lotus, symbolism for centripetal force.,

> > > > lotus

> > > > > is a collection of petals and gravity is a

> > > > centripetal

> > > > > force )

> > > > >

> > > > > Nabhi - Navel - centre of mass - where the entire

> > > > > cosmic mass goes thru.

> > > > >

> > > > > Not sure if I have made any sense. I myself isnt

> > > > sure

> > > > > ... just another wayward thought on mine.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards

> > > > >

> > > > > Bejoy C.S.

> > > > > www.keraladarsan.com

> > > > >

> > > > > --- sreeram srinivas sreeram64@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Be-joy !!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thanks for that supporting piece

> > > > posting......find

> > > > > > it too technical an

> > > > > > answer for members reeling under Maya !! Can

> > > > you

> > > > > > come up with easier

> > > > > > examples, like our great Kabir, better for

> > > > > > us....i.e. Kabir simplied

> > > > > > this complex Maya & Illusion, God -atma &

> > > > paramatma

> > > > > > through his couplets

> > > > > > in lay man words.....understandable even to the

> > > > > > condemned Shudhra

> > > > > > Caste......which have become a folklore today. {

> > > > I

> > > > > > do not believe in

> > > > > > caste differentiation, finds mention here for

> > > > > > discussion sake -

> > > > > > jingoists in the group if any - first note my

> > > > > > disclaimer !! }.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Rider to Be-joy : Einstein / Lorentz formula -

> > > > to

> > > > > > my memory &

> > > > > > follow-up, they are still in theory state of

> > > > > > acceptance or some of it

> > > > > > was supposed to be rejected in the

> > > > > > Physics/Physicists conference a

> > > > > > couple of years before.....update us should you

> > > > > > happen to know about it

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Be-Joy = good name....must be in [: " >] this

> > > > state

> > > > > > !!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > with regards,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > sreeram srinivas

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ,

> > > > > > Bejoy <bejoy_cs@>

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > Dear all,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > For those who would like to see time as an

> > > > > > illusion,

> > > > > > one justification could be the theoretically

> > > > > > proved

> > > > > > Einstein / Lorentz formula for time dilation

> > > > with

> > > > > > increase in velocity.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > As per T = T0 / (sq. root ( 1-v^2/c^2 ) ,

> > > > > > as particle velocity approaches the velocity of

> > > > > > light

> > > > > > ( 3E+8 m/s ) , time reduces close to zero. In

> > > > this

> > > >

> > > === message truncated ===

> > >

> > > ________

> > > Looking for last minute shopping deals?

> > > Find them fast with Search.

> > http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

> > >

> > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with

> > Search.

> > >

> >

>

December 9, 2007

The point that we must investigate is how such a fundamental notion as 7-day week came into existence. Vara is one of the Panchangas. What is this Panchanga? What does the 5 together make? See its role in Jyotisha as Vara and also as the basic factor in the rising times of Upagrahas like Kala-Gulika-Yama etc. Can such an important parameter be arbitrary day reckoning?

, "Sreenadh" <sreesog wrote:>> Dear Hari ji,> The 7 horses of sun referred in Vedas are the 7 colors/rays of light> (VIBGIYOR) and many discussions on this has done by many. It

December 10, 2007

Dear Sreenadh,

This could be variously interpreted by many. As per

present day scientific understanding the centre of

Mikly way galaxy is Sagittarius. This is also a matter

of conjecture and more studies are required.

I could be right or wrong in my inferences. Agreeing

with me is Ok and disagreeing is also OK.

If it is accepted that the orbital velocity of the Sun

is 217 Km/s and the Sun covers 50 arc seconds per

earth year ( EY ), as per Kepler the radius of the

Suns orbit would be about 2.8 light years which is no

great distance by astronomical standards.

The Sun might not be orbiting Saptarishis - I have

another scientific reason to support this argument of

yours as well - Sun and Saptarishis are not in the

same orbital plane while Sagittarius is. Its logical

to exppect that for some thing to orbit another

massive object they got to be in the same orbital

plane as is the case of Sun - earth - moon - jupiter

etc etc...

But as per RV - Saptarishis are also a good candidate

for this job and Dhruva is described as the centre of

the zodiacal wheel. Dhruva being the pole star is

almost at 90 degrees from the orbital plane of the

solar system, so my above case is also ambigous.

Would appreciate more thoughts as that would refine my

thinking as well.

Regards

Bejoy C.S.

--- Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

> Dear Bejoy ji,

> I liked your thoughts. But -

> ==>

> RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

> horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

> assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

> Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

> orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this

> assumption

> of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

> <==

> You are right in the last statement - your

> assumption is wrong.

> The question is what is at the center of our galaxy?

> Is it Saptarshis or

> the black hole of Sagittarius?

> Love and regards,

> Sreenadh

>

> ,

> Prathamesn Chawan

> <upaoakcrest wrote:

> >

> > wow !!

> >

> > I liked it.

> >

> > Jagdish

> >

> > Bejoy bejoy_cs wrote:

> >

> > Dear Jyothi & All,

> >

> > To start with, I would like to clarify that am not

> > knowledegable in astrology / astronomy /

> astrophysics.

> > Whatever that has been written by me are my own

> > thoughts with no proof that I can provide to

> > substantiate myself.

> >

> > I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedas

> > with what is now known as scientific facts.

> >

> > My interest in this area was triggered just 10

> months

> > back as I by coincidence found Patricia Norelli

> > Bachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on

> the

> > precession of equinox made me think. Please visit

> PNBs

> > Aeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known

> her

> > already.

> >

> > Having told this, what I have stated below is

> infact

> > at variance to what PNB is trying to say.

> >

> > To clarify myself more as you wanted ...

> >

> > Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s.

> >

> > Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s.

> >

> > Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s.

> >

> > It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun

> actually

> > is in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so.

> Its

> > not immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ).

> Dont

> > think if this could be a linear motion. If its not

> > linear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits,

> what

> > is the Sun orbiting - assume X.

> >

> > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

> > horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

> > assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

> > Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

> > orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this

> assumption

> > of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

> >

> > Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking

> the

> > Sun along with it ).

> >

> > Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sun

> > along ) orbits Brahma.

> >

> > So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital

> velocity

> > must increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting

> Brahma,

> > its quite probable that the orbital velocity of

> Dhruva

> > is close to the speed of Light ( C ).

> >

> > At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should

> convert

> > into energy so Brahma is the last frontier where

> mass

> > could exist and beyond Brahma it should all be

> energy

> > field.

> >

> > At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root (

> 1-v^2/c^2 ),

> > time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is

> the

> > last frontier where time could exist and beyond

> Brahma

> > is timelessness.

> >

> > Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world, Saptarishis

> > orbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbiting

> > Brahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to

> be

> > temporary as it got mass and time and is subject

> to

> > destruction.

> >

> > Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then,

> the

> > centre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi -

> > energy has got a centripetal nature which I think

> RV

> > symbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetric

> > collection of petals, gravity is a centripetal

> force

> > ). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4

> more

> > worlds which is permanent - no mass / no time -

> only

> > energy ).

> >

> > I have made many assumptions here which may or may

> not

> > be valid. If it is not valid then am wrong.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Bejoy C.S.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

> >

> > --- jyothi_b_lakshmi jyothi_b_lakshmi

> > wrote:

> >

> > > Dear Sir,

> > >

> > > I am trying to comprehend what you have

> mentioned in

> > > your mail

> > > below. But I am totally confused. Many grey

> areas

> > > may be because of

> > > lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention

> my

> > > doubts here:

> > >

> > > " This 3 world theory sits nicely

> > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said

> in RV

> > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

> > > "

> > > What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun

> is

> > > static in the

> > > solar system and it is the planets that are

> moving,

> > > as everybody

> > > knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned?

> > >

> > > What is the correlation between the 3 worlds

> above

> > > earth and suns 3

> > > higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds

> > > above earth are

> > > above sun as well. Right?

> > >

> > > You said " The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we

> > > belong ) is then

> > > particles at different mass and hence subject to

> > > time "

> > >

> > > When we all belong to earth, how can we belong

> to

> > > the temporary

> > > worlds that you say is above the earth?

> > >

> > > " As earth and sun are part of this temporary

> world,

> > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya

> or...

> > > "

> > > Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally

> > > confused. Earlier in

> > > first para it was said, 3 world theory has

>

=== message truncated ===

______________________________\

____

Be a better friend, newshound, and

know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

December 10, 2007

Dear Bijoy ji,

==>

But as per RV - Saptarishis are also a good candidate

for this job and Dhruva is described as the centre of

the zodiacal wheel. Dhruva being the pole star is

almost at 90 degrees from the orbital plane of the

solar system, so my above case is also ambigous.

<==

Describing the total zodiac as orbiting Pole star is a Puranic

description and not a vedic one. The description is true in the

sense - we can clearly see it from earth. Since earth revolves around

its axis, we feel that the the total sky around us (the zodiac)

revolves around the axis fixed across Celestrial North pole (and thus

Saptarshis) and Celestial South pole. Thus it is a natural

description from a common mans stnd point.

But I don't agree with ascribing the same Puranic decription on

Vedas and then trying to interpret that the Sun (and not the sky)

moves around Saptarshis (celestial pole), giving it an infallible

scientific color but which is truly non-scientific (because it

ascribes the ignorance on Vedic sages and assumes that they

considered earth as the center around which sun revolves - which

erroneous and not supported by vedic rishis). As we know, the Vedic

sages had the clear understanding that earth revolves around Sun and

also that earth is a planet like Venus, Jupiter etc. It is wrong to

ascribe the ignorance of Puranic dark ages on Vedic era of knowledge

and understanding. The vedas represent clear and better understanding

of the vedic sages about the universe – and it does not need the

extra coloring, and erroneous efforts to ascribe the misleading and

erroneous maths and concepts on vedas – will only become a hindrance

to identifying the true worth of vedas and the knowledge it contains

within.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

, Bejoy <bejoy_cs

wrote:

>

> Dear Sreenadh,

>

> This could be variously interpreted by many. As per

> present day scientific understanding the centre of

> Mikly way galaxy is Sagittarius. This is also a matter

> of conjecture and more studies are required.

>

> I could be right or wrong in my inferences. Agreeing

> with me is Ok and disagreeing is also OK.

>

> If it is accepted that the orbital velocity of the Sun

> is 217 Km/s and the Sun covers 50 arc seconds per

> earth year ( EY ), as per Kepler the radius of the

> Suns orbit would be about 2.8 light years which is no

> great distance by astronomical standards.

>

> The Sun might not be orbiting Saptarishis - I have

> another scientific reason to support this argument of

> yours as well - Sun and Saptarishis are not in the

> same orbital plane while Sagittarius is. Its logical

> to exppect that for some thing to orbit another

> massive object they got to be in the same orbital

> plane as is the case of Sun - earth - moon - jupiter

> etc etc...

>

> But as per RV - Saptarishis are also a good candidate

> for this job and Dhruva is described as the centre of

> the zodiacal wheel. Dhruva being the pole star is

> almost at 90 degrees from the orbital plane of the

> solar system, so my above case is also ambigous.

>

> Would appreciate more thoughts as that would refine my

> thinking as well.

>

> Regards

>

> Bejoy C.S.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

>

> --- Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

>

> > Dear Bejoy ji,

> > I liked your thoughts. But -

> > ==>

> > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

> > horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

> > assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

> > Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

> > orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this

> > assumption

> > of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

> > <==

> > You are right in the last statement - your

> > assumption is wrong.

> > The question is what is at the center of our galaxy?

> > Is it Saptarshis or

> > the black hole of Sagittarius?

> > Love and regards,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > ,

> > Prathamesn Chawan

> > <upaoakcrest@> wrote:

> > >

> > > wow !!

> > >

> > > I liked it.

> > >

> > > Jagdish

> > >

> > > Bejoy bejoy_cs@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Jyothi & All,

> > >

> > > To start with, I would like to clarify that am not

> > > knowledegable in astrology / astronomy /

> > astrophysics.

> > > Whatever that has been written by me are my own

> > > thoughts with no proof that I can provide to

> > > substantiate myself.

> > >

> > > I am just trying to decipher patterns in the Vedas

> > > with what is now known as scientific facts.

> > >

> > > My interest in this area was triggered just 10

> > months

> > > back as I by coincidence found Patricia Norelli

> > > Bachelet ( PNB ) thru Google and her article on

> > the

> > > precession of equinox made me think. Please visit

> > PNBs

> > > Aeon group www.aeongroup.com if you havent known

> > her

> > > already.

> > >

> > > Having told this, what I have stated below is

> > infact

> > > at variance to what PNB is trying to say.

> > >

> > > To clarify myself more as you wanted ...

> > >

> > > Moon orbits earth at 1 Km/s.

> > >

> > > Earth orbits Sun at 30 Km/s.

> > >

> > > Sun orbits X at 217 Km/s.

> > >

> > > It still is a matter of conjecture if the Sun

> > actually

> > > is in an orbit. But it quite fair to assume so.

> > Its

> > > not immobile anyway ( speed = 217 km/s proved ).

> > Dont

> > > think if this could be a linear motion. If its not

> > > linear then it has to be orbital. If it orbits,

> > what

> > > is the Sun orbiting - assume X.

> > >

> > > RV says Sun is the chariot of Sun is driven by 7

> > > horses - which could be the 7 planets. But here I

> > > assume it to be the Saptarishis - Ursa Minor - Big

> > > Dipper. I start with this assumption that the Sun

> > > orbits the Saptarihis ( 7 Rishis ). If this

> > assumption

> > > of mine is wrong then am entirely wrong.

> > >

> > > Assmption 2 - Saptarihis orbits Dhruva ( taking

> > the

> > > Sun along with it ).

> > >

> > > Assumption 3 - Dhruva ( Taking Saptarishis and Sun

> > > along ) orbits Brahma.

> > >

> > > So as you go higher up the orbit the orbital

> > velocity

> > > must increase and if indeed Dhruva is orbiting

> > Brahma,

> > > its quite probable that the orbital velocity of

> > Dhruva

> > > is close to the speed of Light ( C ).

> > >

> > > At C, as per Einsteins E=MC^2 - mass should

> > convert

> > > into energy so Brahma is the last frontier where

> > mass

> > > could exist and beyond Brahma it should all be

> > energy

> > > field.

> > >

> > > At C, as per Lorentz - T = T0 / Sq.root (

> > 1-v^2/c^2 ),

> > > time reduces to zero - time dilation. So Brahma is

> > the

> > > last frontier where time could exist and beyond

> > Brahma

> > > is timelessness.

> > >

> > > Sun orbiting Saptarishis is 1 world, Saptarishis

> > > orbiting Dhruva is the second and Dhruva orbiting

> > > Brahma is the third world - these 3 worlds have to

> > be

> > > temporary as it got mass and time and is subject

> > to

> > > destruction.

> > >

> > > Beyond Brahma is the infinte energy field then,

> > the

> > > centre of mass of which is Anantha Padma Nabhi -

> > > energy has got a centripetal nature which I think

> > RV

> > > symbolised it as lotus ( lotus is a symmetric

> > > collection of petals, gravity is a centripetal

> > force

> > > ). RV says even this energy field comprises of 4

> > more

> > > worlds which is permanent - no mass / no time -

> > only

> > > energy ).

> > >

> > > I have made many assumptions here which may or may

> > not

> > > be valid. If it is not valid then am wrong.

> > >

> > > Regards

> > >

> > > Bejoy C.S.

> > > www.keraladarsan.com

> > >

> > > --- jyothi_b_lakshmi jyothi_b_lakshmi@

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > > Dear Sir,

> > > >

> > > > I am trying to comprehend what you have

> > mentioned in

> > > > your mail

> > > > below. But I am totally confused. Many grey

> > areas

> > > > may be because of

> > > > lack of my proper understanding. Let me mention

> > my

> > > > doubts here:

> > > >

> > > > " This 3 world theory sits nicely

> > > > with the 3 mean motions of the Sun too as said

> > in RV

> > > > assuming that the Sun has 3 higher orbits.

> > > > "

> > > > What is meant by three mean motions of sun? Sun

> > is

> > > > static in the

> > > > solar system and it is the planets that are

> > moving,

> > > > as everybody

> > > > knows. So which is the motion of sun mentioned?

> > > >

> > > > What is the correlation between the 3 worlds

> > above

> > > > earth and suns 3

> > > > higher orbits? If both are same, then the worlds

> > > > above earth are

> > > > above sun as well. Right?

> > > >

> > > > You said " The 3 temporary worlds ( to which we

> > > > belong ) is then

> > > > particles at different mass and hence subject to

> > > > time "

> > > >

> > > > When we all belong to earth, how can we belong

> > to

> > > > the temporary

> > > > worlds that you say is above the earth?

> > > >

> > > > " As earth and sun are part of this temporary

> > world,

> > > > here comes the relevance of illusion or maya

> > or...

> > > > "

> > > > Sun is also a part of temporary world? Totally

> > > > confused. Earlier in

> > > > first para it was said, 3 world theory has

> >

> === message truncated ===

>

____________________

______________

> Be a better friend, newshound, and

> know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

>

December 11, 2007

Dear Shreenadh and all,

My source of info is as below ... dialogue between

Parasara and Maithreya in the Vishnu Purana

...translated by Ralph Griffith.

PARÁŒARA. The sphere of the earth (or Bhúr-loka),

comprehending its oceans, mountains, and rivers,

extends as far as it is illuminated by the rays of the

sun and moon; and to the same extent, both in diameter

and circumference, the sphere of the sky (Bhuvar-loka)

spreads above it (as far upwards as to the planetary

sphere, or Swar-loka) 1. The solar orb is situated a

hundred thousand leagues from the earth; and that of

the moon an equal distance from the sun. At the same

interval above the moon occurs the orbit of all the

lunar constellations. The planet Budha (Mercury) is

two hundred thousand leagues above the lunar mansions.

Œukra (Venus) is at the same distance from Mercury.

Angáraka (Mars) is as far above Venus; and the priest

of the gods (Vrihaspati, or Jupiter) as far from Mars:

whilst Saturn (Sani) is two hundred and fifty thousand

leagues beyond Jupiter. The sphere of the seven Rishis

(Ursa Major) is a hundred thousand leagues above

Saturn; and at a similar height above the seven Rishis

is Dhruva (the pole-star), the pivot or axis of the

whole planetary circle. Such, Maitreya, is the

elevation of the three spheres (Bhúr, Bhuvar, Swar)

which form the region of the consequences of works.

The region of works is here (or in the land of

Bhárata) 2.

p. 213

Above Dhruva, at the distance of ton million leagues,

lies the sphere of saints, or Mahar-loka, the

inhabitants of which dwell in it throughout a Kalpa,

or day of Brahmá. At twice that distance is situated

Janaloka, where Sanandana and other pure-minded sons

of Brahmá, reside. At four times the distance, between

the two last, lies the Tapo-loka (the sphere of

penance), inhabited by the deities called Vaibhrájas,

who are unconsumable by fire. At six times the

distance (or twelve Crores, a hundred and twenty

millions of leagues) is situated Satya-loka, the

sphere of truth, the inhabitants of which never again

know death 3.

p. 214

Wherever earthy substance exists, which may be

traversed by the feet, that constitutes the sphere of

the earth, the dimensions of which I have already

recounted to you. The region that extends from the

earth to the sun, in which the Siddhas and other

celestial beings move, is the atmospheric sphere,

which also I have described. The interval between the

sun and Dhruva, extending fourteen hundred thousand

leagues, is called by those who are acquainted with

the system of the universe the heavenly sphere. These

three spheres are termed transitory: the three

highest, Jana, Tapa, and Satya, are styled durable 4:

Maharloka, as situated between the two, has also a

mixed character; for although it is deserted at the

end of the Kalpa, it is not destroyed. These seven

spheres, together with the Pátálas, forming the extent

of the whole world, I have thus, Maitreya, explained

to you.

Regards

Bejoy C.S.

--- Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

> Dear Bijoy ji,

> ==>

> But as per RV - Saptarishis are also a good

> candidate

> for this job and Dhruva is described as the centre

> of

> the zodiacal wheel. Dhruva being the pole star is

> almost at 90 degrees from the orbital plane of the

> solar system, so my above case is also ambigous.

> <==

> Describing the total zodiac as orbiting Pole star

> is a Puranic

> description and not a vedic one. The description is

> true in the

> sense - we can clearly see it from earth. Since

> earth revolves around

> its axis, we feel that the the total sky around us

> (the zodiac)

> revolves around the axis fixed across Celestrial

> North pole (and thus

> Saptarshis) and Celestial South pole. Thus it is a

> natural

> description from a common mans stnd point.

> But I don't agree with ascribing the same Puranic

> decription on

> Vedas and then trying to interpret that the Sun (and

> not the sky)

> moves around Saptarshis (celestial pole), giving it

> an infallible

> scientific color but which is truly non-scientific

> (because it

> ascribes the ignorance on Vedic sages and assumes

> that they

> considered earth as the center around which sun

> revolves - which

> erroneous and not supported by vedic rishis). As we

> know, the Vedic

> sages had the clear understanding that earth

> revolves around Sun and

> also that earth is a planet like Venus, Jupiter etc.

> It is wrong to

> ascribe the ignorance of Puranic dark ages on Vedic

> era of knowledge

> and understanding. The vedas represent clear and

> better understanding

> of the vedic sages about the universe – and it does

> not need the

> extra coloring, and erroneous efforts to ascribe the

> misleading and

> erroneous maths and concepts on vedas – will only

> become a hindrance

> to identifying the true worth of vedas and the

> knowledge it contains

> within.

> Love and regards,

> Sreenadh

>

> ,

> Bejoy <bejoy_cs

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sreenadh,

> >

> > This could be variously interpreted by many. As

> per

> > present day scientific understanding the centre of

> > Mikly way galaxy is Sagittarius. This is also a

> matter

> > of conjecture and more studies are required.

> >

> > I could be right or wrong in my inferences.

> Agreeing

> > with me is Ok and disagreeing is also OK.

> >

> > If it is accepted that the orbital velocity of the

> Sun

> > is 217 Km/s and the Sun covers 50 arc seconds per

> > earth year ( EY ), as per Kepler the radius of the

> > Suns orbit would be about 2.8 light years which is

> no

> > great distance by astronomical standards.

> >

> > The Sun might not be orbiting Saptarishis - I have

> > another scientific reason to support this argument

> of

> > yours as well - Sun and Saptarishis are not in

> the

> > same orbital plane while Sagittarius is. Its

> logical

> > to exppect that for some thing to orbit another

> > massive object they got to be in the same orbital

> > plane as is the case of Sun - earth - moon -

> jupiter

> > etc etc...

> >

> > But as per RV - Saptarishis are also a good

> candidate

> > for this job and Dhruva is described as the centre

> of

> > the zodiacal wheel. Dhruva being the pole star is

> > almost at 90 degrees from the orbital plane of the

> > solar system, so my above case is also ambigous.

> >

> > Would appreciate more thoughts as that would

> refine my

> > thinking as well.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Bejoy C.S.