Surya Siddhanta - Appendix for Bijakriya

[Guest guest]

Dear Vinay ji, I would love to see a detailed response from you for this mail. Note: I request both Chandrahari ji and Vinay ji to cool down and start discussing subject matter in scholarly manner - as done in this mail; so that we stundents can benefit from the discussions happening between two scholars. Love and regards,Sreenadh , "chandra_hari18" <chandra_hari18 wrote:>> > It may be noted:> > 1. Burgess himself was a great scholar and astronomer and he has> demonstrated his interpretations with computations in his book and such> a good work has not appeared again even after 100s of years.> > 2. Burgess had the proven competence to understand the relevance few> verses (21 or 22) intended for Bijakriya found in certain manuscripts> known since the time of Ranganatha who wrote a commentary on the text in> 16th century.> > 3. Such an appendix was not known to Kerala astronomical tradition where> the Vaghbhava correction got introduced.> > 4. Appendix as above for Bijakriya was not known during the times of> Varaha, Aryabhata or Brahmagupta, Vatesvara, Munjala etc. These great> astronomers have not discussed the Bija verses seen in some manuscripts> of Suryasiddhanta.> > 5. Great astronomer Paramesvara of 15th century who wrote a commentary> on Suryasiddhanta and also created a new Ganita, Drgganitam has not> discussed the efficacy of any Bija said in Suryasiddhanta.> > Had those Bija verses been original subsequent astronomers would have> discussed, tested and improved those computations during the 1000 years> that elapsed between Varahamihira and Ranganatha.> > All thoses verses appear after the Upasamharam. Why should the great> genius who authored Suryasiddhanta leave some subject matter as few> orphaned verses outside the text? The system of Appendices were> prevalent in those days? ok. If yes, what kind of subject matter is> presented as an appendix?> > If Bija kriya formed part of original text why the great genius (The so> called Asura Rishi Mayan) did not incorporate that into the astronomical> theory of his text?> > chandra harii> > > , Vinay Jha> vinayjhaa16@ wrote:> >> > @ Sunil jee :> >> > I made neither a request nor a challenge, but my language might have> appeared to be equivocal, which was in a response to your language.> >> > You are well versed in both science and ancient texts. If you do not> mind, you can take my mail to be both a request as well as a challenge ;> please do not feel offended. My aim is not to engage you in a wordy> duel, it is foolish and will waste my time as well as yours. I want you> to devote some time to the questions I have put forth. If you find> proper answers, both you and the world will get the benefit. If you do> not know the answer, it will not belittle you in the least, because the> questions I have put forth were beyond the intellectual capabilities of> so-called "experts" like Burgess (22 shlokas of beeja-samskaara ... I> request Sunil jee to help me in understand these> > 22 verses which Burgess deliberately omitted but traditional> publishers are> > still not ready to omit them. ......... show me the technique of those> Suryasiddhantic tables> > which Burgess deliberately omitted to hide his own incompetence in> explaining> > them).> >> > If you get the meaning of 22 shlokas about beeja-samskara in SS, I> shall be obliged to you, because I want to get the views of every> knowledgeable persons about the meaning of these shlokas.> >> > As for the second question (SS tables, I am not speaking of the> Siamese SS tables of 7th century AD presently in France) , try to find> the meaning of my obscure passage.> >> > Sincerely,> >> > -VJ> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________> > Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya@> > > > Thursday, January 8, 2009 1:01:19 AM> > Re: Date of Mahabharata> >> >> > Dear Vinayji,> >> > This is a request or challenge?> >> > Regards,> >> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> >> > --- On Wed, 1/7/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:> > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ >> > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Date of Mahabharata> > ancient_indian_ astrology> > Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 4:53 AM> >> > @Sunil jee :"Would you like to verify from your admirer-scholars> >> > whether all of them have heard about the rule "Ankaanaam Vaamato> >> > Gati" or not. You may be in for a big surprise."> >> > I had said "I may not be aware of "Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati", but all> >> > those institutions and individuals are also ignorant of these things> >> > who accept me as an authority in these matters".> >> > Sunil jee missed the irony in my comment, because he thinks "Ankaanaam> >> > Vaamato Gati" to be a great secret. Every student of Jyotisha at any> >> > Sanskrit university knows it. I had hoped Sunil jee would pay> >> > attention to his language. But I am now really surprized at him and> >> > his interpretation of ancient texts.> >> > Sunil jee also says :"I understand that Suryasiddhanta expects us to> >> > update the astronomical data from time to time."> >> > I hope Sunil jee will illumine my dark mind about updating> >> > Suryasiddhanta, esp because Burgess deliberately omitted from the> >> > original text the 22 shlokas of beeja-samskaara needed for updating> >> > Suryasiddhanta. No westernized scholar could ever understand or> >> > translate those verses. I request Sunil jee to help me in understand> >> > these 22 verses which Burgess deliberately omitted but traditional> >> > publishers are still not ready to omit them.> >> > All modern commentators followed Burgess, Stokingwoode and Wilkinson> >> > in neglecting Suryasiddhantic Tables, just because they failed to> >> > understand the Suryasiddhantic formulas used to construct these> >> > tables. No available commentary mentions these ancient tables, which> >> > are still used by a majority of traditional Hindu almanac (panchanga)> >> > makers. I request Sunil jee to tell me the name of these ancient> >> > Suryasiddhantic Tables, which are still alive but are famous in some> >> > other name.> >> > The "authorities" I cited were not my admirers, but had to accept my> >> > views after a high court verdict which compelled the Vice Chancellor> >> > to organize shaastraartha for three days. But now, I learn from Sunil> >> > jee that all of them, including me, are in for a big surprize for not> >> > knowing the first things a student learns in a Sanskrit university.> >> > Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati cannot be whimsically used to deduce whatever> >> > one wants to. Sunil jee's notions of Time Cycles are contrary to the> >> > views of all ancient astrological/ astronomical and Puranic texts of> >> > India. I have already explained the meaning of 12000 divine years> >> > being equal to 4320000 human years in one of my recent posts, but> >> > Sunil jee is sticking to his wrong views.> >> > Hence, I invite him to teach me the ancient Tantra of Jyotisha which> >> > is needed for constructing and updating Suryasiddhantic and other> >> > tables. Please name that Tantra (Suryasiddhantic Tables). Those> >> > ancient tables were called Tantra, and the mechanisms of constructing> >> > these tables are known only to a few. Shaastraartha presupposes a> >> > thorough study of shaastras. Come on Sunil jee, please illumine my> >> > dark mind about the technique of ancient Indian astrology/astronomy .> >> > Tantra is 'technique' ; show me the technique of those Suryasiddhantic> >> > tables which Burgess deliberately omitted to hide his own incompetence> >> > in explaining them.> >> > -VJ> >> > ============ ======== ============ ========> >> > ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil> Bhattacharjya> >> > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:> >> > >> >> > > Dear Vinayji,> >> > >> >> > > Would you like to verify from your admirer-scholars whether all of> >> > them have heard about the rule "Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati" or not. You> >> > may be in for a big surprise.> >> > >> >> > > According to the Padma Purana the Bhagavad Purana is the highest and> >> > most authoritative among the Puranas. Bhagavad Purana treated the> >> > subject of Yuga classification in short but there is no ambiguity in> >> > its statements. Vishnu Purana supplements the same.> >> > >> >> > > As regards the Aryabhatiya I had the good fortune that a friend of> >> > mine in USA visited the India--Library in London and got a photocopy> >> > of Bhau Daji's paper on Aryabhatiya and he was very kind to pass on a> >> > copy of the same to me. I read Burgess's translation of the> >> > Suryasiddhanta and would like to read yours work on that too. I> >> > believe that Suryasiddhanta was composed by Mayasura, who was from> >> > Pragjyotishpur, the kingdom of Narakasura. I understand that> >> > Suryasiddhanta expects us to update the astronomical data from time to> >> > time and I hope you paid attention to this area. My forays into> >> > Aryabhatiya and Suryasiddhanta were more for historical studies than> >> > for Astrology.> >> > >> >> > > Regards,> >> > >> >> > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > --- On Tue, 1/6/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ ...>> >> > > wrote:> >> > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ ...>> >> > > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Date of Mahabharata> >> > > ancient_indian_ astrology> >> > > Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 11:28 PM> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > Sunil jee said : "Those who are not aware of the rule> >> > "Ankaanaam> >> > >> >> > > Vaamato Gati" interprets it to be 4 to 3 to 2 to 1"> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > I may not be aware of "Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati", but all those> >> > >> >> > > institutions and in dividuals are also ignorant of these things who> >> > >> >> > > accept me as an authority in these matters : cf.> >> > >> >> > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay+Jha> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > Sunil jee is misinterpreting classical theory of time cycles. Most> of> >> > >> >> > > the Puranas give only passing references to such things, excepting> >> > >> >> > > Narada Purana. Since Sunil jee is genuinely interested in this> topic,> >> > >> >> > > I request him to read Narada Purana and esp Suryasiddhanta first of> >> > >> >> > > all, which deal with this topic most clearly and extensively.> >> > >> >> > > Aryabhatiya is the only ancient text which gives a different scale> of> >> > >> >> > > yugas, but that was one of the chief the reasons why Aryabhatiya was> >> > >> >> > > rejected by mainstream scholars of Vedic-Puranic tradition.> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > -VJ> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil> Bhattacharjya> >> > >> >> > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Dear Vinayji,> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > I have not misquoted Vishnu puran. What I say is corroborated by> >> > >> >> > > Bhagavat Puran also. Bhagavat puran gives the ratio of> >> > >> >> > > Satya:Treta: Dwapara:Kaliyuga as 4:3:2:1 Those who are not aware of> the> >> > >> >> > > rule "Ankaanaam Vaamato Gati" interprets it to be 4 to3 to 2 to1> >> > >> >> > > whereas it is 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 The concept of the Sandhi kala is> given> >> > >> >> > > in the Bhagavat purana. Vishnu Purana gives one particular number> >> > >> >> > > dividing which by another particular number one has to arrive at the> >> > >> >> > > span of the Kali yuga. This figure comes out to be 4800 years. At> the> >> > >> >> > > moment I do not have immediate acces to the relevant books. If you> are> >> > >> >> > > really not able to locate in these puranas I shall surely take an> >> > >> >> > > extra effort to provide them to you.> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Many scholars in the past took the wrong ratio and arrived at the> >> > >> >> > > span of the Kaliyuga as 1200 years and then found that the Kaliyuga> >> > >> >> > > should have been over in 3102 - 1200 = 1902 BCE ie before the birth> of> >> > >> >> > > Lord Buddha. But Lord Buddha has been accepted as an Avatara in the> >> > >> >> > > Kaliyuga. They could not solve this discrepancy and that is why they> >> > >> >> > > invented the concept that this figure of 1200 should be multiplied> by> >> > >> >> > > 360 to arrive at the figure of 1200 X 360 = 432,000 years for> >> > >> >> > > Kaliyuga, saying that 1200 years refers to Divyavarsha, which must> be> >> > >> >> > > multiplied by 360 to arrive at the human years.> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Regards,> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > --- On Tue, 1/6/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ ...>> >> > >> >> > > > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Date of Mahabharata> >> > >> >> > > > ancient_indian_ astrology> >> > >> >> > > > Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 3:08 AM> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > I had earlier stated that a mahayuga lasts for 12000 divine years> >> > >> >> > > > which is equal to 432000 human years, according to all ancient> >> > >> >> > > > sources, and Kaliyuga is its 10th part. Aryabhatiya is a sole> >> > >> >> > > > exception, which gives a higher propotion to Kaliyuga. Vishnu> Purana> >> > >> >> > > > is being misquoted by Sunil jee (take my comments positively, and> show> >> > >> >> > > > me the shloka, then I will give more tangible proofs to the> contrary).> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Some NRIs are also propagating a theory of Dvapar yuga at present.> >> > >> >> > > > They are too much impressed with present day material progress to> >> > >> >> > > > value ancient ideas. If the ancient time-cycle is wrong, then one> must> >> > >> >> > > > drop the very notion of such yugas and become completely> modernized.> >> > >> >> > > > Why tamper with ancient idesa?> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > -VJ> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, "Bhaskar"> >> > >> >> > > > <rajiventerprises@ ...> wrote:> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > Dear Sunil ji,> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > Thank you, this is what I was looking for. Acceptance of the> current> >> > >> >> > > > > Yuga as Dwapara Yuga.> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > regards,> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > Bhaskar.> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>